It would not be hard to disrupt the calibration service industry. Whether or not that is good is another question. Watch the video of Dave's visit to the Keysight cal lab. However, $10 of HW would allow extending the cal interval out to several years.
I've not investigated what a Fluke scope tester does, but I did know the procedures for a Tek 465 and had acquired most of the kit for that.
Most of the traditional analog scope tests can be replaced by some precision input signals and DSP routines. For example, while rise time is an important aspect of BW it does not quantify the flatness of the spectrum. But with a signal such as Leo Bodnar's 40 pS pulser the spectral flatness can be recovered to ADC precision via an FFT. The traditional method was a signal generator and a selective level meter in addition to a Tek 106 pulse generator.
As an example, a simple RC circuit and some mathematics are sufficient to characterize and correct ADC errors. The cost would be the flash to store the code. However, the non-recurring engineering cost is not trivial. What I'd consider a proper state of the art job would run $20-30k. That's based on using a sparse L1 pursuit solution. It would only take me a few days to prototype the code, but implementing a production version is a lot more time consuming. You have to make sure you have found and tested *all* the edge cases. It can take days to identify the edge cases and days more to figure out how to test them. And there is no such thing as self documenting code.
I wrote a couple of 15,000 line libraries that had no bugs reported in almost 20 years of use before being retired because it was obsolete. This was part of a 500,000 line port of old FORTRAN code from VMS to Unix. The first year in service we had fewer than a dozen user submitted bug reports. It asymptotically approached zero because we had a large regression test suite which ran every time we built the system on multiple platforms.
The Instek uses the Zynq 7010 for the main functions. There is a Spartan 6 which appears to be for handling the LCD and front panel chores. I believe the Siglent also uses the Zynq.
I managed to pick up a GDS-2072E for $244 in an Amazon NOS clearout. I'm assembling a development environment consisting of a Zybo Z7-20 and a BeagleBoard X15. As I have no FPGA experience I got a MicroZed specifically for the Avnet tutorials. All of this is for the purpose of developing an open source firmware for Zynq based instruments. That will take a few years, but I need a good project. There is no work for people like me in the oil industry (too old and over qualified) .
As it happens I spent the last 3-4 years studying sparse L1 pursuits which is a more general description of compressive sensing. There are no instruments on the market that offer that yet. A prototype was done by Nicholas Tzou at Georgia Tech for his PhD which he finished in 2014. There appear to be many advantages to applying sparse L1 pursuits in a DSO besides reducing the data volume. It's interesting and I think that an FPGA compressive sensing IP has good commercial potential. People will tell you they love you for free, but if they give you money, you know it's true.
I've posted a bit about this, but all it's attracted is a bunch of derision from people who do not know and will not read the mathematics. Aside from not knowing the work of Candes and Donoho at all, they don't actually know Fourier, Wiener and Shannon well.