In today's world, OSS4 is open source, it is actively being developed, and it WORKS!
If OSS4 is such a great magic bullet, why hasn't it it included (much less default!) in a single distribution? Why isn't it part of the stock kernel package? Until both of those things are the case, OSS4 will continue to be an also-ran, just like devfs2 and GGI.
I've been using Linux for over 10 years now and I've been telling people over and over again how even your grandma could use it, but sadly, I have to conclude that in some ways it still sucks balls for people who don't like fiddling around with obscure settings, configuration files, 4 layers of sound settings etc.
Yeah, I guess grandma will just have to use SPDIF output instead of HDMI. I'm sure she'll be heart-broken.
Bah!
As a computer user I do not have time to do that.
Okay, then pay someone else to. Even if that means paying Microsoft or Apple to deliver you a working sound system. You aren't entitled to anything for free.
Where does your HP=Canon comment come from?
That's a laser statement. HP does not make any of their own laser print engines. They use Canon print engines.
My wife and I have a Dell 1710 printer at home, that's a B&W non-duplex model made by Lexmark, and I'm waiting for it to die to replace it with an HP equivalent. The Dell prints great at first, but altogether too quickly , the output becomes shoddy. I've not had such problems with the HP printers in my lab (again, with 25k pages per year at work).
Out of curiosity, are you seeing print quality issues with the OEM toner, or are you using aftermarket toner?
So you're complaining and threatening to remove the drivers in the next release unless they commit resources in perpetuity to maintaing the drivers vs. *your* code base.
I don't think that's the situation. The drivers currently only exist in the -staging tree. That is far different than Linus' official tree. The -staging tree is home to driver code that does not meet the standards of Linus' tree, and it's purpose is to assist the maintainers of the code to increase its quality such that it can be included in Linus' tree. MS is not being asked to "commit resources in perpetuity," but merely to get the code up to the state where it can be included in Linus' kernel tree.
This is really a stupid demand on your part;if the kernel level APIs (what Sun calls their DDI/DKI - Device Driver Interface/Device Kernel Interface) in Linux were stable and not such a moving target, you could just forget the drivers and they'd keep working indefinitely.
See above. Once the driver is included in the kernel proper, the kernel developers themselves fix drivers when API's change. That's one of the primary benefits of being included in the kernel proper. If you're developing driver code and just dropping it on some corner of the web, then You're Doing It Wrong.
I'm using an Android phone with Sprint. The Sprint Touch/HTC Vogue runs Android like a champ.
Where is the standard UI library for C++, where the standard networking library?
I'd rather have several really good libraries (GTK, Qt, etc) than a really crummy standard library (GDI, winsock).
Also, if you want to make assumptions about type sizes, that's why uint32_t, uint64_t, intptr_t, etc, exist. Likewise with endianness and ntohl().
"More software projects have gone awry for lack of calendar time than for all other causes combined." -- Fred Brooks, Jr., _The Mythical Man Month_