SDS800X HD Wanted Features

[eTobey]

I do not see where this is a "complete change" in user habits. You could still select another trigger, as it is now.

Just look how the trigger level is saved for each channel (and probably trigger type?), like i am suggestion for all other settings. Why does it not behave like the other settings? Thats right: every signal (channel) is different. Different signals would need different trigger settings.

And the years of historical experience of these manufacturers are still worthy of respect.

Innovation can only happen, if one would ignore what was done in the past and try something new! One may fail on trying, but the one that never tries will never succeed.

[electronics hobbyist]

Keysight and Lecroy have separately saved parameters for each trigger type, which means the trigger type is the main one, this is a common practice within the industry.

Common practice... "we have always done it like this". No Innovation, no progress. This suggestion could be implemented as an option so users change decide if they like it or not.

At the same time, the software needs to maintain consistency.

When i just change the channel on trigger edge, then the level of it is remembered for each channel. So this works like my suggestion. But this is inconsistent, and the level should be saved on the trigger type. 

The keysight DSOX3000T is that the trigger level are independent, and when switching trigger types, the trigger level need to be readjusted.

I just looked at Lecroy and it's a bit like what you said. It records the trigger source and trigger coupling, but some parameters such as "limit range", "Upper level", "Lower Level",etc have not been saved.I haven't understood the logic behind this yet. Why are some parameters saved and some not.

So both methods are reasonable, Siglent is closer to keysight.

[RAPo]

I suggest this because
a)  it includes a willfull act: you, the user, choose willfully to have setting A on channel 1, setting B on channel 2, etc.
So the "burden" to remember/choosing settings is on you and not the scope
b) in a multi-user environment, there is a possibility to startup in a clean state

  Add two buttons, "Save Trigger info" and "Recall Trigger info", and then...

Why buttons? My solution does this automatically. Its just like other settings on every (almost) device, that just remembers the setting that you set up. My suggestion does this for every channel, so you can quickly just change the channel to trigger on another channel without setting everything up again...

[eTobey]

I just looked at Lecroy and it's a bit like what you said. It records the trigger source and trigger coupling, but some parameters such as "limit range", "Upper level", "Lower Level",etc have not been saved.I haven't understood the logic behind this yet. Why are some parameters saved and some not.

So both methods are reasonable, Siglent is closer to keysight.

No, Siglent is just the opposite of lecroy then. Every parameter is saved for the trigger type, except trigger level. This i would call inconsistent. This is, what people will confuse, if they are not working with the scope every day.

Just think about this:
Why dont you want to give each channel its own private trigger settings (for each "simple" trigger), when each channel (signal) has its own characteristics? This scope already does this on the trigger level for each channel!

To me it seems, there are 3 ways:
- Leave it like it always has been (and stay inconsistent with the trigger level in this case)
- Save trigger settings (for every simple trigger) on each channel (as this is done with the trigger level already)
- Save all trigger settings on the trigger type (including trigger level, to be consistent - but users have to get used to)

[ebastler]

The SDS800X HD digital channel is an independent system and does not support search, making it impossible to achieve pattern search.
Perhaps an integrated digital channel product can achieve mixed pattern search.

Is that so? Not having any Search function in digital data would be a disappointment. I was aware that the independent digital subsystem means that there is no History function. But how about taking a single long capture, and then setting search markers within that frame?

I cannot try this, since I don't have the SLA1016 so far. I came across this question while trying to decide whether I should get the Siglent add-on or rather a separate USB logic analyser. If there is no pattern (state-based) analysis at all, and essentially no analysis of captured soignals beyond the decoders, that is a significant limitation of Siglent's solution in my opinion.

[2N3055]

I just looked at Lecroy and it's a bit like what you said. It records the trigger source and trigger coupling, but some parameters such as "limit range", "Upper level", "Lower Level",etc have not been saved.I haven't understood the logic behind this yet. Why are some parameters saved and some not.

So both methods are reasonable, Siglent is closer to keysight.

No, Siglent is just the opposite of lecroy then. Every parameter is saved for the trigger type, except trigger level. This i would call inconsistent. This is, what people will confuse, if they are not working with the scope every day.

Just think about this:
Why dont you want to give each channel its own private trigger settings (for each "simple" trigger), when each channel (signal) has its own characteristics? You already do this on the trigger level for each channel!

"So both methods are reasonable, Siglent is closer to keysight." A person says.

"No, Siglent is just the opposite of lecroy then." Your answer.

You are arguing even when people didn't say anything contrary to you.

As I said before, you are spending enormous amount of energy to basically force manufacturer to do your bidding.
You forcefully  want to change how basic function on complete line of products work because you think you are more important and smarter than other 7 billion people on planet.

It was explained before: there is no BEST, automagical solution to have magical triggers, otherwise it would have been found in last 50 years.
Triggering can be used in so many user patterns that there is no single way to make them that will fit all.

Oscilloscope is no cigarette lighter: press here, fire comes on the other side.
I would argue that it is much more complicated to drive than a car, for which you have to pass driving school and exam.

The way triggers now behave are such  because usage patterns are such.

Old analog CRT scope by definition remembered all settings.
After first DSO came out, they did too.

After many years we have dedicated Default button on the scope.
Because unlike your opinion, many, many users have a need for scope to come to some defined starting point.
So we DON't have to go and check ALL options. We KNOW what they are and then just set those we need.

Triggers that are being changed all the time, benefit from that too. It is user responsibility to check triggers all the time to make sure it captures exactly what user wants.

What you want does not exist on any scopes. Because it is not needed, just adds to confusion to some people.
We are all different.

Again a topic, where you already wrote more than dozen posts about same thing.
Yes, you don't like how triggering setup works.
You explained what you mean.
We heard you. Repeatedly.
Martians heard you.
If there is something useful in your comments, people that actually make scopes will take it into consideration.
Nobody rejects smart ideas.
And that is it.

Let's move on, please.
There are other topics, like roof repair for instance, we still did not have talked about...

[ebastler]

There are other topics, like roof repair for instance, we still did not have talked about...

Please stop by in the Supporters Lounge, where Dave talks about his house extension.

[2N3055]

The SDS800X HD digital channel is an independent system and does not support search, making it impossible to achieve pattern search.
Perhaps an integrated digital channel product can achieve mixed pattern search.

Is that so? Not having any Search function in digital data would be a disappointment. I was aware that the independent digital subsystem means that there is no History function. But how about taking a single long capture, and then setting search markers within that frame?

I cannot try this, since I don't have the SLA1016 so far. I came across this question while trying to decide whether I should get the Siglent add-on or rather a separate USB logic analyser. If there is no pattern (state-based) analysis at all, and essentially no analysis of captured soignals beyond the decoders, that is a significant limitation of Siglent's solution in my opinion.

Why would that be disappointment?
Did anybody ever promised you search?
Is it in a datasheet?
Did someone lied to you it has it?

There is no search on decoded data.
That is something that is mixed bag with other manufacturers too.
It is not a common function as people would think reading your comment.

Don't get me wrong, would I like it had it?
Yes, like you, I would like to have search on decoded data. Absolutely.

To that matter, I would like my cheapest scope to have all the features of the expensive LeCroy.
Nothing wrong with me wanting something.
But is it realistic?

To make it clear, this is one thing that would be cool to have. But is it possible or realistic? I don't know, only manufacturer would know.

[ebastler]

Why would that be disappointment?
Did anybody ever promised you search?
Is it in a datasheet?
Did someone lied to you it has it?

I was promised a Search function in the datasheet, and I was promised an option for 16 channels of digital data. If the Search function does not work on the digital data, the datasheet should explicitly mention that limitation.

Otherwise we are in DHO900 land: "Yes, you get 1.2 GSa/s sampling rate. Yes, you get 16 digital channels. [Psst, you don't get both at the same time, but we are not saying.]" Call it specsmanship if you want to be kind, or call it lying by omission.

Edit: Oh shoot, it is in the datasheet, kind of. The sources for Search are stated as CH1..CH4 and History. I stand corrected; I had gone by Performa01's review thread only. -- What I cannot find in the datasheet is the limitation that History does not work with the digital channels? 

There is no search on decoded data.

That's not what I asked for. I asked for Search on raw digital data (while a decoder may or may not be enabled in parallel).

[2N3055]

Why would that be disappointment?
Did anybody ever promised you search?
Is it in a datasheet?
Did someone lied to you it has it?

I was promised a Search function in the datasheet, and I was promised an option for 16 channels of digital data. If the Search function does not work on the digital data, the datasheet should explicitly mention that limitation.

Otherwise we are in DHO900 land: "Yes, you get 1.2 GSa/s sampling rate. Yes, you get 16 digital channels. [Psst, you don't get both at the same time, but we are not saying.]" Call it specsmanship if you want to be kind, or call it lying by omission.

There is no search on decoded data.

That's not what I asked for. I asked for Search on raw digital data (while a decoder may or may not be enabled in parallel).

I am sorry but you must have misunderstood something.

I opened datasheet:

Analysis
Search
Source CH1~CH4, History
Mode Edge, Slope, Pulse, Interval, Runt
Copy setting Copy from trigger, Copy to trigger

There is no mention of digital channels.
Actually, out of 4 search types, 2 are applicable only to analog. Only Pulse and Interval would even make sense for digital channels.

My Keysight MSOX3104T also can only search for exactly those 4 parameters and only on analog channels.

It does have search on serial protocols that I mentioned. That is only better thing for 10000 USD price difference.

[ebastler]

Yes, I saw the limitation in the datasheet too in the meantime. See my earlier edits above. There still seems to be a gap regarding the History function's limitation to analog channels in the datasheet, but Performa01 had mentioned that one in his review.

Ok, good to have clarity. For me personally, the conclusion is to get a separate USB logic analyser to complement the SDS800. Probably good to have a complementary tool, with larger screen and larger memory, in my repertoire anyway. The combination will be a bit awkward for mixed signal applications, but the analog/digital integration in the SDS800 is somewhat limited by design as well.

[electronics hobbyist]

To me it seems, there are 3 ways:
- Leave it like it always has been (and stay inconsistent with the trigger level in this case)
- Save trigger settings (for every simple trigger) on each channel (as this is done with the trigger level already)
- Save all trigger settings on the trigger type (including trigger level, to be consistent - but users have to get used to)

I agree with your conclusion, either completely independent or modified simultaneously.

I also don't think Lecroy's approach is good because I don't know which ones are modified simultaneously. It's best if the parameters are common, all should be synchronized to other trigger types.

I think there should be more than one way. If there is an option, it would be a good solution because it can attract users of Lecroy, which is good to the manufacturer. In the personalized settings, you can set whether the trigger parameters is modified simultaneously. The priority may be relatively low.

Added to Wanted Feature NO.28

[Performa01]

Edit: Oh shoot, it is in the datasheet, kind of. The sources for Search are stated as CH1..CH4 and History. I stand corrected; I had gone by Performa01's review thread only

Yes, I have not covered the Search function in my review at all – I should add that in a future revision … when I have time.

Thing is, Search is pretty much trigger event hunting on already captured data. Triggers are implemented in hardware and the more complex ones use up a lot of FPGA resources. Unfortunately, they cannot be used on the captured data, because they are in the trigger path, which is completely separate.

As a consequence, we need to duplicate the triggers for the Search function. You could say this shouldn’t be too hard to do in software; but if we did it that way, Search would be very slooow.

So we do need hardware support for it, which basically means duplicating trigger functions from the trigger engine into a (part of the) FPGA that has access to the sample data. There already are several so-called co-processors to speed up operations on the sample data, especially for more complex math functions, like filters and FFT.

Complex triggers (everything beyond edge, pulse, slope, interval and runt) require a lot of resources, and this is true for serial triggers in particular.

Now for the particular question of Search within digital data: since the sample data is in the external device (remember, I’ve already explained how only decimated display data gets transferred to the scope), any Search functionality would have to be implemented within the SLA1016. I don’t know whether its FPGA resource would be sufficient to support at least the most basic triggers together with pattern trigger.

But even if it is possible, with three new DSOs just released, Siglent would have other priorities right now, I’m afraid. Even though there is a common software platform, there is still a massive layer of hardware related stuff, like the FPGA-code – and then, the software got new features too. So the main focus within the next few months will be bug hunting and fixing, before any new features will be considered.

All in all, my old recommendation still stands: anyone serious about MSO usage should consider an instrument that works with the SPL2016 digital probes.

[eTobey]

I agree with your conclusion, either completely independent or modified simultaneously.

I think there should be more than one way. If there is an option, it would be a good solution because it can attract users of Lecroy, which is good to the manufacturer. In the personalized settings, you can set whether the trigger parameters is modified simultaneously. The priority may be relatively low.

I agree: An option is always good! So anyone can be pleased, and not only users from Lecroy ;-).

This might be asked a bit too much, but i suggest it anyway:
Make option for each setting. (Can be limited to only a few common options) (global means over all simple triggers of the same type / individual means settings from each channel trigger setting):
- use global/individual slope/polarity
- use global/individual holdoff type and time
- use global/individual coupling
- use global/individual noise reduction

But id say, just go with one option for each trigger (or all triggers).

Here is a update pseudocode example:

Code: [Select]

if(trigger_type == A){ // simple trigger
if(option_use_global_settings){
*read settings from global trigger type A;*
}
else{
check_channel(){
case 1: read settings from channel 1 for trigger_type A;
case 2: read settings from channel 2 for trigger_type A;
...
}
}
}
else if(trigger_type == X){ // complex trigger
*read settings from trigger_type X;*
}
You could add this post, and this: https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/sds800x-hd-bugswanted-features/msg5432240/#msg5432240
to the bug and  feature suggestion list.

Edit:
To indicate, what setting is currently used, it is possible to do this like in the picture attached.

[2N3055]

Oh, the irony of  large effort to make triggering easier to use by adding dozen of new configuration settings..........
Making scope even more confusing and harder to use...

Bravo.
 

[electronics hobbyist]

Oh, the irony of  large effort to make triggering easier to use by adding dozen of new configuration settings..........
Making scope even more confusing and harder to use...

Bravo.
 

Haha, it's okay. Manufacturer can filter and choose suitable suggestions.

[electronics hobbyist]

I agree: An option is always good! So anyone can be pleased, and not only users from Lecroy ;-).

This might be asked a bit too much, but i suggest it anyway:
Make option for each setting. (Can be limited to only a few common options) (global means over all simple triggers of the same type / individual means settings from each channel trigger setting):
- use global/individual slope/polarity
- use global/individual holdoff type and time
- use global/individual coupling
- use global/individual noise reduction

But id say, just go with one option for each trigger (or all triggers).

There are indeed too many settings.

[eTobey]

Making scope even more confusing and harder to use...

Just RTFM and then you will be fine. 

[2N3055]

Making scope even more confusing and harder to use...

Just RTFM and then you will be fine. 

LOL, that is rich coming from you....

At this point it seem you are simply trolling, bumping up number of fake complaints...
That is how your "contributions" look to me, to be honest..

Only real bug you reported was holdoff with edge trigger... We, other users, thank you for that.

[ebastler]

Only real bug [eTobey] reported was holdoff with edge trigger... We, other users, thank you for that.

You obviously don't like each other much, but we should honour the facts. There are several more entries in electronics hobbyist's list which go back to eTobey's findings, and which pretty clearly describe software behaviour which was not intended. eTobey found quite a few bugs over the first few days of using the scope -- I'm glad that there are not more users who identify more issues at the same rate...

8. Math Function dialog automatically closes after channel change. -- eTobey
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/sds800x-hd-bugswanted-features/msg5426099/#msg5426099
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/sds800x-hd-bugswanted-features/msg5414804/#msg5414804

9. Trigger holdoff fails. -- eTobey
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/sds800x-hd-bugswanted-features/msg5424071/#msg5424071

10. SMB Client does not autoconnect when DHCP.  -- eTobey
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/sds800x-hd-bugswanted-features/msg5417699/#msg5417699

11. History frame and intensity will change simultaneously.  -- eTobey
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/sds800x-hd-bugswanted-features/msg5424257/#msg5424257

12. Sequence is restart when menus are opened and closed. -- eTobey
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/sds800x-hd-bugswanted-features/msg5426579/#msg5426579

13. Scale number overlaying others.  -- eTobey
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/sds800x-hd-bugswanted-features/msg5426687/#msg5426687

[2N3055]

Only real bug [eTobey] reported was holdoff with edge trigger... We, other users, thank you for that.

You obviously don't like each other much, but we should honour the facts. There are several more entries in electronics hobbyist's list which go back to eTobey's findings, and which pretty clearly describe software behaviour which was not intended. eTobey found quite a few bugs over the first few days of using the scope -- I'm glad that there are not more users who identify more issues at the same rate...

8. Math Function dialog automatically closes after channel change. -- eTobey
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/sds800x-hd-bugswanted-features/msg5426099/#msg5426099
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/sds800x-hd-bugswanted-features/msg5414804/#msg5414804

9. Trigger holdoff fails. -- eTobey
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/sds800x-hd-bugswanted-features/msg5424071/#msg5424071

10. SMB Client does not autoconnect when DHCP.  -- eTobey
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/sds800x-hd-bugswanted-features/msg5417699/#msg5417699

11. History frame and intensity will change simultaneously.  -- eTobey
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/sds800x-hd-bugswanted-features/msg5424257/#msg5424257

12. Sequence is restart when menus are opened and closed. -- eTobey
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/sds800x-hd-bugswanted-features/msg5426579/#msg5426579

13. Scale number overlaying others.  -- eTobey
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/sds800x-hd-bugswanted-features/msg5426687/#msg5426687

Yeah thank you for the summary.
I pretty much credit "electronics hobbyist" for that list, because without him useful information would be lost between milion redundant posts.
I'm not trying to shut up anybody. I just wish there was less histrionics, that's all.

And frankly, in my book, only "real" bug is holdoff.
Other are more of annoyances.
Not that technically they are not bugs and should definitely be fixed.

As a side note when R&S publishes release notes, they call bug fixes "Improvements", not bug fixes. True story. Talking about defensive language.

[ebastler]

I'm not trying to shut up anybody. I just wish there was less histrionics, that's all.

There are two sides to this. Please take a moment to imagine how frustrating it is when every single bug you report is an uphill battle: "No, not true." -- "You must describe this much better for us to even care." -- "Ok, you are right, but it's unimportant and just an annoynance."

If you have to go through six (!) clicks to re-establish the SMB connection every time you boot the scope -- how is that not a bug? I would have stopped using SMB on day 2 if I had not found the workaround. If the Math dialog kicks you out, seemingly at random, in the middle of your actively changing the settings -- how is that not a bug? If the universal knob suddenly controls two things at once, dimming the trance intensity as you step through frames -- how is that not a bug?

And I won't even get started about feature suggestions. It's totally fine to respond by explaining why you think something is not a good idea and has undesirable side effects, of course. But the following responses are not helpful: "You must be a total noob." "You must be an old man, stuck in his CRT user habits."  "RTFM!"  "Let me explain to you how R&D works."

Yes, I also hope we can discuss apparent bugs or more-or-less-worthwhile feature ideas in a calm and constructive manner. But that takes not only a level-headed submitter of such reports, but also a fair and receptive audience.

[2N3055]

I'm not trying to shut up anybody. I just wish there was less histrionics, that's all.

There are two sides to this. Please take a moment to imagine how frustrating it is when every single bug you report is an uphill battle: "No, not true." -- "You must describe this much better for us to even care." -- "Ok, you are right, but it's unimportant and just an annoynance."

If you have to go through six (!) clicks to re-establish the SMB connection every time you boot the scope -- how is that not a bug? I would have stopped using SMB on day 2 if I had not found the workaround. If the Math dialog kicks you out, seemingly at random, in the middle of your actively changing the settings -- how is that not a bug? If the universal knob suddenly controls two things at once, dimming the trance intensity as you step through frames -- how is that not a bug?

And I won't even get started about feature suggestions. It's totally fine to respond by explaining why you think something is not a good idea and has undesirable side effects, of course. But the following responses are not helpful: "You must be a total noob." "You must be an old man, stuck in his CRT user habits."  "RTFM!"  "Let me explain to you how R&D works."

Yes, I also hope we can discuss apparent bugs or more-or-less-worthwhile feature ideas in a calm and constructive manner. But that takes not only a level-headed submitter of such reports, but also a fair and receptive audience.

I did warn about "boy that cried wolf" in the very beginning.

And you know damn well how fast you are to react if someone is rubbing you the wrong way.
Which is fine by me. We should be respectful to each other, so no reaction is ever needed.
I haven't got a single problem with any person here, per se.

But this particular person is baiting me all the time. And you try to present it like I should suck it up and be a better man?
I won't suck it up. It is not a civilized thing to do.
That is a loser thing to do.
It is a place in development of civilization where rude and abrasive and aggressive ones take over.
Not gonna happen on my watch.

[ebastler]

But this particular person is baiting me all the time. And you try to present it like I should suck it up and be a better man?

No. Just asking you to realize that you are contributing to a pretty equal extent. -- Anyway, I have no further ideas how we can fully sort this out. Probably a "frozen conflict" is the best we can hope for.

[2N3055]

But this particular person is baiting me all the time. And you try to present it like I should suck it up and be a better man?

No. Just asking you to realize that you are contributing to a pretty equal extent. -- Anyway, I have no further ideas how we can fully sort this out. Probably a "frozen conflict" is the best we can hope for.

I don't believe in frozen conflicts. They are engineered situations designed to keep instability forever.
They are worse than unconditional surrender.
They never benefit either side directly involved, but only éminence grise that provoked conflict in a first place.

Anyways I thank you for being a decent human being that wants to "sort it out". I think you took upon yourself a large burden of herding cats here....