sqkybeaver wrote:imho there is no reason that the should not be somthing like the dso nano but have the logic sniffer built in.
I don't disagree, but I think that there is one key difference. Typically, if you're looking at analog waveforms, you're doing something like debugging a component or subcircuit. Using the waveform involves tweaking analog pieces of the circuit.
On the other hand, when you're using a logic analyzer, what you're debugging is generated by digital components or subcircuits, which are almost always, these days, software generated. It's either FPGA HDL you need to modify, or microcontroller code in order to fix your serial or parallel waveforms. If we still used 7400 chips all the time, that wouldn't be so true, but discrete logic isn't typically a major part of today's workflows.
I think what that means as far as tools go is that it's useful to have a standalone scope - you're not limited by bandwidth of a USB bus, you don't have to have a computer present when all you're using it for is circuit debugging, and so on. Intrinsically, it makes sense to have a scope next to your circuit.
But on the other hand, if you're using a logic analyzer, you're almost certainly modifying software and reloading that into your circuit to try to get your waveforms correct. So you've already got a computer on your bench, and you're trying to match bytes and timing from the LA to what your software SHOULD be generating. In that case, it's far more useful to have the waveform data in the window next to your IDE. For that reason, I don't think that I'd find a bench or even standalone handheld LA especially useful. If it's an extra $30 for the bluetooth hardware to use my phone as a display, that's worth it for the novelty and portability in certain situations, and for that matter, bluetooth could replace the USB cable to a computer in the first place. But I don't know that I'd pay $100+ for a standalone unit INSTEAD of my USB unit, whereas I totally would for a scope.
Additionally, there are key interface differences too: Scopes are used on analog waveforms, and LAs on digital. Changing the parameters on a logic analyzer involve punching in integer values and clicking checkboxes corresponding to boolean values, all easy and comfortable to do on a computer in a software interface.
On the other hand, getting your waveform correct on a scope involves turning knobs for amplitude, time delay, trigger value, and so on. This is far more awkward on a computer, especially for the continuous nobs like cursor that can't be replaced by a 0-100% slider. I will always prefer nice smooth knobs to interact with my analog waveforms, necessitating a nice big standalone product. I think even the DSO Nano/Quad come up short here.
EDIT: Forgot to say, you mentioned integrating something like the OLS INTO something like the nano. I would definitely be in favor of a standalone mixed signal scope. That would be one MAJOR case in which a standalone product makes lots of sense.