There is a threshold (or actually two) involved when switching from a DMM to a scope.

The first - and minor - threshold is that a DMM is more or less instant. Turn it on an place the probes. The scope requires you to look at all the settings, and adjust it to actually show anything. An 'auto' button is only meaningful if you have a continuous signal you are trying to measure, so the scope will know both amplitude and frequence.

But the big threshold is that to start using a scope, you have to spend time learning what it is.

It can have a lot of menues that are non-obvious. And until you have learned about the different trigger modes, you will hardly get anything out of the instrumnet.

And when you look at your curve, you will not know if you can trust it, until you have learned to think about the bandwidth the scope is capable of and the probe is capable of and the sampling rate the scope has. And the curve shape can't be trusted until you have learned to calibrate your probe with a square wave.

And since few beginners has access to differential probes, you will have to think about earth potentials when doing the measurements.

In the end, you need to have seen the gain you can get from using a good scope in the correct way. They saying "one picture is worth a thousand words" really comes to mind, but you need to know the when and the how to be able to take that picture, and to be able to read and understand it. I don't think it a generation issue. It is a question of experience. Been there, done that. It really takes experience to learn to know which of all tools to use.

Edit: Actually a third threshold. You need access to a scope to be able to use one :)