You can wave your arms as much as you like, but if it doesn't work, it doesn't work. I don't give a damn what the root cause is. The problem is with the CH340/341 and I fixed it by changing to a different brand... a brand with a reputation.
So, next time the Linux driver for your currently preferred chip has a bug you throw away those chips, too? Yeah, that makes sense!
If the driver can't be fixed, or is going to be a problem because the defective driver is dominant in the wild, then yes. I need devices that work.
If there is an easy path to upgrade, then fine, that's workable. With the CH340/341, I had the latest driver from WCN and it was nearly impossible to get anyone to talk to me about the problem. It's not a company well known for its support.
Is this not obvious to you? What part of this is hard to understand?
The part that is hard to understand is why you seem to think that moving the goalpost somehow makes for a useful argument.
All I was pointing out was that your experience was maybe not indicative of the design quality of their chips. That's it. And you are just going on about how the quality of their drivers is important to you, and how you don't care about the root cause, but also it's workable if there is an easy path to upgrade(?!), and then about your experience with their support ... while pretending that that somehow contradicts my statement that the problems that you experienced were probably driver problems.
Exactly noone was saying that you should be using WCH chips, or that you should be using CH340 for your particular application, or anywhere, or that you shouldn't care about driver quality ... but chances are others reading here don't care about (Windows) driver quality, be it because they don't target Windows, or because they are using chips for which drivers are irrelevant anyway, and so for their application WCH chips might be fine despite their driver quality.