I think this is a question of whether you want good quality images out of camera, or want even better images as a result of post processing. Different amounts of sharpening are required for different amounts of detail in the image, how the image is to be used and what size it's to be used at. That's why the sharpening is usually added as the last step in the digital work flow, after saving the master file so it can be used for other purposes in the future.

The answer is, I expect both a sharp image from the camera and a better image from post processing. Just as I do with my film cameras. Would you accept soft images from an EOS 1 or Nikon F6 as being the standard? We are paying from $800.00 to $8000.00 and more for these digital cameras. We should expect the best as we have done in the past.

Warren , seems to me, and I could be wrong, but it sounds like what you wanted was a p&s digital that will print direct from the camera. Pict bridge or PIM enabled cameras allow the printer and camera to communicate w/o the computer's intervention. truth is, that the antialiasing filter over the sensor makes it neccessary to post process sharpen many, if not most, dslr's iamges.
To me, the whole point of dslr's is the control you have in editing when you want/have to. Frankly, I leave all the camera controls for sharpness, contrast and saturation on ZERO and edit on the computer or I will print direct from the card (studio shots where I have complete control of the lighting).
what you consider to be a downside to digital, ie., the NEED to post process, is the upside for many who use digital capture.

I love the abilities that we now have in post processing. When I bought my 10D 3 years ago I also bought an Epson 3200 scanner and a Epson 960 printer to play with. I have also upgraded to the Elements 3 program. I didn't need a stroger program than that. I am planning to upgrade to a 4990 and a 1800 or 2400 printer after we move to Colorado. I'm also waiting to see what Canon replaces the 20D with. This quality question came up when I started seeing questions in the forums about the soft pictures that new people were getting on their dslrs. I didn't think much about it until then. The question simply is why should we be expected to accept less than a sharp image from our cameras? I understand about the antialiasing filter usage
and I'm just kicking up the dust in hopes the camera designers will improve this aspect of their products. If there are enough complaints they just might do it.

P.S.
All my settings for my parameters are now back to their zero settings. Old dogs can learn new tricks.

Whether it is an area array chip in a digital camera or a linear CCD array in a scanner, all digital capture devices produce relatively soft images in raw output that must be sharpened with software after capture.

In default mode saving to JPEG a digital camera processing ASIC chip applies a sharpening filter along with other auto-correction adjustments prior to saving an image to file. When a digital camera is set on Raw output no post capture processing is applied to the image data, it's essentially straight off the chip. This then puts the responsibility for finishing, and editing the image to a custom desired final form on the photographer/user.

The question is really do you want someone else (a camera company engineer) to make your decision regarding image quality for you, or do you want that freedom of choice for yourself?