Turn your Rigol DS1052E Oscilloscope into a 100MHz DS1102E
in [Design]
|
From: hamilton on 31 Mar 2010 06:44 > On Wed, 31 Mar 2010 03:02:13 -0500, George Jefferson wrote: > > >> It's also very dishonest Hmmm, Rigol is the dishonest party here. They sell you a device that's made with 100Mhz circuitry and then hold it hostage until you pay more. hamilton
From: David L. Jones on 31 Mar 2010 05:45 Nial Stewart wrote: >> It's also very dishonest and goes to show why humanity will never >> make it very far. People like Larkin are too arrogant to understand >> this. Do you think people would buy their products if they knew that >> the only difference between the low end and high end versions is the >> price.... > > ...and access to extended functionality that someone's had to be paid > to develop? In this case Rigol actually went to the trouble to design-in circuitry to enable this 50MHz "cripple" feature. The front end was clearly designed from day one to be at least 100MHz bandwidth, and they then decided to dumb it down to meet a lower end market and price point by adding the cripple feature. So George is essentially right, the only effective difference is the price. >> At the very least they could have added some true functional >> improvement that made it justifiable but simply changing the model >> number.... > > ...and access to further functionality that someone's had to be paid > to develop.... The only extra functionality is being able to go to 2ns timebase instead of 5ns, everything else is identical. A couple of lines of code? Any extra design effort that has gone into this product all went in to designing the cripple feature to dumb it down! >> doesn't justify a 40% price increase. > > By your logic Microsoft should only be charging $0.50 for the costs > of the DVD when they sell Windows7. A completely silly analogy. Dave. -- --------------------------------------------- Check out my Electronics Engineering Video Blog & Podcast: http://www.eevblog.com
From: Al Borowski on 31 Mar 2010 05:51 On Mar 31, 1:03 pm, John Larkin <jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: > What you have done is possibly a criminal act in the USA, using a > computer to deprive Rigol of revenue [...] >The act is > arguably legal theft. It's certainly moral theft. If I bought a house, and it included an extra bedroom that wasn't advertised and was padlocked shut, I wouldn't feel guilty breaking the padlock in the least. Would you? Cheers, Al
From: Nial Stewart on 31 Mar 2010 05:55 > Hmmm, Rigol is the dishonest party here. > > They sell you a device that's made with 100Mhz circuitry and then hold it hostage until you pay > more. It's their design, they can market and sell it whatever way they want to optimise their profits. Dishonesty would be promising 100MHz performance then delivering 50MHz performance with a demand for more money to get to 100MHz. ? Nial
From: John Devereux on 31 Mar 2010 06:01
terryc <newsninespam-spam(a)woa.com.au> writes: > On Wed, 31 Mar 2010 03:02:13 -0500, George Jefferson wrote: > > >> It's also very dishonest > > Fill me in one that please. (I do not waste bandwidth on youtube). > > In this country, if I outrightly own item A and item B, what I do with > them is my business (legal restictions aside). > > Where was the dishonest part? > Was their an agreement signed prohibiting use of some part on one of the > items > >> Do >> you think people would buy their products if they knew that the only >> difference between the low end and high end versions is the price? > > Well, the only difference with Casio calculators over the entire range > was the number of wires brought out from under the blob, but they still > sell like hot cakes. Not even that, sometimes. My first casio (age ~13) had lots of extra "hidden" functions (statistical). They just did not appear on the screen printing on the keyboard overlay! But you could access them by just pressing the buttons as if they were. I suppose in the USA now I would be guilty of computer hacking, breaking the DMCA and breaching license conditions, moral and legal theft. -- John Devereux |