Rohde & Schwarz Oscilloscopes Reviews

Our primary use case is audio measurements, as well as current measurements.

We use the UPV Audio Analyzer mostly, not the scope. We use Bluetooth in our product. We are measuring currents for enabling Bluetooth.

We can't measure our dynamic current with oscilloscopes. We can only use an Audio Analyzer, because of the low noise floor. Thus, it provides information that we couldn't get otherwise.

Its very low noise floor.

There is a small learning curve. It probably took a month or two to get used to the instrument because of the user interface, which could be cleaned up more. Sometimes, it's difficult to find menus.

I haven't used their technical support.

We are utilizing the full bandwidth of the product. 

I believe the product is upgradable to provide more functionality to the user.

It provides all the functionality we need. It will take time to learn due to the user interface.

The primary use case is debugging, prototyping, and validating the check site and design, e.g., the circuitry and hosts. We have several testing stages to go through before production.

We have a lot of different models that we are using in the lab. We work with the highest view scopes and protocol analyzers, like PCIe, SAS, and SATA. We use them a lot. The PCIe analyzers, like PAM, have full size testing equipment in our labs.

We are the server producers. We touch every corner: high-tech. electronic, electrical, down to the mechanical, materials, and performance. We provide the backbone to support the words - Internet connection.

• Accuracy
• Console/GUI
• Zoomable things
• Remote access

We would like to have autotracking and auto error tracking for regression testing. We would like to know what error happened, when it happened, and during what scenario (such as setup), because right now we have to manually look at when it happened. Sometimes, this takes a long time. We want when something happens, to capture it, then have it give out the full timestamp. We also want it user-friendly and sent to the cellphone, so that's the Internet of Things.

The test equipment has configured the capability to ease the tester's routine job. Going forward, the product should be able to forward the tester's debugging and test information to the their cellphone and enable them to check the results on-time. 

We update everything in our systems everyday.

We are using the full bandwidth.

We have a series of specific testing instruments to generate a protocol for generating signals and RF down to the digital protocol analyzer. We have high-speed serial, a base-band processor, network processors, network chips, network controllers, and CPUs.

Their support is strong and timely.

The previous solution was out-of-date and too old, but we did not switch. We kept the legacy systems in the lab to support legacy customers because not all our customers kept pace. We're the most advanced industry, and we have to support them.

We did a demo with all the vendors that we evaluated. We learned their roadmaps and features. We also exchanged ideas of what they are designing in the future.

They are a top tier product. We use it to guarantee our top tier product. That is why we purchased it.

The user interface is pretty good. Right now, it is more what we had expected. It's easy and fast to use.

There is no learning curve. We have an evolution that is following the process, such as following companies producing in test equipment. We followed their seminar rapidly. We know their roadmap and they know our roadmap, so we have very synchronized very well, which is good.

Our primary use case is telecom. I use a couple of their models.

The application space that we are using the solution to target is 5G and another proprietary connectivity solution for digital health and autonomous driving.

Essentially, we measure the signal to noise issue, various EVM, and other wireless performance.

• It is easy to connect with.
• It's accurate.
• It's reliable.
• It hardly fails.

• User interface
• Accuracy
• Performance
• Reliability

They could use an RDA interface.

We are utilizing the full bandwidth of the product, more or less.

I haven't personally thought about upgrading it. For this particular application, somebody else owns the instrument. We just use it.

If we need technical support, we just call them.

The pricing is very expensive.

We also evaluated HPE and Anritsu.

It has good performance, reliability, and support, but it is too expensive. Compare to other business models.

As time passes, the learning curve gets shorter. They're becoming better.

The technology requirements are increasing because of evolving standards. While they're coming along, I expect them to be there, as they have always been there.

We are not using this product to connect with support connected devices, but it will be going forward for devices, like IoT development.

We use it for monitoring and measuring signals in telecom systems. We are measuring anything from low-speed to high-speed and we are usually using the whole bandwidth of the product.

Most of the features offered are free, like serial data analyzers or jitter measurements.

The user interface of this solution is not that intuitive. When you're used to a different product, there's a learning curve.

Also, the size of the unit is too big, too heavy. It has to be made more portable and smaller.

We haven't really contacted support, but if we did we would go through the rep or the distributor.

If we are going to switch, usually it's speed related and bandwidth related.

We looked at Tektronix and Keysight. We did a trial or a demo of the products on our shortlist before purchasing them. What we learned was that the price varies from model to model but usually they're in the same ballpark.

When you're used to a product, go with the same product or vendor, unless the price of another is really cheap.

There's a definite learning curve. I'm used to Tek or Agilent.

I would rate this product at seven out of ten because there's a learning curve that's involved in using the product.