Looks like Tek are getting really desperate - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 20, 2012, 01:49:29 pm
content: QuoteAccording to the video, only 60% of Tek customers would "Enthusiastically" recommend their products - I'm not sure I'd be shouting about such a low customer satisfaction rating.

author: Bored@Work
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 20, 2012, 02:16:00 pm
content: Is this a "spam your friends" scheme?

author: ftransform
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: December 20, 2012, 02:16:35 pm
content: They should do advertizements with supermodels using their test equipment if they need money.

author: tom66
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 20, 2012, 02:21:07 pm
content: Perhaps they should stop spending so much money on marketing products that no one will buy, but instead on making products that require very little marketing to sell.

author: hlavac
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: December 20, 2012, 02:46:11 pm
content: Funny how the marketing companies lately found out it is easier and more profitable to concentrate on fooling their clients instead of potential customers of their clients.

author: Sionyn
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: December 20, 2012, 05:56:55 pm
content: same thing sky dose intrude a friend to sky and get free M&S vouchers

author: JoannaK
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: December 20, 2012, 06:12:08 pm
content: If they wanted positive review, they should send their scopes to someone like me. Even low end one would do, since only scope I could compare it with would be my existing Sovet-era scope (1channel 20Mhz thingy).

author: jerry507
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: December 20, 2012, 09:44:23 pm
content: So I don't tend to see a lot of new scopes. I have plenty of good things to say about scopes I've used from the mid 90's to early 2000's. What has changed that Tek has such a low reputation? Is Agilent just that far ahead of them these days? I'm so out of touch with this market.

author: Unknown
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: December 20, 2012, 09:55:01 pm
content: Tek released the TDS 200 series lunchbox DSOs in the nineties. What was special about these is that they were the first to offer real time (1 GS/s) sampling rate in low end scopes. Downside was high noise due to the analog shift register they used to achieve this sample rate (put in in the shift register at 1 GS/s, then digitize from the shift register at much lower sampling rates) and limited memory (2.5 kpoints). 15 years or so later, their low end scopes (TDS 1000, TDS 2000, TBS 1000) still share these same specs, although the rest of the world has moved on to at least ten times longer memory depth.The low end offerings are kind of pathetic. They still have some decent products in the mid to high end, but since very few hobbyists buy $10k+ scopes, they don't get a lot of credit for this. The MDO4000 is quite an innovative product for example, although perhaps a bit niche.

author: tom66
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 20, 2012, 10:13:45 pm
content: If they released a sub $800 scope which had similar features to the DS2072 (and they -could- do it, what with such large R&D force that's still left hopefully) then they could take the market by storm. Beat Rigol at their own game. Low price scope with a decent entry level feature set.

author: SLJ
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: December 20, 2012, 10:50:21 pm
content: The electronics industry is a tough place to be. You have to compete with companies in some countries that pay next to nothing for labor let alone their government subsidizing some of their costs and shipping. The industrial market is dependent on not only cost effective products but value added services like tech support. The hobbyist market is small, tiny, minuscule compared to the industrial market so I would not even expect a lot of companies that focus on industrial applications to even try to have a line of "hobby" scopes. My guess is these scopes are designed for assembly line uses that they have seen there is a market for a low end scope that will do a required job within these specifications. I don't think for one minute they are trying to compete for the hobby business.I would be very hesitant about beating them up over this line as a hobby scope. I don't think that's their intent. If I needed low end scopes for an assembly line and these met the specs/requirements and I knew Tek would back them up and keep my production line moving I would think twice about buying someone else's.

author: tom66
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 20, 2012, 11:39:27 pm
content: We use some fairly ancient Tek scopes on our production line. They are using passive matrix monochrome LCDs. Not sure what the model is, but they suit us fine. No need to use a different scope, just need to see if a particular waveform is there. So for example a basic GW Instek or Rigol would be absolutely fine...

author: casinada
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: December 20, 2012, 11:46:34 pm
content: The one that compares with The Agilent 2000 and Rigol 2000 series is the DPO/MSO 2000 series. The waveform rate is only 5000w/s they start at $1200 for the 2Channel 70mhz. I don't know why only 5000w/s if they knew how to do 200K W/S since the TDS700 series

author: jerry507
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: December 20, 2012, 11:52:15 pm
content: I'm a professional engineer, but often I have a focus on "lower end". In my own business or the small businesses I work for as my day job, neither can justify spending 10k+ on a scope. I have a TDS 2014 and it's an alright scope I suppose. I'd probably rather have a Rigol.But if I'm a small business owner and I'm looking to make a purchase to replace something like an old analog scope, the DSO4000 series, and ESPECIALLY the MSO4000 series, have really strong appeal to me. I'm probably buying just one and I'm obviously looking to spend a bit more than the few hundred I could get a low end Rigol for. Plus I can spend 4-5k on one of the MSO4000's and get a scope plus logic analyzer. But it's still my one, single, big purchase.Maybe I'm just not seeing all the players in the 1-5k range. But that's where I see a lot of small businesses with a few engineers.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: December 21, 2012, 02:03:07 am
content: Quote from: Bored@Work on December 20, 2012, 02:16:00 pmWorked for Amway didn't it?Dave.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: December 21, 2012, 02:09:21 am
content: Quote from: jerry507 on December 20, 2012, 09:44:23 pmThey have not updated their basic low end scope architecture in a decade or more in some cases.Look at their recent pathetic TBS1000 just released. Still only 2.5K of sample memory and 25MHz bandwidth!It's downright embarrassingDave.

author: JoannaK
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: December 21, 2012, 02:28:32 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on December 21, 2012, 02:09:21 amGood grief.. Tektronix TBS1022, 25 MHz, 2 Ch, (2.5k sample) and that LCD screen looks like super low res..Price: $520.00I still remember the time Tek B/W LCD scopes were best for the money. About only enchancement they have managed on all these years seems to be Color LCD, and even that is ugly as hell.

author: w2aew
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 21, 2012, 03:18:54 am
content: It's funny, the DPO/MSO series scopes (bigger, hires displays, deeper memory, advanced features, etc.) were designed to replace the aging TDS series. Customer demand for the TDS series is the reason that they are still around, and being sold along with their newer counterparts.

author: andersm
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 21, 2012, 05:09:13 pm
content: It's a curious business, making test instruments. The big, famous brands have been all but pushed out from the low end of the market, but because they still want to offer a complete lineup they pay their competitors for gear to rebadge, providing them with more funds to advance their own technology.

author: tom66
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 21, 2012, 07:37:44 pm
content: Am I missing the difference between the TBS1000 and, say, the TDS2000 series? Slightly different case? Same hardware and software, I'll bet...

author: IanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 21, 2012, 07:51:26 pm
content: Quote from: w2aew on December 21, 2012, 03:18:54 amThe DPO2000 series looks attractive for the money. I'm not in the market for a new scope, but if I were why would people be recommending me against this option?

author: TestBox
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: December 21, 2012, 08:24:16 pm
content: Tek aren't desperate or stupid. They are following something called the Danaher Business System that seems to have the sole purpose of making money. The desperate fools are the people who buy scopes based on brand and because they are blue. If you can still make money by remarketing 15 year old technology why wouldn't you?Trio has a Siglent 150 MHz scope for $400 in their post in the "unhappy Tek thread" that looks remarkably like a LeCroy WaveAce and Rigol has scopes that blow the socks off the TDS1000/2000 series. Why would anyone in their right mind buy a TBS? I think TBS series stands for Tek Bull Shit and Danaher's leaders just smile more broadly when fools swallow it by buying these dinosaurs

author: Bored@Work
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 21, 2012, 08:47:10 pm
content: Quote from: TestBox on December 21, 2012, 08:24:16 pmThe stupidity lies in selling your long-term future for some short-term gain.

author: TestBox
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: December 21, 2012, 09:03:26 pm
content: Quote from: Bored@Work on December 21, 2012, 08:47:10 pmAgreed. They should have rebranded the Tekway / Hantek scope. The case is blue and someone else paid for the R&D.

author: free_electron
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 21, 2012, 09:23:35 pm
content: Quote from: tom66 on December 21, 2012, 07:37:44 pmi speculate they upgraded the cpu from the tds2000 series to give it a usb port for a memoryt stick. the actual scope portion ( a/d and visualisation )is the same.the tds2000 platforms are very simple machines . the pcb is no larger than an oversized creditcard .... it has 2 or 3 asics made by national semi and an old motorola 68000 cpu with 1 flash rom.kick the motoroil out and substitute with a cpu that has a usb host. all that is needed is some software , no doubt written by the lowest paid programmers in india and a tweak in the pcb done by the lowest paid layouter , using an illegal version of a cad program , in china. Wash-rinse-flog on the market ... send $ to the bank... Development ? zero . Research ? Zero . Design ? zero. Technology improvement ? Zero. Just the way the beancounters want it...

author: Mechatrommer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 21, 2012, 09:45:56 pm
content: Quote from: free_electron on December 21, 2012, 09:23:35 pmno need to hire indian to program from scratch. reuse the old software, add usb interrupt, change color constants here and there, recompile with CooCox or Eclipse using new toolchain, one day done! the rest of the days ask him to milk the cow. that is if the Danaher Bull System is not stupid enough to leave at least one competent programmer in their "campus".

author: tom66
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 21, 2012, 09:58:02 pm
content: Quote from: free_electron on December 21, 2012, 09:23:35 pmNope... because both have USB (though the old TDS2000 didn't I'll admit.)Let's compare the TBS1042 and TDS2001C.Tek TBS1042: 40 MHz, dual, 500MS/s, 2.5k sample memory, interface looks similar, has USB, $680Tek TDS2001C: 50 MHz, dual, 500MS/s, 2.5k sample memory, interface looks similar, has USB, $890Aside from the extra 10MHz bandwidth, where is $210 going?? Tek really need to evaluate their pricing if even Agilent's rebranded Rigols out-priceandout-feature them:-Agilent DSO1052B: 50 MHz, dual, 1GS/s, 1M sample memory, Rigol interface (very Tek-like), has USB, $820I don't understand MBAs.

author: jerry507
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: December 21, 2012, 10:19:47 pm
content: So who are the big players in that 1-5k market? If very few of Teks customers would recommend them, who is stealing all their business away?Also who are these customers that aren't recommending them? Engineers who have no say in the equipment bought for them? I presume people are still happy with the higher end of Teks lineup and it's just the low end that has zero value?

author: JoannaK
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: December 21, 2012, 10:26:41 pm
content: Why on earth Tek should keep the 2000 series at all.. Based on the specs, there's essentally nothing diffrentiating those from 1000 scopes. Same sample rate/memory (too shot) etc... About only think I saw was the 4-input models, but those could be put into 1000-series with no problem.Now as there are plenty relatively inexpensive scopes + Agilent(=rigol) 1052, there's not much room for Tek to make all new series that could compete.

author: tom66
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 21, 2012, 10:28:23 pm
content: Agilent, mostly, I guess. Maybe LeCroy for the really high end stuff. Rhode and Schwartz, too. Plus Hameg, but that's mostly lower end and wouldn't compete with R&S (same company.) And of course, other OEMs like Rigol, Siglent, etc. are now offering more competition.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: December 21, 2012, 10:48:03 pm
content: Quote from: jerry507 on December 21, 2012, 10:19:47 pmAgilent and Rigol are the big two that have killed Tek's sales.The Agilent 2000X and 3000X rocked the market completely and stole a huge chunk of Tek's business practically overnight.Funny how both Agilent and Rigol were able to do that by investing in continuous R&D, and in the US to boot in the case of Agilent! (designed by their scope group in Colorado)QuoteCorrect. They are still a worthwhile option at the high end, and maybe the upper mid range as well. But the mid to low end, they are done and dusted.Dave

author: nukie
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: December 21, 2012, 11:28:39 pm
content: Key in the model numbers in google and you get to this eevblog discussions. There goes Tek sales. It's just a matter of time before they shut their doors or do something different. Anyway I wouldn't be able to afford their anything even if they have the right 'budget' model. I go with Agilent thank you very much.Agilent & Lecroy are much wiser to pair up with the Chinese for their low end scopes while they concentrate on making kickass high end scopes. That's the way to go.tapatalk

author: TestBox
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: December 22, 2012, 12:34:10 am
content: Does anyone remember that short lived video of a Toyota LandCruiser with supposedly an Agilent scope driving it crushing a Tek oscilloscope? According to that article Danaher did a much better job.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: December 22, 2012, 01:27:27 am
content: Quote from: nukie on December 21, 2012, 11:28:39 pmThe Agilent 2000X/3000X are low to mid range scopes, and 100% Agilent in-house design and manufacture.Agilent are only rebadging the Rigol for the super-low range scopes.Dave.

author: w2aew
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 22, 2012, 01:43:50 am
content: I guess I'm biased, but if you compare the Agilent 2000X to the equivalent DPO/MSO2000B from Tek - I see that Agilent has a larger screen, DVM and wavegen option, but the Tek has 10x the memory, double the digital channels (on MSO models), more triggering options, serial decode and triggering options, search and mark capability, etc. - all at about the same price. So, it all comes down to which of these features you value most for your application.If you are going to compare scopes, it's not really fair to compare against the decade+ old TDS series of scopes that were supposed to be replaced by the DPO/MSO series - but are still in high enough demand by Tek customers that they're compelled to continue to produce them.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: December 22, 2012, 03:42:32 am
content: Quote from: w2aew on December 22, 2012, 01:43:50 amYes, the DPO/MSO are still compatible here since Tek slashed their prices to try and compete.But those extra digital channels aren't that great on a 480×234 screen, and you can't upgrade the bandwidth later.And you forgot to mention the Tek is only 1/10th the update rate of the 2000X. And at the moment, Wavegen is free.Agilent have the capability to add serial (hardware) decode, extra memory, faster update rate, and some other stuff at a moments notice on the 2000X with a just a firmware update. I guess they haven't had to do so in the last 18 months because the Tek (and Rigol's) aren't a big enough threat to their massive sales yet. I guess that says a lot about what the industry want and are buying.Dave.

author: gregariz
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: December 22, 2012, 03:52:46 am
content: Quote from: Bored@Work on December 21, 2012, 08:47:10 pmI dont think Tek are stupid either.The bottom line is that you probably can't make any money on sub $1000 oscilloscopes. You may not even make much on 2k scopes. Rigol are using people at 50c or $1 an hour to make that stuff. They are paying engineers 10 or 15k a year. Nobody can compete at that level except some other slave labour force. Same with alot of Chinese stuff. How much Agilent actually make on their low end stuff would be an interesting read.Its not even worth the effort. Tek may have simply given up that market because they know they are screwed and its not worth their R&D dollars. Tek still make TDS's I think because (and we've had this argument on this board before) they have a design that's already done and a lot of people don't need anything more than it provides. Come back in 50 years it will still do all your basic measurements. Schools and colleges getting students interested in electronics or assembly lines doing basic measurements would probably prefer to buy a Tek that has less features just for having local Tek support. People in serious R&D can buy higher end models. Hobbyists can buy a Rigol.My company has similar pressures from the Chinese. If any one has a marketing plan to make money at both the low end and high end these days, I'd love to see it, as would many western Tech firms I suggest.

author: jklasdf
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: December 22, 2012, 10:39:49 am
content: W2AEW, the Tek DPO series are really annoying to use in practice. Besides just having a much slower waveform update rate than the Agilent 2000x, pretty much everything is slower, and gets a lot worse if you turn on FFT/math. Even for regular use, just moving a waveform up and down has a really long delay. So does trying to moving left or right. If you watch the review video for the much mixed-domain oscilloscopes, a lot of the lag is still present in their even higher end scopes.One of the most annoying problems is trying to use the cursors with a couple of measurements and math/FFT on. Even at fairly low speeds, the cursor will jumpbackwardswhen you try to move it because the rotary encoder doesn't get sampled quickly enough. Incidentally, you have to adjust the FFT with the same multipurpose knobs used for the cursor. (The rotary encoders aren't always undersampled in all modes, but when they are it's really frustrating and noticeable.)A disadvantage compared to the TDS series is that menu items which used to toggle between just 2 or 3 different items at the push of a button, for the DPO series, you have to first push the button to bring up a little submenu for the button, and then use the multipurpose knob to adjust stuff. Even if there are only two possible choices. In general, the main disadvantage of the DPO series iseverythingis really slow, especially with FFT/math/lots of measurements on. The update speed for everything becomesreallyslow. I think between the Agilent Infinivision and Tek DPO series there is really no comparison.A final annoyance is USB flash drives that draw more than 500mA have lots of issues. This isn't really tektronix's problem, technically, but in the real world quite a few flash drives do in fact draw more than 500mA.

author: jeroen74
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: December 22, 2012, 01:24:27 pm
content: Why no mention of Yokogawa? At my last job there where basically two brands of scopes, Tek and Yokogawa, with a couple of lonely Agilents/HP/Lecroy's. What I heard they were moving to Yokogawa for new scopes.

author: jerry507
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: December 26, 2012, 04:13:23 am
content: While I might not know as much about the logistics of the business customers, I do know the university customers. Agilent is whooping Tek mostly because Agilent offers really good educational deals on very nice scopes. And in this day and age of race to the top education, no respectable university engineering department is going to stock a lab full of base model scopes. Maybe a physics department or something, but not engineering. You'd just look trashy.

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 26, 2012, 11:27:02 am
content: Quote from: jeroen74 on December 22, 2012, 01:24:27 pmYokogawa don't seem to have made much marketing effort in the UK at least - they do seem to make some nice stuff, and I'v recently seen ads for this beast - 8 analogue channels :http://tmi.yokogawa.com/products/oscilloscopes/digital-and-mixed-signal-oscilloscopes/dlm4000-mso-series/

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: December 26, 2012, 11:45:27 am
content: Quote from: mikeselectricstuff on December 26, 2012, 11:27:02 amPractically zero marketing in Oz either. Looks like an awesome scope.Dave.

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 26, 2012, 01:08:33 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on December 26, 2012, 11:45:27 amI hate scopes that don't have seperate knobs for each input channel though

author: Hypernova
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: December 26, 2012, 01:52:13 pm
content: How many new born babies must I sacrifice for that beast?

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 26, 2012, 09:20:21 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on December 26, 2012, 11:45:27 amAs they appear to be doing some advertising for it , maybe worth approaching them for a review unit?

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: December 26, 2012, 09:44:04 pm
content: Quote from: mikeselectricstuff on December 26, 2012, 01:08:33 pmMake a box that sits underneath with a bunch of aligned rotary encoders that send Ethernet commands to the box.Dave.

author: chickenHeadKnob
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 27, 2012, 04:30:13 am
content: Quote from: mikeselectricstuff on December 26, 2012, 11:27:02 amCan an engineer cite a use case for 8 channels? Up until recently when I started working with BLDC motor controllers (which are really three phase devices) I had a tough time coming up with a need for four channels.

author: Hypernova
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: December 27, 2012, 05:05:17 am
content: Quote from: chickenHeadKnob on December 27, 2012, 04:30:13 amSet up some DAC's and show in real time what the MCU is doing, I just did that this week since my job is FW engineer for servo motor driver development. Even if you can send the UART at 4.7MBaud (Max for the TI 28335DSP) most PC would have trouble keeping up if you want real time scrolling display.

author: NiHaoMike
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 27, 2012, 05:12:08 am
content: Quote from: chickenHeadKnob on December 27, 2012, 04:30:13 amIf you monitor the voltage and current on each phase, that's 6 channels right there. And then maybe a shaft position signal and DC bus current to get up to 8 channels.And in advanced digital logic, 8 channels might not be enough! At work, I have seen a few setups with multiple high speed data acquisition boxes locked together in order to check signal integrity on something like a memory or PCIe bus.

author: IanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 27, 2012, 05:20:42 am
content: Quote from: chickenHeadKnob on December 27, 2012, 04:30:13 amIf you follow Mike's link to Yokogawa's web site they give a few illustrations of possible uses including the one you mentioned.

author: PChi
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: December 27, 2012, 11:51:35 am
content: I have used 4 channels but miss them now that I am limited to 2 channels. 4 are very useful for checking serial buses like SPI and for memory interfaces.Eight seems as extravagance but again I guess that if you were used to using them you would miss them. I could have used more than 4 when probing memory interfaces.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: December 27, 2012, 11:59:13 am
content: 8 channels is very handy for logic analysis type stuff, when you have to actually look at the signal integrity and not just the digital signal level.And of course some niche analog stuff too. More than once I've had to common trigger two 4 channel scopes.Dave.

author: Neilm
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 27, 2012, 12:15:43 pm
content: I've had to have six analogue channels when debugging a control loop - monitoring the motor tacho, the demand, the control loop output and the various sensor signals. I ended up using Labview and an 8 channel NI data acquisition card, but that was the only situation I have ever seen when I needed more than four (excepting logic analysis stuff)Neil

author: free_electron
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 27, 2012, 04:17:58 pm
content: In burn-in test we have some of the yokogawa 7500 modular machines. Kitted out with a bunch of modules. We monitor the three phase currents, the center voltage , the voltage across one phase to see the commutation , so thats 5 analogs. Then there is the vcm where we need the current as well as the feedback signal. Thats another two. Theres 5 regulators where we want to see the switch current .. I believe they have 8 modules in the scope each being two input for a total of 16 analogs. The scope is connected to a huge multiplexers so we can measure any of the 500 pr so chips that are in burn-in at a time....

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 15, 2013, 05:49:08 pm
content: I wonder why they still produce TDS1000 scopes withmonochromeLCD...http://www.tek.com/oscilloscope/tds1000TDS1012B is for $1710 while DPO2012B is for $1620...That's strange. Maybe they just have full stocks of TDS1000s and they still try to sell them even for the high price...http://www.tek.com/oscilloscope/mso2000-dpo2000

author: Unknown
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: June 15, 2013, 05:53:31 pm
content: Presumably because people are still buying them. Maybe companies that have procedures in place that rely on them, and don't need anything more. It's not like all of the old stuff stops working every time something better comes along.

author: M. András
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 15, 2013, 05:58:41 pm
content: Quote from: alm on June 15, 2013, 05:53:31 pmsshhh dont said that too loud they will have a new idea for consumer electronics and industrial electronics too how to get even more profit

author: tom66
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 15, 2013, 10:52:53 pm
content: The equivalent colour TBS1000 scope is $600 cheaper!

author: ddavidebor
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 15, 2013, 10:57:29 pm
content: Probably legacy

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 28, 2013, 07:37:00 pm
content: Will there ever be any reply on Rigol DS2000, Siglent SDS2000 or similar competitors? Or is Tektronix going to produce the DPO2000 series for 15 years like that TDS3000?

author: TimNJ
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 28, 2013, 07:53:18 pm
content: Quote from: ftransform on December 20, 2012, 02:16:35 pmHP got pretty close...

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 28, 2013, 11:34:18 pm
content: NOTE: This message has been deleted by the forum moderator Simon for being against the forum rules and/or at the discretion of the moderator as being in the best interests of the forum community and the nature of the thread.If you believe this to be in error, please contact the moderator involved.An optional additional explanation is:

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 29, 2013, 01:20:56 am
content: Quote from: alm on June 15, 2013, 05:53:31 pmSometimes you just need a trusted brand for political reasons. Last year I needed to select a scope for certification work. I choose one from Tektronix because I didn't want to leave any room for arguments about the brand and I know how Tektronix scopes work.