Comment by chicom_malware

10 months ago

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.

11 comments

chicom_malware

Reply
porridgeraisin  10 months ago

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

  • toast0  10 months 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.

  • mrweasel  10 months 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.

  • prmoustache  10 months 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.