Things don't sound good at Tektronix - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: December 21, 2012, 01:47:45 am
content: http://www.oregonlive.com/silicon-forest/index.ssf/2012/12/tektronix_five_years_after_sal.htmlDave.

author: ivan747
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 21, 2012, 02:14:02 am
content: QuoteI blame Danaher until proven otherwise!QuoteThis made me mad. It's just stupid. Many of us have mentioned that management can ruin technical companies like Tek. They just don't know how the industries work.

author: JoannaK
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: December 21, 2012, 02:19:26 am
content: Well, tech companies tend to run out of steam sooner or later. And not all of them manage to keep going untill they van figre their problems and start anew.. Tek has had a good run, they have made a lot good products durig the years.

author: Bored@Work
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 21, 2012, 02:29:55 am
content: Maybe Rigol should offer Danaher some money for the remains of Tek. That would rock the industry.

author: IanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 21, 2012, 02:40:38 am
content: It's possibly unfair to blame Danaher here. It seems like Tek was already a failing company before the acquisition.A parallel might be drawn with the British Ever Ready Electrical Company (BEREC). They were bought out by Hanson Trust and given similar treatment--a relentless drive to efficiency and profitable operations.But the parallel is this: BEREC had bet the farm on zinc chloride batteries, figuring that alkaline batteries were too expensive and would never take off. They had a huge, luxurious research campus and they poured enormous amounts of money into improving zinc chloride technology. In effect, they were trying to develop a better horse and carriage while the motor car was being developed by competitors. The result was entirely predictable and the company was already doomed by the time Hanson took them over.Tek was only acquired by Danaher five years ago. But apparently they are still trying to sell technology from 10 or 20 years ago. Like BEREC, they are behind the times and had sown the seeds of their own doom long before the takeover. It is clear today that digital technology is the future and that is where all the competitive products are making an impact in the marketplace. Tek may have good quality steam powered instruments, but we are in the space age right now and their competitors have rocket ships.

author: zaoka
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: December 21, 2012, 02:58:33 am
content: They are investing money into top salesman and marketing with idea that people are still stupid to pay for brand name

author: nanofrog
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 21, 2012, 03:10:44 am
content: Quote from: zaoka on December 21, 2012, 02:58:33 amInstead of R&D.And they wonder why sales are off? Management wasat the wheel, and now it's caught up with them IMHO.

author: zaoka
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: December 21, 2012, 04:05:44 am
content: I feel that many brands are investing money into top salesman and marketing instead of developing technology.The fact is that marketing is developing very fast, as fast as electronic industry. They are now using powerful marketing techniques such as NLP to brainwash customers mind.BY using these techniques they are keeping your attention away from this question: Is this test equipment the best deal for money?Instead, they are occupying your mind with terms such as "imagine, think of, etc." whose purpose is to put a human mind in position of thinking (during this moments you can not think about something else and they know it) and than feed you with features of their products which are in reality nothing special. End user gets impression that this is what he wants.At that time he is served with Special Promotion or Free stuff with a purchase making him feel that hes getting amazing deal. On the other side marketer just want you to fell that way so that you do no recall our old question: Is this test equipment the best deal for money?THey will often include time limiting deals because they know that time will reset your mind back to normal

author: TRIO_Smartcal
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: December 21, 2012, 04:48:59 am
content: I totally agree with this statement...Quote from: zaoka on December 21, 2012, 04:05:44 amNormally in the world of sales and marketing, when dealing with competitive situations, we respect what our competitors offer to the market. Our competitors are engineers just like ourselves only they work for a different company. When engineers move from one competitor to another it does not make them more or less of an engineer either. They might just have a different design brief and different levels of investment to work under.When faced with a competitive product the correct approach is to recognise the competitive product for what it is, and if it is the case, admit to the customer that company XYZ does make a good product. The next step is to show how your product fits the customer's needs better. It is not a negative response, the customer's viewpoint is respected and a good sales ENGINEER, not sales person, will have the technical background to understand his product, the competitor's product and of course the customer's application so that indeed the customer ends up with the right piece of test gear for what he is doing. If your product is similar to the competitors or even if the performance is lower but it still does the customer's job, then offer better value for money. Some you win, some you lose but's that's life.... but these new TBS series scopes deserve nothing but contempt and derision. They seem to be the product of a stock-price driven company, not an engineering driven one.Check this out...http://www.tek.com/basic-oscilloscopes/tbs1000..... Personally I find it very difficult to say anything good about them. The record length and sample rate have not changed in perhaps 15 years? They are nothing more than 15 year old mutton dressed up as fresh spring lamb, but they still stink of 15 year old sheep....Are these "new" scopes seriously the best new product of what was once one of the world's great test-and-measurement innovators that is now reduced to being vilified in press articles like the one Dave posted? Is this what happens when fat-cat shareholder value is placed on a high pedestal far above engineering innovation? Where's the innovation here? It's nothing more than re-marketing old technology.... They want $1,520 USD for a 150 MHz scope with 1GS/s and 2.5K of memory that probably costs them no more than $120-$150 ex-works irrespective of bandwidth. Anyone paying this quite frankly deserves to own one.Remember the value equation ... (VALUE = Performance/Price + Service) These TBS series scopes are a total travesty of it.Could it be that the only innovation from Tek here is defining a measurement for low-end scopes called "Dollars per MHz?" It would certainly be something that the Danaher accountant mob would understand. If indeed we use this metric on this series we see a range of about 20 $/MHz at 25MHz, to 10 $/MHz at 150 MHz for what presumably is a Tektronix Basic Scope (TBS)So, if you can stop laughing at the price and the 2.5K memory, and apply the same formula to these scopes.....https://triosmartcal.com.au/search.php?submit_search=Search&search_query=siglent&orderby=price&orderway=ascyou'll see that at 150 MHz we offer 2.67 $/MHz with the scope on this link.....http://triosmartcal.com.au/2952-siglent-digital-storage-oscilloscope-150-mhz-bandwith-2-channel.htmlAnd if you really want to spend around $1,520 on a scope try this ...http://triosmartcal.com.au/owon/2800-owon-sds9302-300mhz-2-channel-oscilloscope.htmlOr even better still add a few more dollars and get the best.....http://triosmartcal.com.au/2234-agilent-dsox2012a-4-channel-70mhz-oscilloscope.htmlYou know it makes sense, because nothing about this new TBS series does.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: December 21, 2012, 05:09:01 am
content: Quote from: TRIO_Smartcal on December 21, 2012, 04:48:59 amYep, it stands for Tektronix Basic Scope:http://www.tek.com/document/news-release/tektronix-introduces-entry-level-tbs1000-oscilloscope-seriesAlan, who works for Tek, made the assertion in another thread that Tek keep producing them because the customers keep asking for them. I don't buy it. That's just an excuse you use when you have nothing else to offer because you failed to innovate and keep up with the marketDave.

author: free_electron
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 21, 2012, 06:34:22 am
content: For me it's simple. tek was a technology incubator driven byq 'pet' projects. That is why they were the best for so long. A pool of driven engineers , out for experimenting, wanting to make the best. In comes the wave of brain-choked business crufts and the first thing they do is shoot the research... At tthe same time adding more brain-choker wearing ( a brain-choker is a tie. You wear a tie around your neck to cut off the flow of oxygen rich blood from your lungs to your brain) nitwits.30000 people to 1000... I give them two more years ...

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: December 21, 2012, 06:39:46 am
content: Quote from: free_electron on December 21, 2012, 06:34:22 amNo way. They can milk the cow, flog the dead horse, and shuffle the deck chairs on the Titanic for a lot longer than that I recon. Plenty left to doThe chances of seeing a truly new scope out of them again is starting to border on zero, unless they have something in the works already...Dave.

author: TerraHertz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 21, 2012, 07:05:41 am
content: Tragic.Uuurgh! Reading the corporate blather at the Danaher site makes me shudder.Looks like Tektronix has been handed the same poison chalice as HP drank from when they took on Carly Fiorina as CEO.Here are the people to blame at Danaher:http://www.danaher.com/leadership

author: BravoV
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 21, 2012, 07:12:36 am
content: Just wonder how is Fluke doing these day ?Heading to the same direction as Tek does ?

author: TRIO_Smartcal
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: December 21, 2012, 08:01:12 am
content: Quote from: TerraHertz on December 21, 2012, 07:05:41 amVERY interesting, if you click the "+" after each of the Danaher executive officer names, you'll find that there appears to be just one science degree held between all of them. The rest are MBA's, BA's, Lawyers, Accountants, Economists and a spurious Psychologist........... Hmmmmmm.......Just what a technology company needs perhaps? I won't answer that........ Just re-read the article.

author: AndyC_772
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 21, 2012, 08:20:32 am
content: It's a terrible shame. I've been a fan of Tek scopes for as long as I can remember, and I'm currently the proud(ish) owner of a TDS754D: 4 chans, 500 MHz. It's a bit long in the tooth, and for a while now I've been looking at possible replacements.The nearest equivalent new Tek would be the DPO3054, at £6900. 5M points memory, 50k waveforms/sec acquisition rate, and 2.5 GSa/s. I've had a demo and it's.... OK.Alternatives? The Agilent DSOX3054A offers 2M points memory but 1M waveforms/sec and 4 GSa/s for £7200. From Dave's videos it looks like a much nicer, more responsive piece of kit. It's still hugely expensive, but at least the's some justification: it captures waveforms200 timesfaster than the Tek.On the other hand, the Rigol DS4054 offers 140M points memory, 4 GSa/s, and 110k waveforms/sec. It's still faster than the Tek, but crucially it's much cheaper too: £3900. I've had a demo of this unit too and there's nothing obviously cheap-and-nasty about it - it works just fine.I'd have hoped that this segment would be fiercely competitive, but Tek just don't seem to have a credible option. They're even still selling the TDS3054C, which is a nice enough piece of kit, but the design is 10 years old, and the price is a joke: £9300!

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: December 21, 2012, 09:27:59 am
content: Quote from: TRIO_Smartcal on December 21, 2012, 08:01:12 amAnd then he blew that by getting a masters in management!And it seems they have no CTO either... I guess they leave that up to the individual companies, who are them probably hamstrung by the fiscal strings anyway...Dave.

author: cybergibbons
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: December 21, 2012, 09:55:15 am
content: The major advantage Tek and Agilent used to have was support and access to knowledge. I found a bug in one of their scopes, called up support in my country and timezone, and 3 days later had a patch.Rigol can't do this.But I'm not sure Tek and Agilent can either anymore.

author: Achilles
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: December 21, 2012, 10:38:12 am
content: Yeah well........ one problem is that a lot of those salesman just know better what the user needs/wants.....Then you have a lot of ideas and possibilities cut down, because another idea was in favor....My brother is a product manager (first milling and then inductive sensors) and had some basic technological training at his University, but well.....no comment here *rolleyes*. No practical work, more like an overview what is possible.What these folks learned is to make money (or try it) and so the technological background isn't very deep. They also switch the business from time to time and therefore haven't a clue what is needed wanted, as they barely had contact to someone who actually worked with the stuff. Did anyone ever hear from a sales representative/ product manager if the product is good or could be improved......most times these fellows just wait for you to call because of a bug/malfunction.Then you still have the problem that some big/well known companies have a good reputation and live on that. You've a problem....you're stuck, because who cares for ONE customer..... I am not talking about Fluke or Agilent, as I heard good stuff most times ( and had good experience with the service). More personal experience with my Photography stuff for example......or automotive stuff.I think I saw some companies who offered a kind of suggestion box where customers could put their ideas.....can't remember who it was. That's at least a start.

author: Bored@Work
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 21, 2012, 11:05:47 am
content: Quote from: Achilles on December 21, 2012, 10:38:12 amWell ... More than one company lets user Nobody and his cousin Dave Null handle the suggestion box. I am currently dealing with one such company, Frontier Silicon. They back their WLAN radios with a web "service" short of any service, and ignore their feedback form. So much for World Class Digital Broadcast Solutions.Suggestion boxes and feedback forms are something companies do to pacify customers, not because they really want to improve something. What seems to work better is if you manage to start a stink on Farcebook or Twitter

author: Achilles
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: December 21, 2012, 11:30:40 am
content: Quote from: Bored@Work on December 21, 2012, 11:05:47 amYepp, I recently saw an article about social media as possibility to force companies to solve your issues. Well, apart from all that social media rubbish it's a bad way to use this as primary service organ for your customers.Hantek handles that really shitty. They have a service email which you can write to, but ignore that one. Then they have a forum where you can ask questions and all that stuff. Most entries there are Customer: "I have a problem with......, but there was no response on the service email"..... Answer:" Try,.... for problem.... See our email".So they mix that up what really sucks...... People with similar problems have to go through the same process as well.....A company where my brother worked before had the habit to ignore customer complains as long as possible..... Great way to treat people who you want to get money from. It didn't work very well and because of that ignorance they had much higher costs in the end.

author: ptricks
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: December 21, 2012, 11:33:28 am
content: Quote from: TerraHertz on December 21, 2012, 07:05:41 amHere is what experience they brought :Presidential Realty CorporationBoard of Directors for GlaxoSmithKlinPresident and Chief Executive Officer of Schwab CorpExecutive Vice President of Wal-Mart Stores IncSenior Vice President and Treasurer of The Procter & Gamble Company since 2009,Assistant attorney general for the state of Maryland.member of the board of directors of Colfax Corporationmember of the board of directors of Smithfield Foods, Inc. and Choice Hotels International, Incmember of the board of directors of IAC/InterActiveCorp., director of Getty Images, Inc. and TechTarget, Inc.one of the leading authorities in the United States on emerging trends and issues in medicine and medical careI can see it now, scopes will be made in china and be on the shelves in walmart for $199.95 and come with complimentary bottle of imitrex for headaches, a picture of the manual you couldn't read anyway, Tide for washing your clothes after you cut yourself on the crappy construction, a coupon for sliced ham at the hotel of your Choice that you will need once you get fired for using the equipment that burned down your work place, and in case you decide to sue you have to be living in the state of Maryland where they will deny your right to sue.

author: orbiter
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: December 21, 2012, 12:04:30 pm
content: Come-on Tek.. Time to lower the prices so we can all afford one. Ya never know.. It might just help keep you afloat too

author: Mechatrommer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 21, 2012, 03:51:08 pm
content: Quote from: orbiter on December 21, 2012, 12:04:30 pmyou dont get it do you? or havent read from page 1? not gonna happen. what happened is those poor engineers are forced to copy 10 years old design (2.5Kb mem) with not so much better to modern UI, at the same price tag as 10 years old before and ask kids to buy it. do you know how it feels like to work with ham burger maker and gambling nuts standing next to you on the right side and an attorney on your left with arm crossed?

author: Hypernova
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: December 21, 2012, 04:20:33 pm
content: Looks like the path to the grave is set, given their shrinking resources and the nature of the business having long product cycles, it's unlikely they will have the right scope out the door in time. The means a slow self feeding downward spiral until they get bought out.

author: orbiter
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: December 21, 2012, 04:22:03 pm
content: Quote from: Mechatrommer on December 21, 2012, 03:51:08 pmNope..and nope. That's all ya gettin' out of me Mr.

author: TRIO_Smartcal
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: December 23, 2012, 01:36:48 am
content: Consider what has happened to the Danaher Stock Price in the last 5 years. The same period this article refers to. Look here.....http://money.cnn.com/quote/quote.html?symb=DHR(click on the link and select 5-years in top left of graph)And here's what an analyst is saying about the stock....http://www.thestreet.com/story/11798034/1/danaher-corporation-stock-buy-recommendation-reiterated-dhr.html?puc=CNNMONEY&cm_ven=CNNMONEYTek seems to have chosen to re-market / re-position / re-price the TDS1000/2000 basic hardware to make it more competitive while still obviously maintaining the brand premium price for, let's face it, very mediocre performance in today's market. People however will buy it for no other reason than it has the TEK logo on it and it's blue. Tek will know that from market focus groups and they are very good at that.Every company has limited R&D funds and the funds will go to where the best bang-for-the-buck can be achieved. I'm sure that under Danaher that will be even more strictly enforced within TEK. These folks are no fools. The Danaher stock price is up almost 50% in 5 years through the GFC.If people still buy these scopes then DHR will make a truck load of cash for minimal investment out of blinkered engineers having excessive brand-loyality. If the TEK brand name can command $1,520 for the 150 MHz version of this shoe box that can't be more than $150 to build, then that's good product portfolio and R&D funds management. TEK seems to know how to extract maximum dollars from brand-loyal followers that don't look elsewhere. That's business and not engineering. And the qualifications/skill-sets of Danaher's management team, that someone pointed out earlier, makes very clear that's what they are good at and the stock market obviously approves. Tek is now being run as a business and under the threat of the plethora of low-cost scopes and more likely the restrictions from finite R&D dollars, the best they can come up with is the TBS.... for now presumably. And the answer is simple, if you don't like what they have done don't buy the product.Notice too they have dropped the warranty back to 5 years on the TBS yet similar hardware has a limited lifetime warranty in a TDS box. Is the TBS less reliable? I doubt it. But making provision for a 5-year warranty is most likely less costly than making liability provision for a 10-year or limited-lifetime warranty and that will show up on the balance sheet. And that's presumably what it's all about now.

author: ttp
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: December 23, 2012, 07:17:03 am
content: Quote from: TRIO_Smartcal on December 21, 2012, 08:01:12 amI work for a small company (40-60 employees) that was rated 4th to 8th im word market share from year to year. That was until we were bought by big multinational (but with US dominated management and culture). All is important now are financial reports, no one gives a shit if we actually do any R&D, trying to sell stuff to customer or fix customers' problems. Somehow in the past I've spent 2-3 hrs in meetings a month, now if I go to all meetings they want me to it would be close to 2-3 hrs a day. I could whinge for pages but since I'm not a Pom I stop right here.

author: TerraHertz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 23, 2012, 08:17:56 am
content: The process of small to medium, successful companies being rapidly destroyed by corporate/marketing MBA droids is something I'm very familiar with. Over and over.... In fact it's one of the reasons I took early retirement - I was sick of seeing good work I'd done being trashed by idiots who's sole ambition in life seemed to be profits for them and their mates via stock market pump-and-dump schemes. While putting large numbers of honest and competent workers out of a job. I'm not going to work for a corporation, *ever* *again*.It's probably not a good idea for me to tell specific stories with company and personal names. Much as I'd like to.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: December 23, 2012, 10:37:44 am
content: Quote from: TerraHertz on December 23, 2012, 08:17:56 amCompany names, hell yes!Dave.

author: TerraHertz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 23, 2012, 01:53:34 pm
content: Ha. It's very tempting. But thinking about it, I don't see any useful way to tell these stories without details of the people responsible. It just wouldn't make sense. But if I did use personal names I could get sued.I'll think about it some more.

author: nanofrog
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 23, 2012, 05:26:58 pm
content: Quote from: TerraHertz on December 23, 2012, 08:17:56 amPlease use company names, and create fictional names for the people involved.

author: Smokey
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 13, 2015, 04:37:18 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on December 21, 2012, 06:39:46 amLooking through some old threads I came across this one.Does the MDO series fit this bill?

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 13, 2015, 05:19:23 am
content: Quote from: Smokey on April 13, 2015, 04:37:18 amYes, and no.Yes in that it was innovative to add a real spectrum analyser into a scope and to do it real cheap. But that is where the innovation ended.The scope architecture is just the same old tired design they have had for decades, hence why it's very slow.

author: Corporate666
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 13, 2015, 06:50:19 am
content: Times change. Markets change.The problem many companies experience is they get into a rut and lose their vision and adaptivity, and then fail to keep up with the changing times.I think Tek can survive and grow again to be a big player in the game - the question is will they do the right things to make that happen. And will Danaher give them the tools to do the job?I think Rigol is showing the rest of the market how it's done. They are delivering a hell of a lot of bang for the buck, as well as bucking the trend in features and options. There is no reason Tek couldn't do the same - or even leapfrog Rigol and beat them at their own game. But do they have the tools (from management and/or Danaher) to do the job? It's doubtful. When they are in a world of shit, companies often cut back on R&D and go into survival mode, which only ensures they will do anything but survive.

author: SL4P
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 13, 2015, 08:02:39 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on December 21, 2012, 06:39:46 amLook at other companies of the same era -DIGITAL EQUIPMENT & AMPEX.AMPEXled the broadcast technology and video recording industry ineverysegment until 'everyone else' had access to low-cost digital processing technology and revived many of the fundamental ideas developed by AMPEX and others.A couple of missteps (Composite Digital (D2) recording), and the arrival of desktop editing - and they were starting on the slow decline.Ampex had a last gasp - in they developed an uncompressed 3/4-in digital tape technology (DST) for industrial/defence applications in parallel with their DCT video technology(which lasted about 5 years - then also faded away against Digital-Betacam from Sony). Their DST technology let them hold on to another decade of military recording contracts - but I'm not sure what they're doing now... but they get paid for patents on a lot of tech that was in everyday use through the 1970s-2000s!DIGITAL EQUIPMENT (DEC)- are a slightly different story.... Leading the minicomputer industry with PDP and VAX systems through the 70s-90s... They didn't handle the transition to personal desktops well, and COMPAQ (of all people) gobbled up the remnants, in turn eaten up and so-on until today.Life goes on, but disruptive technology does exactly that. Disrupts.Sadly - all we got out of it wascrappyweb pages, andgrey text on whitebackgrounds!

author: Blofeld
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 13, 2015, 08:27:22 am
content: If anybody wants to take a look at their glorious past - people like Prof. Lundberg are crazy for vintage Tek scopes:http://readingjimwilliams.blogspot.de/search/label/Scope%20Sunday

author: Kjelt
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 13, 2015, 08:37:05 am
content: There are less and less workplaces that require an oscilloscope, compared to the 80s.Then which workplaces really need GHz scopes? The market of 300MHz and lower oscilloscopes has had an enormous price erosion thanks to Rigol and sorts.Getting into the GHz bandwidth takes an enormous investment.I am not sure if this is a business they should continue to be in, you see it often with large companies, too slow to change over time while the environment changes dramatically.

author: Corporate666
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 13, 2015, 03:58:44 pm
content: Quote from: Kjelt on April 13, 2015, 08:37:05 am...on the other hand, the hobbyist market is exploding. And hobbyists love $300-500 scopes. Rigol is making a killing with them, IMO. Then you have the semipro level like the DS2072 and beyond... the $500-1000 range.Tek has nothing on the low end to compete with the DS1054Z and nothing that stacks up well against th DS2072. That's where they should focus. Given their history and capabilities, I would have to think a DS1000 series competitor would be a piece of cake for Tek to design and manufacture. Do something for $500 that matches the capability of the DS1000, but add in the software decoding and other features that cost $$ on the DS1000 for free. Perhaps make the screen 2-3 inches bigger than the Rigol and have 20Mhz higher bandwidth.. but charge $100-150 more than the Rigol. I'd buy that scope all day over the DS1000.They should also look at power supplies and electronic loads... I think Rigol does well with the DP832 series, I think it was a game changer in price/performance. I would think PSU's and loads are comparatively easy next to O-scopes and function generators... Tek could come up with a DP832 and e-load that would be great value for money and I bet they would sell like hotcakes also.But to do the above would require a commitment and an investment from Danaher or Tek senior management... and that is a bold move when the company is perpetually downsizing and clinging to life in a declining (for them) market.

author: Smokey
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 13, 2015, 05:03:58 pm
content: Quote from: mojo-chan on April 13, 2015, 08:23:40 amHowever much we all love the cheap stuff Rigol puts out, it really isn't in the same class as Agilent/Keysight, Lecroy, or even Tek on the high/middle end. Rigol only compete at the low end where just functioning as a basic scope and being cheap are the only real requirements. Watch some TheSignalPath episodes, specifically the one where he was looking at noise floor if you want an example. This could change at some point, but it's the case now. In the same way that Tek needs to innovate to stay in the game, Rigol needs to innovate to get out of the low end market.

author: Kjelt
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 13, 2015, 05:44:29 pm
content: I don,t think a company like Tek can compete with Rigol in the low end of the spectrum. We have seen this so many times with other companies in the past like IBM with their PCs against clone manufacturers. It takes many manhours to design a new product no matter if it is a cheap scope or an expensive one the cost of manhours outweighs the BOM if the quantities you sell are below hundreds of thousands and the wages are skyhigh.

author: LabSpokane
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 13, 2015, 05:54:21 pm
content: The future is not found at the bottom.

author: linux-works
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 13, 2015, 06:03:59 pm
content: a few years ago, I had an interview at a company that danaher bought. they were clueless and they were looking to hire only h1b's and 'affordable talent'. it really put a bad taste in my mouth, from that experience.I got a rejection from them (fine, probably for the best) but then, over the years, I continued to get calls/emails from one of their recruiters. they turned me down and yet they still come back to waste my time, year after year?if this is how danaher is running tek, might as well close the doors and send everyone home. pity that they also own fluke and a few other tech companies, too ;(

author: LabSpokane
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 13, 2015, 07:34:18 pm
content: Danaher's 2014 annual report is actually interesting reading. The CEO strongly hits at asset sales this year. T&M division's operating profit is down year over year for the last two years. Tek going on the chopping block would be a good bet.Lots of comedy in the "Environmental" business with gas pump equipment manufacturers Gilbarco and Veeder-Root being lumped into the Eco-bucket.

author: Smokey
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 13, 2015, 08:57:29 pm
content: Funny.I just got an add from Tek. Looks like they have a new 70GHz scope with the following banner specs:• 70GHz Analog Bandwidth• 200GS/s Sample Rate• 4.3 ps Rise Time (20/80)• >25GHz Edge Trigger• 5.25" Compact Form Factor• Channel-to-Channel Jitter <500fshttp://info.tek.com/www-dpo70000sx-ati-performance-oscilloscope-em.html?mkt_tok=3RkMMJWWfF9wsRokvajOeu%2FhmjTEU5z14u8pW6O%2Bhokz2EFye%2BLIHETpodcMTsJjMrjYDBceEJhqyQJxPr3AJNQNzcV1RhnmCA%3D%3D

author: SL4P
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 13, 2015, 09:39:51 pm
content: Quote from: LabSpokane on April 13, 2015, 05:54:21 pmBut that's where it's heading!

author: pickle9000
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 13, 2015, 09:55:16 pm
content: Quote from: SL4P on April 13, 2015, 09:39:51 pmMeaning that Rigol, Siglent and Hantek are not selling scopes? For Tek to ignore such a large market seems off to me. The goal is to sell product one bleeding edge scope verses 1000 cheapos. Why not both?

author: Corporate666
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 13, 2015, 10:04:29 pm
content: Quote from: LabSpokane on April 13, 2015, 05:54:21 pmAnd Tek is free to continue to believe that while Rigol and others gobble up massive amounts of market share. They can keep believing it at the asset auction too.Good business is where you find it. The "maker" scene is something new and is bringing millions of people into the electronics hobby with devices like Arduinos and R-Pi's. And those buyers aren't looking at $10,000 scopes, let alone $1,000 scopes.Lower price doesn't have to mean lower margin, and by leveraging technology they already own and have mastered, they can bring unprecedented features down market. That's exactly what Rigol is doing and it is working out fantastically well.I'd rather sell a single $100k scope than 1,000 $100 scopes. But I'd rather sell 1,000,000 $500 scopes than a thousand $50k scopes. Not to mention the opportunity to drive those customers further into your brand with a widening product range.Tek needs to take a page from the car manufacturer handbook. BMW/Mercedes/Audi all realized that pushing downmarket brings buyers into the brand - it's a winning strategy.

author: LabSpokane
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 13, 2015, 10:41:43 pm
content: Quote from: Corporate666 on April 13, 2015, 10:04:29 pmI just don't see $500 scopes to the "maker" community as a great business model. Rigol is stretched far more thinly, technically and financially, than most want to believe, in my opinion.Commodore sold lots of cheap computers. They are gone as well.

author: Smokey
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 13, 2015, 10:45:00 pm
content: Quote from: pickle9000 on April 13, 2015, 09:55:16 pmNot saying Tek should ignore the low end market completly, but neither Keysight or Lecroy have anything to compete with Rigol there either (not counting rebadged Rigol and Siglent stuff). It takes a whole different product design mentality to make something to the absolute lowest price point. You can't expect your high end design team to know how to do that without a lot of practice and product revisions. Going from the design mentality of using the best components regardless of price to trying to figure out how many decoupling capacitors you can remove to save 5cents is a big step. The car analogy is a good one but you have to take it all the way to the oscilloscope market extreme. It's sort of like asking why there is no model BMW to compete with the Geo Metro. BMW still makes plenty of money without playing in that arena and just having such a low end model and all the compromises that entails can hurt their high end image.

author: Galenbo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 14, 2015, 09:54:37 am
content: Quote from: TRIO_Smartcal on December 23, 2012, 01:36:48 amBe careful with expressing serious numbers about companies in paper money's absolute value.If you compare it to what NAS100 and DOW JONES did, they perform nearly the same, witch means they are just another company in the field, and it's only the paper money that got worthless.

author: Corporate666
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 14, 2015, 06:38:57 pm
content: Quote from: LabSpokane on April 13, 2015, 10:41:43 pmI don't think it is about "makers".I think if you were to chart the test equipment/oscilloscope market over the past 20 years, it has grown dramatically. I think that growth largely comes from costs coming down along with all other digital electronics, making scopes accessible to hobbyists and smaller companies than previously.I think additional (and huge) growth has come in the last 10 years with the advent of the layman getting into electronics. I don't think anyone can deny the success of Arduino/R-Pi and such. And that represents literally millions of new buyers. And those buyers aren't buying $3,0000 Agilent scopes.I also think if you look at Agilent and some of the other big guys - you would have to agree that they are focusing on that market. I remember what low end scopes cost from those guys 10-20 years ago compared to today... it seems they are adapting to that market.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 14, 2015, 08:33:23 pm
content: Quote from: Corporate666 on April 13, 2015, 10:04:29 pmTektronix is already doing that with 20 year old technology but they fail to look at the competition (Rigol, Siglent) which offer a much better value for money. Rigol and Siglent use off-the-shelve parts where Tektronix most likely would use an expensive ASIC. Tektronix just can't create a really cheap design.

author: Bassman59
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 15, 2015, 12:03:02 am
content: Quote from: nctnico on April 14, 2015, 08:33:23 pmI think that their engineers could definitely create an inexpensive yet quality design that rivals the Rigol and Siglent products.I think that their management doesn't want to do that.

author: pickle9000
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 15, 2015, 12:18:18 am
content: Tek's problems are those of management. Tek sells product, if management does not recognize a market possibility then that is a failing. High end, low end, or feature the end game is the same. Sell or die, you must develop products and ideally a wide range of them. Certain personnel at Tek may already be at Agilent, where will that lead?Tek will or should at least start selling rebranded scopes. They have the name they should use it. If they don't do it now they soon will. Agilent did a deal with Rigol, Tek should do a deal with Siglent.

author: LabSpokane
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 15, 2015, 01:12:45 am
content: I'm surprised at how many here think that the $400 oscope is a gold mine product. What do people think the gross and net margins are on those scopes? Particularly after places like Tequipment get their maybe 10-15%...So let's say Rigol's take is $340 on a $400 unit. What do you think the BOM cost is? Manufacturing, overhead, shipping, etc? What do you think Rigol's return rate and costs are? How much of the remaining profit would you allocate for R&D on new products? How many $400 scopes do you think Rigol sells annually? How much would you allocate for sales and support personnel?If I had a pile of money to invest, the last thing on this earth I would do is start a company that built $400 o-scopes. I'd say it's the new toaster oven, but toaster ovens may be higher margin. I think Rigol set this price point based on selling add ons like serial decoding and bandwidth upgrades. Instead what's happened is everyone is hacking the scopes and getting all that for free.What's the business model?

author: Galenbo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 15, 2015, 04:30:33 pm
content: Quote from: LabSpokane on April 15, 2015, 01:12:45 amI don't disagree with you, but I think this Rigol scope made the market different.Before it was mainly a specialists market, like dentist equipment. You phone and the seller comes by.Now this bottomrange scopes are in the TV/Laptop/GSM area. If a 46" TV, Win8 Laptop, Quadcore Smartphone can be made for 400 euro, also the Rigol scope.The hackability (and this site) gave Rigol a huge publicity. After that everyone bought it, eyes closed.Exactly what they needed.

author: Bassman59
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 15, 2015, 05:44:38 pm
content: Quote from: LabSpokane on April 15, 2015, 01:12:45 amOne might start by assuming that BOM is 20% to 25% retail list. Wholesale cost paid by distributors might be 50% of list. Distributors sell the product at a "discount," so maybe 60% to 75% of retail list.It is an exercise for the accountants to determine how many $100 bills need to come in so they can keep the lights on and the staff paid.

author: tom66
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 15, 2015, 05:54:23 pm
content: The ADC in the Rigol 1054Z costs at least $75. The main FPGA is about $75 as well. Add in casing, display panel, power supply, processor and ancillary electronics, BOM could easily be $200-250. I don't think Rigol makes a lot at a $399 price point after retail and distribution costs, but they sell such a large volume of them large margins would not be as important as they would be to the Teks and Agilents of this world.

author: pickle9000
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 15, 2015, 06:11:28 pm
content: Many products sell on a tight margin, the market defines that. If Tek is unwilling to get in on a particular market then that is their choice. Others will take it up, grow their company and then eat into Tek's business. It may take time but they (the other guys) will grow and learn.Companies are willing to take lower margins for volume and reliable (over time) sales. It's money in the bank.What are Rigol's bom costs? Only Rigol knows for sure.

author: LabSpokane
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 15, 2015, 06:27:56 pm
content: Quote from: pickle9000 on April 15, 2015, 06:11:28 pmThe bigger truck theory is um...well...an interesting theory of how to grow a company. It's usually a poor plan for a low-moderate volume business that require a lot of quality talent to grow. The bigger truck types of businesses are usually slave ships. Tek probably didn't choose that path because not even Danaher would find that market entertaining.Rigol's business is based on borrowing what they learned from others. As for growth, I see little to no potential for them to eat into the >=1GHz market, which is where the real revenue is. Rigol barely has the talent to support what they do now. And their higher end scopes are just as expensive as the big boys, since they have to buy the same components to do the job.As for the BOM costs, that is a valid topic for discussion since folks are asserting that a $400 scope is a profitable business model.

author: LabSpokane
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 15, 2015, 06:31:36 pm
content: Quote from: pickle9000 on April 15, 2015, 06:11:28 pmThe bigger truck theory is um...well...an interesting theory of how to grow a company. It's usually a poor plan for a low-moderate volume business that require a lot of quality talent to grow. The bigger truck types of businesses are usually slave ships. Tek probably didn't choose that path because not even Danaher would find that market entertaining.Rigol's business is based on borrowing what they learned from others. As for growth, I see little to no potential for them to eat into the >=1GHz market, which is where the real revenue is. Rigol barely has the talent to support what they do now. And their higher end scopes are just as expensive as the big boys, since they have to buy the same components to do the job.As for the BOM costs, that is a valid topic for discussion since folks are asserting that a $400 scope is a profitable business model.

author: Corporate666
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 15, 2015, 08:17:17 pm
content: Quote from: LabSpokane on April 15, 2015, 01:12:45 amYou're isolating the $400 scope as its own business - it isn't. It's part of their global business. Are they bringing people into the brand with a low cost of entry product and getting sales on other products? Certainly... who knows to what extent. As for BOM cost and margins - you said yourself that if you get into the >1Ghz market, you have to buy the same high end parts as everyone else. Are you sure that the margins are so much better on those scopes than on the $500 items? Or just presuming they are better?At the end of the day, overhead, R&D and return costs don't enter into the picture, provided they are similar percentage-wise to Rigol's other products. All that matters is the gross profit per unit and the volume of units sold.If Rigol sells 1,000 $500 scopes per month for every single $20,000 scope that Tek sells - then they are doing very well, as long as they haven't created a loss leader. And I don't think they are dumb enough to be losing money on $500 scopes.

author: pickle9000
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 15, 2015, 08:18:50 pm
content: The Danaher model is to make a lean machine. I have no idea if they are involved in product development. In the case of Tek developing a new low cost scope isn't really needed just rebrand. If for no other reason to have a presence in that market. Agilent does it and I'm sure that they have good reason.As for existing development if Danaher has cut too deep then the entire product line will suffer.

author: LabSpokane
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 15, 2015, 09:04:35 pm
content: Quote from: Corporate666 on April 15, 2015, 08:17:17 pmWell, the cheap scope business is its own unit at Keysight at least. The easiest way to kill a company is to let a low margin product overwhelm the side of the business that's high overhead. Hence the separate business unit.I doubt Rigol is necessarily losing money, but I seriously doubt that they'll ever make the kind of money to do the development work to take on Keysight or Tek on the more advanced products.As far as Rigol's higher end products, who's buying them? Rigol is as nearly or more expensive than the majors in those markets - particularly with the software option bundles.Anyway, this has been a good discussion. It will be fun to see how things turn out (aside from Tek imploding which hurts to see). Maybe we can bet beers on it via long distance.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 15, 2015, 09:21:16 pm
content: Quote from: Bassman59 on April 15, 2015, 12:03:02 amThey can't. The 20 year old technology can't be upscaled so they basically have to start over. Add higher wages for the R&D department and more overhead to equation and you'll see Tektronix can't compete with the Chinese.

author: linux-works
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 15, 2015, 09:29:35 pm
content: BUT - if tek still has some local workers (if they have not been all outsourced) then their attention to detail and proper QA would be true value-add over typical chinese software/firmware offerings.now, here's an idea: have rigol make the hardware and their own 'starter' software. but tek could partner with them and upgrade/update the firmware, fix bugs, add useful features and add SUPPORT, which people really do want and deserve. charge for the software! leverage the commodity hardware.win/win.but it will never happen.

author: pickle9000
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 15, 2015, 09:40:54 pm
content: Quote from: linux-works on April 15, 2015, 09:29:35 pmKind of interesting a firmware company called Tek that specializes in test equipment. Like you say never happen but if any test equipment had a "Firmware by Tek" sticker on it that would be a massive selling point.As for what I don't want to see is Tek selling it's name to any third party product that comes along. That will kill them for me.

author: Corporate666
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 15, 2015, 09:41:26 pm
content: Quote from: LabSpokane on April 15, 2015, 09:04:35 pmI respect your insight on the matter - you obviously know your stuff, even though we don't agreeI know that in my case, I didn't consider Rigol to be much different than Owon/Hantek/Siglent, etc. In the past few years, that has changed - I believe Rigol has hit a few home runs in succession, and I don't think their formula is all that hard to glean (or to imitate). In my case, I bought a DS2000 because it set a new bang-for-buck standard. I've been impressed with it and have since bought a few other pieces of their equipment - and (perhaps more importantly) they are on my short list for when I am looking for new equipment (eg - now I am looking at signal analyzers). I'm not sure I would have done that had I not been impressed each step of the way with my purchases (scope, PSU, function generator, meter).In my business, we have some products in the $5,000 to $25,000 range.. but those are the show-off items that we don't sell often (and crack a beer when we do). The run of the mill $500-1000 parts are where we make our real money. Support and development costs of the $25k parts is high - with high consumer expectations and perfection in fit and finish demanded. It's a lot easier to perfect a product line you sell thousands of - at least in my case.As for Rigol earning the income needed to fund R&D on higher end stuff - perhaps, but from what I know (which is second hand information and definitely not irrefutable), Rigol has been doing fantastically well from a financial perspective, with the only asterisk being their R&D and manufacturing budgets on the new products being high due to rolling out a lot of new stuff recently. If they are smart and are rolling appropriate talent and $$ back into the product lines, I don't see why they can't either expand in the low to mid range, or even tackle the higher end range as their brand grows.We shall see. As for Tek, I hope they don't go away... that would be like losing Radio Shack, but it certainly appears that what they are doing isn't working. The scope market is much bigger than it was but Tek is much smaller than it was... so something is going off the rails over there. Hope you are not affected personally.

author: LabSpokane
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 15, 2015, 09:54:14 pm
content: Corp666,We agree to disagree.I really do hope that you're correct. I would love to see the cost come down on other items.I will confess to having an emotional bias due to working with a bunch of ex Tek employees and knowing some Agilent folks. Sharp cats.

author: linux-works
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 15, 2015, 09:57:20 pm
content: Quote from: pickle9000 on April 15, 2015, 09:40:54 pmdesigning and selling hardware IS a race-to-the-bottom. very sad but it seems to be true.so, let the chinese vendors make the gear. but if they were smart, they would realize that they can't do both hardware AND good software. so, they should be hardware designers and makers.someone with a track record in support and qa (and docs!) could step in and offer aftermarket firmware, as long as the specs were fully open to (at least) tek. that would be the hard part, but if they could agree to it, one company could do just firmware and the other just hardware (and maybe 'basic' free firmware).a long time ago, there was a bios company 'mr. bios' (lol) that did this. I ran their aftermarket bios on my pentium-1 system (that's how long ago this was; phoenix, ami and award were still the big 3 but there -was- a 4th choice for some boards). it had more features and was actually less buggy than the award/ami it replaced!rockbox is another example. I recently tried a 'high end' audio portable player and it did have a rockbox port. the port was quite a bit better than stock firmware (same with sandisk sansa players).there is an upgraded firmware for canon cameras that is better than stock.then there's openwrt for wifi routers. and tomato, and... (etc).so, it can be done. lots of examples of this in the real world.

author: Psi
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 16, 2015, 10:31:14 am
content: tek should shead off say $20mil to a 2nd company/department purely to go away and build some new game changing test hardware.They could get a lot done without the overhead of dealing with internal company politics and red tape.Only engineers permitted in said company plus 1 manager to keep thecatsengineers focused on a single task and 1 general staff member to keep the coke machine stocked and the whiteboard makers fresh.Also the engineers get to pick who they want the manager to be from the list of current tek managers.Perhaps they could finally make a good sub-$2k spectrum analyzer that can do 6ghz using new SDR tech.Basically a hackRF in a box with a LCD, control buttos and some good tools for analyzing things.I would buy that in a sec.

author: Galenbo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 16, 2015, 01:04:53 pm
content: Quote from: Corporate666 on April 15, 2015, 08:17:17 pmThe same goes for me. I had 1500 euro to spend on equipment, I chose Rigol products because of their DS1052E success story, but bought a higher range.They are smart enough to maybe take 50 euro extra from me, and use it to keep their bottom productline alive.Because it's exactly that bottomline marketing product that produced working publicity to seduce me.The other way: Producing a new Formula-1 Terrahertz Scope that costs +1M euro, and also a $1000 range, woudn't have worked for me.

author: Smokey
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 16, 2015, 07:19:41 pm
content: Quote from: Psi on April 16, 2015, 10:31:14 amShhhh.... The first rule of Tek Skunkworks is you don't talk about Tek Skunkworks!!That would be killer. As long as it's not in palmdale.

author: aargee
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 17, 2015, 05:49:57 am
content: I really think that the mid-range market for scopes has evaporated with the march of consumerism and the "throw away" society.My service job many years ago had a CRO as a standard piece of test gear, not so now. Either service industries have dried up or the equipment is now digital with little or no scope requirement for adjustments.The 'low' end scopes have marched up and taken much of what market was left. Although 'low end' is quite subjective for their capabilities.High end scopes for research/education and specialised applications are still about but even this is suffering from the same change in technology that affects all areas of electronics.The gear I work on now has no application for scope measurements, it self calibrates or is locked down. If it fails to meet spec, there is no adjustment, modules are swapped or binned. We have scopes on the shelves that are slowly being reduced in number, we have two Teks left (with dust on them) plus a handful of portables for grab and go checking of external signals.Such is life where I live.

author: Smokey
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 17, 2015, 07:40:37 pm
content: Quote from: aargee on April 17, 2015, 05:49:57 amWhile I'm not sure this is a direct reflection on scope sales and use, it is certainly true that with the more integrated systems there really aren't a lot of things a tech can repair in the field.

author: pickle9000
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 18, 2015, 01:16:57 am
content: Quote from: Smokey on April 17, 2015, 07:40:37 pmEquipment repair was a such a big industry. Are there places in the world that do still repair things on a large scale? Maybe a better question is will the recycling industry do this, or perhaps a country and then resell the goods?

author: Smokey
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 18, 2015, 01:51:14 am
content: It's probably cheaper to keep desoldering and reselling the chips and stripping all the gold out of the PCBs like they are doing now. If you've ever spent any significant amount of time trying to troubleshoot and fix random failures (not all the same failure) in any piece of electronics (even the ones you have all the schematics for) that is incredibly time consuming and not economical. Not much return there.There probably aren't many chips in modern high end scopes that you could even salvage since a lot of the work is in custom silicon.

author: pickle9000
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 18, 2015, 06:31:15 pm
content: Quote from: Smokey on April 18, 2015, 01:51:14 amI was referring to a general repair industry. In countries where repair is a viable alternative to buying new. It used to be common for a local repair shop to do everything from a toaster to a TV. Those things not paid for where just sold. Many (most) repairs for modern equipment relate to power supply issues a problem that's easy to sold without a schematic. A small shop dealing with equipment like this has use for a basic scope. I guess the real issue is will this come to be. The repair of consumer equipment rarely happens and when it does it's a board swap. I think in a place like Brazil (for example) this could or may actually be a part of the normal economy.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 18, 2015, 07:29:08 pm
content: Well, Tek produces much non-oscilloscope stuff. They might be good at it.http://www.tek.com/power-analyzer/pa4000

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 18, 2015, 07:59:45 pm
content: Please, when compared to Rigol, Owon looks like a child's toy.

author: rdl
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 18, 2015, 09:46:23 pm
content: Actually, judging by the DP832 and DS1054Z, I believe Rigol's current design trend is to make things that look more like they belong on a shelf at Toys"R"Us rather than on a lab bench.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 18, 2015, 11:16:15 pm
content: Perhaps but TFT screens offer a whole new range of possibilities to shown what a piece of equipment is doing. I recently acquired some older Agilent gear with a VFD display. That is quite a step back.

author: aargee
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 20, 2015, 12:32:35 pm
content: Quote from: rdl on April 18, 2015, 09:46:23 pmIn what respect?Googling up a whole lot of Agilent/Keysight DSO device images and comparing them with the DS1054 images, there aren't a lot of stand out differences there. They look as pretty and as colourful as each other.

author: Galenbo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 21, 2015, 07:45:53 am
content: Quote from: rdl on April 18, 2015, 09:46:23 pmI think I found a gap in the market. Let's develop a whole series of front covers like the nokia 5110.And sell other backgrounds and color themes for the display :-)

author: ve7xen
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 21, 2015, 08:48:30 am
content: Quote from: Galenbo on April 21, 2015, 07:45:53 amAgilent'sgot this market coveredfor multimeters - but nobody's done scopes yet!

author: embeddedbob
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: April 21, 2015, 01:13:46 pm
content: Quote from: aargee on April 20, 2015, 12:32:35 pmI agree with rdl on this. To be specific its the curves and edges on the case (and graphics); Keysight are way ahead on this (as you would expect).