Siglent scope comparison

[Electro Detective]

No offense intended, but you seem to hold rather strong opinions based on rather limited experience...

Have you actually used the Rigol, and tried out the shared Y control? You might find that it's a very acceptable compromise, in return for the compact form factor and the additional features which the Siglent CFL lacks. Have you done any actual four-channel measurements? I have found that I am more likely to benefit from the advanced trigger options offered by the Rigol, than to be in desperate need for a separate trigger input on top of the four channels.  And I'm afraid that, during a four-channel measurement, you will find your bench to be a "multiple probe circus" with the Siglent too... 

Anyway, I guess my point is: Relax! These dog fights over oscilloscope preferences get old really quick. Enjoy your new scope!

No offense intended, but you seem to hold rather strong opinions based on rather limited experience...
REPLIES > Life is short why waste it on more limited experience with 'half baked' test gear when there's work to be done.

Have you actually used the Rigol, and tried out the shared Y control? You might find that it's a very acceptable compromise, in return for the compact form factor and the additional features which the Siglent CFL lacks.
I'm not interested in compact form factor, only honest performance, ease of use and basic wysiwyg controls,
even if the scope is the size and weight of a suitcase full of wet sand.

Have you done any actual four-channel measurements?
ALL THE TIME, tracking down multiple issues and verifying that related DUT inputs and outputs are interacting appropriately

I have found that I am more likely to benefit from the advanced trigger options offered by the Rigol, than to be in desperate need for a separate trigger input on top of the four channels. 
"advanced trigger options" should be standard with all DSOs that come out of the same factories, assuming it's not an excuse to save on a BNC connector and drilling a hole for it    and who wants to mess around figuring them out if they are too 'advanced' and may not work anyway on a buggy budget scope trying to do too much with not enough processor horsepower and firmware glitches. Separate trigger input gets my vote every time.   

And I'm afraid that, during a four-channel measurement, you will find your bench to be a "multiple probe circus" with the Siglent too... 
LOL, what I meant was during a "multiple probe circus" (that happens with any scope) I don't need to be switching between shared channel controls on a Rigol and wasting ch.4 for triggering

Anyway, I guess my point is: Relax! These dog fights over oscilloscope preferences get old really quick. Enjoy your new scope!
Yes I agree and thank you for your pov,
I intend to enjoy it once I get the correct firmware baked in, then take it for a proper test drive, note any limitations,
and perhaps re-open the 'circus'