Keysight Oscilloscopes Reviews

We are using it to do research. We're currently doing optimal links research.

We are measuring PAM-4 signals with it.

We generate a waveform from the AWG. We using the scope to sample the waveform, then do offline processing.

We use the high-end scope and high-end AWG, having the bandwidth and signal rates forwarded to us.

Its resolution is very good. It has the highest bandwidth and resolution on the market.

We are using the full bandwidth of the product.

The technical support is good, and it has very strong customer support. They sent an engineer to us who gave us some training and tutorials.

The pricing is very expensive.

They sent their device to demo to us before purchasing.

We also evaluated Teledyne LeCroy.

I automate these devices for the other persons to use and take measurements. Our current model is a VNA machine.

It's easier to automate and connect with multiple devices, and at the same time with laptops.

The ACPA comments for automation testing.

While the user interface is good with respect to instrumentation, but with respect to documentation, I do not like it. Its documentation is slightly bad. It was not organized properly. The way it's organized is very difficult to understand, so it takes lot of time to search for one thing in particular.

We are utilizing the full bandwidth of the product.

I have not contacted technical support as of now.

If you want to use it manually and automate it, it's easy. However, for automation, if the documentation was better, it would decrease your time using it. At first, you need to read the documentation, or if you want to search for any particular thing, it takes lot of time. So, you need to invest a lot of money to start this. If someone has some experience with Keysight, then it would be easier.

We are measuring signals mostly related to switching, like networking. The type of signals that we are measuring are signalling integrity.

I don't think it's being used for connection devices. I have seen past developments, and it's mostly used for taking measurements on the board to check how it works.

I'm using Keysight VNA, Oscilloscopes, and Spectrum Analyzer. The oscilloscope is mostly used for Keysight because they have a very high resolution and very high memory digs. They also can capture the signal reading at a very high signal read. We regularly go to 100 gigabits so we can capture a lot of signal for Keysight.

They changed a lot of the workflows, especially for the statistical analysis. They provided simplicity in the design, and we can ask for we want in futures designs. The statistical analysis is very good in the Keysight software.

The user interface is very user-friendly. You can use a lot of functions in their scope and will provide them for you. You can update the scope's software by asking Keysight to update the software when you want. 

The jitter management from Keysight is very smart. It can capture the jitter very quickly and provide some statistical analysis, which is awesome.

Signalling integration has room for improvement.

I would like more customized functions, so we can do the programming and definitions ourselves. There is an automation flow to capture this signal, and we would like to do this ourselves. If we could get a lot of the data automatically, then maybe we could get some machine learning stuff.

We are measuring many signals in one system (approximately 100).

With some features, you cannot use them as you want because the product is very specialized.

We have upgraded the scope and Keysight has given us more solutions.

If I need technical support, I can contact the account manager or architectural engineer for information, and they will give me support very quickly.

I have always used Keysight. 

Most people use Keysight. but some people use Tektronix, Teledyne, or Rockworth, because they have other needs. For example, Teledyne provides more high resolution scope, and for Rockworth, their spectrum analysis is very easy to use. Tektronix is very good at end log power management. 

We did a trial of Keysight before purchasing it.

We always are sharing this solution with our peers and colleagues.

The solution is targeting high-speed serial applications. For high-speed signal designs, you need to get the eye diagram beautiful. 

The learning curve of the solution depends on the quality of the material. Some things take a day or two to get acclimated, and others take a year or two.

I am working on some larger devices, so I don't plan on using it for IoT. Though some of our department using it for IoT, I don't have any details.

We are using Keysight Oscilloscopes and software for assimilations. 

Their new features are very useful for our jobs and workflows because they are very accurate.

Its versatility and accuracy are the most valuable features.

The user interface is very simple. Everyone can use it.

They can improve, but I don't know how.

We are utilizing the full bandwidth of the product.

I don't know if its upgradable for our parts. I think we use all of the features that can be used.

We have often needed technical support often. They were always ready to help us. They have been very useful. 

If you need help, there is always someone who will help you.

The pricing is good for what they offer.

Once we knew that we needed this type of software, we decided on Keysight.

I suggest looking over their use case site.

We are using it to connect IoT to our products.

We're measuring high-speed signals, like USB, PCI Plus, HDMI, DDR, memories, power rails, etc.

The application space the solution targets is embedded systems. For example, an embedded PC for industry automation, including wellness in strength machines or bicycles.

The Keysight Ecal feature has made it very easy for me to do calibrations.

While the user interface is pretty good, going forward, we would like to upgrade it. It needs better calibration features.

We are using this product to support connected devices for IoT development, but we need more automation.

We are utilizing the full bandwidth of this product.

The technical support is okay, but sometimes they are on a different page than us. If it is something wrong with the scope, they are okay. However, if something technical goes wrong, like the calibration, it is hard to get the information that we need because it is hard to share everything and explain all the measurements in real-time.

The price is affordable for us, but for smaller companies, probably not.

We have competing products in our lab.

The learning curve is not that steep. If you are used to some of the measurements beforehand, it is easy and straightforward.

The application space that we are using the solution to target is high-speed serial.

We use a 40-gigahertz network analyzer to look at in-session loss or retention loss at 28 gigahertz. For us, the solution targets high-speed switches and routers, high-speed PCB. We are measuring 400-gig Ethernet. We're definitely using the full bandwidth of the product.

We need the results to be repeatable. By using the Keysight network analyzer, we get pretty reliable results. We like it.

• Accurate
• Fast
• High-bandwidth

Also, the PLTS is pretty convenient.

Some of the models have only two ports. It takes much longer to use a two-port. If they had a four-port, it would be much better.

Technical support is pretty responsive.

Keysight is on the high side. If they could make the price lower without sacrificing the quality that would be great.

We looked Tektronix, Keysight, and a few others. The reasons we went with Keysight are accuracy, reliability, and ease of use.

Create a shortlist and have a demo with each of them. Try each one. Once you do some trials, experiments, you will know what you want to choose. There are several things we look at: One is the accuracy, the second is the reliability of the equipment, and the third is how easy it is to use.

There is no learning curve because I've been using it for so long and it's pretty simple.

The solution is field-upgradable. We may add more functionality to the PLTS.

I would rate the product at eight out of ten. It's pretty easy to use, pretty reliable. It doesn't break, so it can work in a very harsh environment. But for a lot of additional functionality, we need to pay extra. So that is where there is room for improvement.

With telecommunications. The protocol standard needs to be created, then it uses 4G or some type of 5G for preliminary spec. Afterwards, we can create a pattern, major it, then we can see some of the IDOCs run or have some of the special masks to test it.

While it depends on the field, the learning curve is usually really quick.

The user interface is getting better. A graphical interface would be good, but having been a test engineer previously, it is nice to have some script programming.

The integration between different software and hardware panels could be improved. In the software, it's not as strong as the other solutions.

They should have more training resources accessible.

Usually, we don't ask too much of the technical support. 

There are a lot of secondhand models in the market, so that is how we first accessed it. Then, we bought the newer version after that.

We did do a demo with the company first.

If we rented the product, it would be more affordable than buying new. I would like it to be more affordable.

The application space the solution targets is usually telecommunications, like 4G and 5G.

We are measuring RX and TX signals.