10 ms·

Worth mentioning lack of Bluetooth is only because they felt the existing BT stack was not up their standards and ripped it out rather than let it rot like most

Worth mentioning lack of Bluetooth is only because they felt the existing BT stack was not up their standards and ripped it out rather than let it rot like most software.

porridgeraisin 2y ago
There are a grand total of zero valid reasons for not including bluetooth in a desktop OS.
- toast0 2y ago
  It's pretty easy to avoid Bluetooth, and it'a a complex stack and having code quality standards means sometimes you have to remove features because the code quality isn't there, and nobody had time/interest/motivation to do the work to make an implementation with the proper amount of quality. If you have a 'must have' device for your desktop environment that's bluetooth, then yes, it makes OpenBSD unviable for you; but OpenBSD isn't viable for every use case.
  - porridgeraisin 2y ago
    > isn't viable for every use case Yes, and desktop, especially laptop, is an example.
    - dijit 2y ago
      I’d prefer not to have something than to have a bad something. Yeah, it was annoying when I tried to pair my mouse- but you know… a wired mouse isn’t that big of a deal. One thing that brings me the most displeasure about internet discourse about operating systems is this idea that they all have to do all the same things. Thats homogeny by another name; the point of different operating systems is different trade-offs.
      - porridgeraisin 2y ago
        Sure, and openbsd has traded off being a desktop OS for not tainting their code with the Bluetooth stack
        dijit 2y ago
        If we're going to be bad faith discussing: as you seem to be should I remind you that your definition of "being a desktop OS" means running a stack that is primarily useful for phones and laptops- definitively not "Desktop" devices?
        toast0 2y ago
        I haven't used a Bluetooth device on a desktop or laptop in decades now. Not because I'm using OpenBSD, but because while the promise is there, the reality of using Bluetooth has been so disappointing it's not even worth trying for me anymore. Personally, I'm not opposed to wires, because wires usually mean low latency and no dropped connections; but even when using thinks like wireless mice, using them in propriatary modes was so much better than Bluetooth that after a couple attempts, I stopped trying. You've clearly had a different experience with Bluetooth, and that's good for you, and neither of our experiences is universal, but I think there are plenty of people willing to use a desktop OS without Bluetooth. Heck, my new car only uses bluetooth to do phone pairing, then it switches to wifi to talk to phones, because that's clearly better than Bluetooth.
    - IcePic 2y ago
      Sounds easy to buy one of those bluetooth dongle things that can talk to your external mouse/keyboard and pretend to be a set of wired usb-hid devices to solve that small issue.
- mrweasel 2y ago
  Not having developers to work on it seems pretty valid. It's a matter of opinion, but I feel like it's better to have no Bluetooth, compared to having a half-broken and unsupported implementation. Again you could also view is as having a semi-functional Bluetooth is better than none and then hopefully attract developer wanting to fix it.
- esseph 2y ago
  Then make it. Are you waiting for someone else to do the work?
- prmoustache 2y ago
  I can't recall having needed bluetooth for anything else but audio[1] on my laptops so there is a huge YMMV. [1] for which there is an easy workaround in the form of class compliant usb audio cards that output to bluetooth.

Worth mentioning lack of Bluetooth is only because they felt the existing BT stack was not up their standards and ripped it out rather than let it rot like most software.

porridgeraisin 2y ago

There are a grand total of zero valid reasons for not including bluetooth in a desktop OS.

toast0 2y ago
It's pretty easy to avoid Bluetooth, and it'a a complex stack and having code quality standards means sometimes you have to remove features because the code quality isn't there, and nobody had time/interest/motivation to do the work to make an implementation with the proper amount of quality. If you have a 'must have' device for your desktop environment that's bluetooth, then yes, it makes OpenBSD unviable for you; but OpenBSD isn't viable for every use case.
- porridgeraisin 2y ago
  > isn't viable for every use case Yes, and desktop, especially laptop, is an example.
  - dijit 2y ago
    I’d prefer not to have something than to have a bad something. Yeah, it was annoying when I tried to pair my mouse- but you know… a wired mouse isn’t that big of a deal. One thing that brings me the most displeasure about internet discourse about operating systems is this idea that they all have to do all the same things. Thats homogeny by another name; the point of different operating systems is different trade-offs.
    - porridgeraisin 2y ago
      Sure, and openbsd has traded off being a desktop OS for not tainting their code with the Bluetooth stack
      - dijit 2y ago
        If we're going to be bad faith discussing: as you seem to be should I remind you that your definition of "being a desktop OS" means running a stack that is primarily useful for phones and laptops- definitively not "Desktop" devices?
      - toast0 2y ago
        I haven't used a Bluetooth device on a desktop or laptop in decades now. Not because I'm using OpenBSD, but because while the promise is there, the reality of using Bluetooth has been so disappointing it's not even worth trying for me anymore. Personally, I'm not opposed to wires, because wires usually mean low latency and no dropped connections; but even when using thinks like wireless mice, using them in propriatary modes was so much better than Bluetooth that after a couple attempts, I stopped trying. You've clearly had a different experience with Bluetooth, and that's good for you, and neither of our experiences is universal, but I think there are plenty of people willing to use a desktop OS without Bluetooth. Heck, my new car only uses bluetooth to do phone pairing, then it switches to wifi to talk to phones, because that's clearly better than Bluetooth.
  - IcePic 2y ago
    Sounds easy to buy one of those bluetooth dongle things that can talk to your external mouse/keyboard and pretend to be a set of wired usb-hid devices to solve that small issue.
mrweasel 2y ago
Not having developers to work on it seems pretty valid. It's a matter of opinion, but I feel like it's better to have no Bluetooth, compared to having a half-broken and unsupported implementation. Again you could also view is as having a semi-functional Bluetooth is better than none and then hopefully attract developer wanting to fix it.
esseph 2y ago
Then make it. Are you waiting for someone else to do the work?
prmoustache 2y ago
I can't recall having needed bluetooth for anything else but audio[1] on my laptops so there is a huge YMMV. [1] for which there is an easy workaround in the form of class compliant usb audio cards that output to bluetooth.