I dunno....  I see such a difference between the Cakewalk/Gibson relationship vs. Cakewalk/Roland.   I would hope that it applies to TASCAM just as much since their interfaces will be sold with SONAR, and that implies a certain "need" in the driver department.
 
I don't have a stake in it either way though - I have a Focusrite interface. 
 

I've only owned a couple of Tascam pieces.  A Portastudio 4 track cassette recorder that I bought in '91 (which still works even though I quit using it back when I bought Cakewalk Guitar Tracks in '99) and a TA-1VP vocal processor.  Never had a problem with either and they were both cheap.  I hope that makes for some good things in the future.

super excited for the future...time to produce... :) -Shawn

bitflipper
Go back and review all the panicked threads after Roland acquired a majority share of Cakewalk. Do a mental search-and-replace, substituting "TASCAM" for "Roland".
 
That relationship lived up to neither the optimistic nor pessimistic forecasts. All we got out of that deal was R-Mix, which nobody ever figured out and only lasted through one SONAR version.
 
Also, consider that before SONAR could be adapted to any TASCAM-specific features, TASCAM products would have to first have some unique proprietary features.

R-Mix is a single band, fully parametric EQ, that's also filterable by placement in the stereo spread, both L-R centerpoint and L-R  width. It also allows some degree of control over the linearity of the relationship between the bandwidth and stereo spectrum width. I use it like an EQ/fader spotlight, or EQ/fader anti-spotlight, from the FOH position, and from there into a bus, you can add any other effect necessary.

I really LOVE my FW-1884 and would hate to scrap an AWESOME piece of hardware because of drivers. For that, I'm not moving off of Win7 for the foreseeable future; but I would DEFINITELY throw some of my own coin for drivers.