Turn your Rigol DS1052E Oscilloscope into a 100MHz DS1102E
in [Design]
|
From: Joel Koltner on 31 Mar 2010 17:06 "Phil Hobbs" <pcdhSpamMeSenseless(a)electrooptical.net> wrote in message news:4BB3A9C7.9010508(a)electrooptical.net... > These hardware/software gizmos we're surrounded with are in a bit of a grey > area. If you bought an Apple computer, for instance, you'd own the hardware > but only license the pre-installed software. You don't get a right to > hack/rip off/disassemble their software just because you bought their > hardware. Actually I think (in the USA) you do have rights to do a certain amount of hacking and disassembling regardless of what the shrinkwrap license might suggest, but I agree it's largely a grey area. I'm willing to bet you that plenty of the big guys like Agilent, Tek, and LeCroy have completely taken apart, analyzed, and disassembled as much hardware and software as they could manage of their competitors' gear -- and then incorporated any hardware AND SOFTWARE improvements they found into their own kit. (All with one of the company lawyers around to make sure it was done legally, though.) > As I said, it's a good lesson in product design HP/Agilent and Tek have were using simple-minded-but-effective encryption already 20+ years ago to control access to software years in their gear... > and an interesting moral question that is more complicated than most folks > here are willing to see. Agreed. ---Joel
From: Joel Koltner on 31 Mar 2010 17:08 "John Larkin" <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in message news:ub77r59i42igsqva44a605ms9fm1cc9fno(a)4ax.com... > It also does the standard bandwidth limit function, so it would have > been there anyhow. OK, but there's still an extra resistor needed to set it to 50MHz vs. 20MHz. :-) You never did tell us if you'd pursue legal action against someone taking one of your widgets, completely replacing the firmware, and thereby providing functionality that you currently charge for? > Since the ADCs are overclocked, it may be that Rigol selects the best > scopes to be the 100 MHz versions. Good point. ---Joel
From: Swanny on 31 Mar 2010 17:25 John Larkin wrote: > On Wed, 31 Mar 2010 11:29:12 +1100, "David L. Jones" > <altzone(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> For those with a Rigol DS1052E oscilloscope, you can now turn it into a >> 100MHz DS1102E with just a serial cable: >> >> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LnhXfVYWYXE >> >> Dave. > > What you have done is possibly a criminal act in the USA, using a > computer to deprive Rigol of revenue. In the US, "using a computer" to > perform an act can be a much more severe crime than the act itself. > So are all the overclockers in the USA in jail for depriving Intel of revenue by not buying a higher grade CPU for more $?
From: David L. Jones on 31 Mar 2010 17:30 George Herold wrote: > On Mar 31, 11:53 am, John Larkin > <jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >> On Wed, 31 Mar 2010 07:14:03 -0700 (PDT), George Herold >> >> >> >> >> >> <ggher...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Mar 30, 8:29 pm, "David L. Jones" <altz...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>> For those with a Rigol DS1052E oscilloscope, you can now turn it >>>> into a 100MHz DS1102E with just a serial cable: >> >>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LnhXfVYWYXE >> >>>> Dave. >> >>>> -- >>>> ================================================ >>>> Check out my Electronics Engineering Video Blog & >>>> Podcast:http://www.eevblog.com >> >>> Excellent, I just ordered a Rigol DS1052E! The best news is that >>> even without the mod the 50 MHz is closer to 70 MHz as is.... (just >>> scaling your measured 5ns rise/fall time.) >> >>> George H. >> >> It has very clean transient response as shipped, at the 50 (or 70) >> MHz bandwidth. The hacked version is ratty looking. I wouldn't do >> the hack even if it was morally and legally fine. >> >> This is a very nice little scope, superb for the price. It has loads >> of more features than a comparable Tek at around 1/3 the price. >> >> Why Jones would choose to hurt Rigel is a mystery to me. >> >> John- Hide quoted text - >> >> - Show quoted text - > > Oh I don't plan on hacking it. I just figured that there might be a > tick up in sales of the 50MHz version and I should get mine before > they sell out. And yeah the pulse response looked nice. (I also like > that it's a bit faster than the spec.) I'm not sure about the > rattiness of the 100MHz response.. after all the 100MHz TEK pulse > looked ratty too and it might have been that Dave was hitting it with > a raggy pulse to begin with. (Sorry Dave, I don't mean to dis your > bench test skills.) > > I think Dave likes Rigol and I'm not sure his hack will hurt sales. I > would guess it's only a small fraction of users that would want the > hack anyway. I would bet.. though I don't know how to prove it.. that > Dave has been good for Rigol sales. (He is certainly responsible for > my purchase of one.) I know for a fact that my (positive) review and pushing of the Rigol scope on my blog and other places has directly resulted in at least several hundred sales (people email me and thank me for it almost daily). My review of the Rigol has been viewed over 15,000 times, so I'd be surprised if I'm not responsible for sales in the thousands, directly or indirectly. I'm probably Rigol's biggest independent public supporter. BTW, I did not come up with the solution and expose it, it's been public info on various forums for weeks before I did my video, and was even featured on Hackaday. And I have just heard that Rigol have already fixed the firmware before I did the video. John seems obseesed with "why I did it". Err, in case he missed it, I run an electronics engineering video blog, and have had several episodes on the Rigol, so I and many of my viewers are curious about how Rigol (and others) design and market their products. I originally suggested the possibilty of a mod out of curiosity, so it's a update on what my viewers have discovered and have already shared with the world. There is actually nothing new in my video. I'm not depriving Rigol of anything, my blog is educational, and once again I believe I'm helping promote their products. To think my blog would hinder sales is ridiculous. But given that Rigol are (or were) the 2nd biggest oscilloscope manufacturer in the world (they might be #1 now), my little blog is hardly going to amount to a hill of beans in terms of (I believe positive) sales for them anyway. John needs to get off his ridiculous US DCMA hobby horse. Dave. -- --------------------------------------------- Check out my Electronics Engineering Video Blog & Podcast: http://www.eevblog.com
From: fritz on 31 Mar 2010 17:30
"John Larkin" <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in message news:mtq6r5t2e14htcdl9svbr3bt8g95hlpmmc(a)4ax.com... ...... > Looking at the transient response at 100 MHz, which kinda sucks, I > wonder if the 50 and 100 MHz scopes are indeed identical except for > firmware. > > John Kinda sucks ? Did you watch the eevblog ??? I don't think you have the slightest clue about what fast signals really look like. The higher the bandwidth the messier they look as various resonance effects in the measurement circuit are revealed - use a 1Ghz 'scope and they REALLY suck. The modded Rigol compared very well with a 100Mhz Tektronix TDS 1012. |