> On the other hand, we have all three items for Bluetooth, yet where is it?

        Bluetooth is a technology that was simply over hyped. When people finally
figured out what Bluetooth was they were disappointed by all the
limitations, resulting in VERY slow acceptance. I still don't own a SINGLE
device that has Bluetooth, and I don't expect to own one any time soon.

        Personally Bluetooth was simply out of place, it wasn't define tight enough
for the masses to understand, and as a result few devices have it.

> > because people are trying to use these items out of spec, means
> it's USB's
> > fault???? You're saying getting things for less is a BAD thing?
> I think you
> > are now simply confused as to what you are complaining about.
>
> No. I simply acknowledged the validity of many of the points you've made,
> AND complained about the problem of having to load so many
> different drivers BECAUSE
> of the USB spec. I don't have a problem with different drivers
> for different
> classes of device, but I DO expect that the spec would require
> all of a particular
> class to use a 'standard' driver. e.g. Storage devices, mouse device, etc.

        Again, don't blame the spec. The spec HAS defined "standard" devices, the
MANUFACTURERS decided to "go it on their own", and USB allows them to (can't
blame USB for that, leaving things open for devices outside of "predefined"
types was pretty much required). Again, it's not USB's fault that you had to
load all those drivers, put the blame where it belongs.

> >         USB, when used for what it was meant for, works VERY
> well. If people try to
> > do things USB was never meant for they have NO RIGHT to complain.
>
> So how exactly, is my ATTEMPT to use USB MP3 players 'not what
> USB was meant for'?

        The manufacturers require a custom driver and didn't conform to the mass
storage spec. The manufacturers made this choice based on the threat of
attack from the RIAA if they didn't. So, blame the RIAA, I do. They (or
their equivalent in other countries) are the reason I pay a "tax" for every
piece of blank media I buy, even though I'm not using it to store copyright
material (mostly pictures I've taken, backups of my servers, etc.). Of
course in the case of my country it pretty much makes downloading
copyrighted music "legal", so I guess there is some benefit.

> If they looked like a storage device, then they would work
> without any 'extra'
> drivers, wouldn't they? But they don't.

        Again, not USB's fault, put the blame where it belongs.

> The fact remains that USB MP3 players require unique drivers for
> EACH device,
> rather than using a common 'storage class' driver. This is just
> plain stupid, RIAA
> notwithstanding. The 'custom' device driver does nothing to
> improve the customer
> experience, and -this- customer has been really turned off by the
> experience.

        See above.

----------------------------------
Herbert's PIC Stuff:
http://repatch.dyndns.org:8383/pic_stuff/

--
http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us!
email listserv@mitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body