New 2GHz touchscreen scope from Tek, June 6th

[EEVblog]

They probably paid a fortune to a branding company for that.
Someone should tell them their customers are engineers who don't give a toss about that crap. We'd much rather the money was spent on product improvements.

Probably could have paid for a good engineer for a couple of years.

[xrunner]

There is also the fact that social scientists and behavioural analysis people will be able to write entire books about how the look of something influences our mindset. If you have nice "light" documentation, with softer colors, it will make you feel more relaxed when looking at it. By being hapier, you will automaticly be more positive towards the data inside.

And always remember - from the Tek branding guidelines - the forward angle of the bluish line must always be 55.8 deg.

FORWARD ANGLE

The Forward Angle
is exactly 55.8º
and always moves
up and to the right.
The Forward Angle is a signature element
of the new Tek visual system. It echoes
the angles within the logo, and ties to our
heritage.

p. 25

[TheUnnamedNewbie]

My guess that that is the angle in their font. If it's off, your eyes will be able to tell.
Sure, it sounds silly but if nobody states what the angle is, nobody knows what angle to make it at. I doub't they designed it that way. Mock marketing material all you want, it's an essential part in sales. It's good to do it right and have a nice document. I don't get why everyone is bashing it that much. Wouldn't you rather have a document that clearly states how you have to make your documentation look, instead of having marketing get angry at you because you did it wrong?

[nctnico]

Someone should tell them their customers are engineers who don't give a toss about that crap. We'd much rather the money was spent on product improvements.

Don't you get it? WE (engineers) are not the target audience! Tektronix targets the ones who make the decisions!

Anyway, I'm wondering what we'll get to see in a few days!

[technogeeky]

On the branding: As much as engineers like to say "Engineers don't give a toss about branding", I really think we do. We are less susceptible to it because we (like scientists and researchers) are trained to look at facts, but we are still human. All of use will give pretty things a little bit of a positive bias, things that aren't will get a negative bias. Part of the reason why peope see vendors like Analog Devices, Linear tech, or T&M brands like R&S, Tek, HP etc as "reliable" is because they have nice, organized websites, datasheets, ... It's consistent, you know how it looks, it feels "well designed". It's one of these things we don't notice when it's done well, but we will find blatently obvoius when it's not. (ofcourse, the main reason why we like them is because they simply are well built and well engineerd devices. Just stating that if they didn't have that marketing, it would take more effort to get there.

There is also the fact that social scientists and behavioural analysis people will be able to write entire books about how the look of something influences our mindset. If you have nice "light" documentation, with softer colors, it will make you feel more relaxed when looking at it. By being hapier, you will automaticly be more positive towards the data inside.

Then there is also the fact that the marketing material gives an image about the company. If the material is neat and tidy, consistent, it gives a good image: They seem to have attention for details, they are organized, ...
Let's face it, who here hasn't gotten a datasheet from a company that looked very poorly done and gone "hmm, can I really trust this brand? This documentation looks quite crusty..." Even though it might have been the best built, highest performance part on the planet!

Oh, and as others have said, that stuff also matters a lot towards the investors...

I think you make some excellent points. Engineers may think they such things are beneath them, or that they don't succumb to marketing. But this is obviously a lie. We're just as susceptible, and we like fancy clean looking images.

[KE5FX]

It's just engineering by another name: the use of science and technical discipline to achieve a desired practical outcome.  Standard stuff in any company beyond a certain size. 

[kcbrown]

I think you make some excellent points. Engineers may think they such things are beneath them, or that they don't succumb to marketing. But this is obviously a lie. We're just as susceptible, and we like fancy clean looking images.

I disagree that engineers are just as susceptible.  I do agree that they are susceptible.

To illustrate, ask yourself this: would an engineer prefer something pretty over something functional?  If the choice was between something that works and something that is easy on the eyes, which would an engineer choose?   I think the answer to that is clear: he would choose something that works.  He might not like that he has to choose in that way, but in the end, that is the choice he almost certainly will make.

But management is very different.  Management will choose something pretty over something functional.  That happens all the time, as we've all seen repeatedly, and much to our annoyance since we are often the recipient of the products that management chooses.

[technogeeky]

I think you make some excellent points. Engineers may think they such things are beneath them, or that they don't succumb to marketing. But this is obviously a lie. We're just as susceptible, and we like fancy clean looking images.

I disagree that engineers are just as susceptible.  I do agree that they are susceptible.

To illustrate, ask yourself this: would an engineer prefer something pretty over something functional?  If the choice was between something that works and something that is easy on the eyes, which would an engineer choose?   I think the answer to that is clear: he would choose something that works.  He might not like that he has to choose in that way, but in the end, that is the choice he almost certainly will make.

But management is very different.  Management will choose something pretty over something functional.  That happens all the time, as we've all seen repeatedly, and much to our annoyance since we are often the recipient of the products that management chooses.

What I meant is, fancy sharp stylistic pictures and branding makes everyone's nether regions moist. This reaction happens very quickly. It is only after this reaction has passed does the engineer have time to make an evaluation of the product specifications and decide on the relative merits (or lack thereof) of a product.

What can happen is that someone might be so put off by marketing wank that this initial reaction does not have time to sink in before the engineer gets viscerally disgusted or annoyed at the marketing attempt. In this case, then all bets are off. But I don't think this reaction is specific to engineers, just people who are focused on avoiding the wool being pulled over their eyes in general.

Of course, if you reverse this argument and say you start with a technically sound product and you embellish it with quality or poor quality marketing, the engineer will very often go for the quality marketing item. Sometimes, even at increased cost.

[snoopy]

Only 2 days to go 

[BU508A]

Only 2 days to go 

Then it is (probably) Christmas time for snoopy. 

[EEVblog]

I found a web page that shows the MSO54 goes from 350MHz to 2GHz.
50MHz arb gen
62.5M to 125M memory



And the input channels are called Flex Channels, they have a trademark on it:
http://www.trademarkia.com/flexchannel-86899040.html

[PA0PBZ]

62.5M to 125G memory

First I went like  but then it turned out to be an ordinary typo 

[nctnico]

I found a web page that shows the MSO54 goes from 350MHz to 2GHz.
50MHz arb gen
62.5M to 125M memory



And the input channels are called Flex Channels, they have a trademark on it:
http://www.trademarkia.com/flexchannel-86899040.html

For those who didn't read the description: it is a fancy name to put less memory in a scope and share the memory with the analog and digital channels  -sigh-.

[mtdoc]

For those who didn't read the description: it is a fancy name to put less memory in a scope and share the memory with the analog and digital channels  -sigh-.

Is it? Or is it part of "empowering customers" and "advancing technology in cadence with their customers to resolve complexity and accelerate the realization of innovation".

[EEVblog]

And the input channels are called Flex Channels, they have a trademark on it:
http://www.trademarkia.com/flexchannel-86899040.html

For those who didn't read the description: it is a fancy name to put less memory in a scope and share the memory with the analog and digital channels  -sigh-.

And the channels can be either analog or digital, not both.
I wonder how many digital channels per analog input? If it's only 1 channel through the analog BNC then that's pretty lame.
Or a new custom interface where the digital channels are several pins surrounding the existing analog BNC.

Either way I don't get it, why make the user select one or the other when you can simply have an extra dedicated digital input like all existing MSO's?
What possible advantage does sharing the connector offer?
The only thing I can think of is that you only need to probe once and then you can switch, in which case why bother with digital at all, just display the analog and decode as digtial as required.
The big high res touch screen will be ideal for lots of mixed signal action.

[nfmax]

My guess is you can either plug a digital probe into an input, and get maybe 6 or 8 digital channels, or an analogue probe, and get one analogue channel. That way you can vary the analogue/digital split as the current job requires, just by switching probes. I suspect there is the same amount of memory behind each 'plug-in' which is allocated to either analogue or digital depending on the probe connected.

Slowly, Tektronix is reinventing the 'scope plug-in.

[Fungus]

My guess is you can either plug a digital probe into an input, and get maybe 6 or 8 digital channels, or an analogue probe, and get one analogue channel. That way you can vary the analogue/digital split as the current job requires, just by switching probes. I suspect there is the same amount of memory behind each 'plug-in' which is allocated to either analogue or digital depending on the probe connected.

They could do it with a special BNC connector that has a clock signal input, a bit like the auto-switching 1x/10x/ probes.

[snoopy]

Only 2 days to go 

Then it is (probably) Christmas time for snoopy. 

If I win the competition it will be

[EEVblog]

My guess is you can either plug a digital probe into an input, and get maybe 6 or 8 digital channels, or an analogue probe, and get one analogue channel. That way you can vary the analogue/digital split as the current job requires, just by switching probes.

Sure, buy why?
What's the advantage over just using a traditional external digital input connector, and then you get to keep all your analog inputs?

[nctnico]

My guess is you can either plug a digital probe into an input, and get maybe 6 or 8 digital channels, or an analogue probe, and get one analogue channel. That way you can vary the analogue/digital split as the current job requires, just by switching probes.

Sure, buy why?
What's the advantage over just using a traditional external digital input connector, and then you get to keep all your analog inputs?

On second thought: if you have 8 analog channels then it isn't a big sacrifice to trade one analog channel for 8 (I assume?) digital channels especially if you keep full memory depth. It is possible to use the BNC input for a high speed digital signal which contains the sampled digital inputs but that enters the realm of pure speculation. Let's see first... I'm mostly interested in how well it works and the price but I have a feeling it will be well into the 5 figures for the most advanced version.

[EEVblog]

On second thought: if you have 8 analog channels then it isn't a big sacrifice to trade one analog channel for 8 (I assume?) digital channels.

Sure, but if you have the 4 CH version it's a much bigger deal.
And once again, why go to the effort to design a new "Flex Channel" interface and probes etc when you can simply use an existing interface and existing probes. Unless they plan something extreme like 8 digital channels per analog input, 64 channels total, that might be something new for a scope.
Otherwise, I'm left scratching my head apart from the "because we can, and it's sexy" reason.

Anyway, they have this one locked up tight, almost nothing has leaked. Amazing.

[Fungus]

Sure, buy why?
What's the advantage over just using a traditional external digital input connector, and then you get to keep all your analog inputs?

It's looks prettier.

Tektronix hired a new interface guru and is making oscilloscopes for design-sensitive engineers

[Fungus]

It is possible to use the BNC input for...

Who says it's BNC? It might be some new magnetically-attached, designer probe. 

If you want unclean BNC connectors there'll be an adapter cable, just like Apple does with SD cards, USB, etc.

I think you'll all agree it's worth the extra expense when you see it. 

[David Hess]

For those who didn't read the description: it is a fancy name to put less memory in a scope and share the memory with the analog and digital channels  -sigh-.

This would not be the first mixed signal oscilloscope which divides the acquisition memory between each analog channel and each group of 8 digital inputs.  You could also think of it as allowing the digital acquisition memory to be redirected to additional analog channels when the digital inputs are not needed.

Note that it may not be the memory itself which is divided although I think HP did it this way.  There is only so much memory throughput available and it may instead be the memory throughput which has to be divided so you can either have full sample rate analog or digital or half sample rate analog and digital.  For designs where the memory instead of throughput is divided, you could think of the extra throughput (sample rate) being wasted when the digital channels are not used.

My guess is you can either plug a digital probe into an input, and get maybe 6 or 8 digital channels, or an analogue probe, and get one analogue channel. That way you can vary the analogue/digital split as the current job requires, just by switching probes. I suspect there is the same amount of memory behind each 'plug-in' which is allocated to either analogue or digital depending on the probe connected.

Slowly, Tektronix is reinventing the 'scope plug-in.

The Tektronix's TekVPI interface is very much like this but without the advantages of a real plug-in.  Mechanically the interface is terrible; the probe modules take up a lot of workbench space in front of the oscilloscope and if the oscilloscope is tilted back, especially to make room for the practically mandatory keyboard and mouse on the higher end models, then torque on the plastic probe modules makes the interface connections unreliable.  When I was evaluating it, the common failure was the oscilloscope either halting in a futile attempt to enumerate the partially connected plug-ins or crashing requiring a hard reboot.

[EEVblog]

Sure, buy why?
What's the advantage over just using a traditional external digital input connector, and then you get to keep all your analog inputs?

It's looks prettier.
Tektronix hired a new interface guru and is making oscilloscopes for design-sensitive engineers

You mean the new generation easily triggered kind? With a section of the sample memory reserved as a safe space?