Chris, what you've said is very reasonable.
I did learn quite a bit on your site.
One of the things I learned is you are an asset for Microsoft.
Thanks for your efforts.
> I've written software that controlled the QA and manufacture of blood
> oxygenators used in open-heart surgery, and I did it with a Microsoft
> product. Does that say how much I trust them?
> I'll be the first to admit eVB has MANY shortcomings, but I also feel well
> qualified to be able to say a Desktop VB developer can write a mobile
> application for a Pocket PC in eVB that is shippable in FAR less time than
> it would take for them to learn C/C++ plus all of Codewarrior and Palm's
> issues (and don't try to say it hasn't got any, I've programmed for the
> If you want a better comparison, look and eVC, though I still maintain
> you're comparing two significantly dissimilar items, so the comparison is
> As for emulation, I think anyone who has done CE development will agree
> current emulator sucks ass. Did Palm make their emulator? No. Did
> Metrowerks? No. How long has POSE been around for the bugs to get worked
> out? The CE emulator is how old? I've seen the next generation emulator.
> It's a real emulator and will do a lot of cool stuff. Some that POSE
> do, but it still lacks some features that POSE has (and I've made the
> suggestions personally to Microsoft).
> You seem hell-bent on trashing Microsoft in hopes that they will listen
> change their ways, presumably to provide exactly what you want. I don't
> any point in trying to dissuade you.
> In my view, CE and Palm OS are two completely different reals for
> different uses and applications. Palm OS is great for a PDA, and if I
> wanted a PDA strictly for PDA stuff, I'd use a Palm. If you want to
> some sort of embedded device or have a handheld that does a good amount of
> processing or requires large data files, I'd go with CE. Again, I try to
> provide our customers with a product that will do what they need. I don't
> give a damn who it comes from.
> P.S. I'm glad to see you read so much of our site. Sure, it gave you
> posting material, but maybe it gave you some information that will allow
> to produce a better product or produce what you're after in less time.
> "Clifford Jones" <cjo...@narlysoftware.com> wrote in message
> > Shripathi
> > Well it seems you're now trying to anlize what you say is a "feeling of
> > inadequacy".
> > This is what happens when someone says something could be better.
> > a small percentage of the population will fight to keep it the same.
> > They will even regress to personal issues.
> > How's this sound, you're so happy with the tools you have, keep them
> > and I'll use the ones 2 years from now that have been refined because
> > of the complaints like mine that have been taken seriously.
> > Engineered solutions don't get better on there own. Feedback is
> > Most of the time negative feeback creates the greatest improvement.
> > Just a last point, I write software that controls Manufacturing
> > These
> > Are things that move when the computer tells it to. Some of the
> > has a
> > great deal of power. These machines could squash a person like a bug.
> > If there is a bug in the software, people could be killed if the power
> > didn't shut
> > off or the rollers came down when they were not suppose to. So, in many
> > cases
> > it is more serious than just telling people to simply "reinstall the
> > software" when
> > their game application doesn't work right or you couldn't look up the
> > of a football game over your wireless connection.
> > This is why this matters to me. What responsibilities do you have for
> > software?
> > "Shripathi Kamath" <skam...@Home.com> wrote in message
> > news:9cIZ7.19611$B61.email@example.com...
> > > "Clifford Jones" <cjo...@narlysoftware.com> wrote in message
> > > news:uZtznUclBHA.2432@tkmsftngp02...
> > > > Hear are my responses to your comments.
> > > > >Can you please elaborate on how you came up with the 4 times
> > > > >think the Win98 requirement comes from support for Unicode being
> > > on
> > > > >Win98.
> > > > I'm waiting for $1300 worth of IPaq product from Compaq as my 3870
> > > > on backorder. I didn't want to stand still but to begin developing
> > > > solutions
> > > > I need on the PocketPC platform. So, I'd say It costs a lot more
> > > > PalmIIIC at $199 and a copy of Metrowerks Codewarrier about $350.
> > > Apples to apples please! And even at your comparison with specious
> > pricing
> > > (comparing a top of the line 3870, which incidentally is $599, not
> > to
> > > a Palm IIIC), it ain't 4x!
> > > And if you went back to your original post didn't you brag that all
> > > tools were free? Why are you paying for CodeWarrior?
> > > > Yea I know it will do more but with much much more effort and
> > > > Boy is the C++ Class Browser in Codewarrier great!
> > > That is a subjective evaluation, which can only be taken seriously if
> > backed
> > > up by factual data.
> > > > >> Why do all you developers of Pocket PC put up with such crappy
> > software
> > > > >> tools?
> > > > >I for one do not, can you elaborate as to which software tool is
> > 'crappy'
> > > > >and why?
> > > > There are more bugs/oversites or undersites in the Microsoft CE and
> > tools
> > > > than
> > > > carter has liver pills. In addition to that they are very very
> > > to
> > > > put togeather
> > > > actual applications and debug them.
> > > Again, more generalities, and a strong feeling of inadequacy...
> > > > Examples are as follows:
> > > > 1) goto http://search.support.microsoft.com/search/default.aspx and
> > search
> > > > under
> > > > Windows CE and type in the word bug. You'll find 100 articles.
> > > > creating
> > > > an application only to find you have to back up and take a different
> > > > approach for
> > > > each of these. (Time wasted big time)
> > > Er, this was about tools, you need to compare eVC/eVB to something
> > not
> > > CE itself.
> > > > 2) Look up the article "How to Write and Use ActiveX controls for
> > > Microsoft
> > > > Windows CE 3.0" When it comes time to create one you find your
> > to
> > > > manualy make 2nd copies of your source and fake out the OS into
> > > you
> > > > only have one UUID when in fact you need two of these so called
> > ids
> > > > in order to have a design time control. Once again this cluge is
> > > > because
> > > > of the missdirected emulator Microsoft put out that I'm going to be
> > forced
> > > > to use
> > > > if I want to write apps for the IPaq. Oh, by the way eithernet is
> > > > recommended for
> > > > the connection to a real machine. That's more money and hardware
> > > > cover
> > > > for a poor design. The Emulator can't even save multiple sessions.
> > > There was consensus that the emulator wasn't up to snuff, so what?
> > > > 3) Imagine the sales pitch, Pocket versions of Excel and Word. What
> > > bunch
> > > > of crap.
> > > And how exactly is this sales pitch making it difficult for you to
> > > software?
> > > > They are totaly different applcations with totaly different file
> > formats.
> > > As
> > > > I've investigated
> > > > the file formats it has become clear that the so called Experts at
> > > Microsoft
> > > > seem to be
> > > > doing everything in thier power to complicate the usage of these
> > products
> > > > instead of
> > > > evolving to somthing simpler to use. For Gods sake just about every
> > > > type has
> > > > been recreated with a different format. So much for ease of use when
> > > copying
> > > > files
> > > > from our PocketPC to CF cards and to the PC. Look what it takes to
> > > > complete
> > > > backup of a PocketPC. Ick... The articals just say reinstall the
> > software
> > > > applications.
> > > Don't use them since you don't use them on your PalmOS anyway! It
> > NOT
> > > affect your development for the PocketPC. They are applications, not
> > > development tools.
> > > > How much free time do you have?
> > > > >> Do you really believe Microsoft knows what they are doing or just
> > > faking
> > > > it
> > > > >> until they do?
> > > > >As long as PocketPC sells, it does not matter to me.
> > > > Guys, it should matter to us. As long as the develpers have the
> > > > that
> > > > it doesn't matter, we will continue to get the examples I listed
> > If
> > > > Microsoft doesn't
> > > > listen to someone that knows how sloppy they are, they certiantly
> > > > listen to
> > > > a dumb user that has no idea of the work under the hood. This is a
> > > part
> > > > of why
> > > > I'm so vocal here. As a group we should put pressure on for better
> > > > solutions.
> > > One would have a little more credibility putting pressure when they
> > > away from
> > > " Do you really believe Microsoft knows what they are doing or just
> > > it until they do?"
> > > If there is a successful software company, it is MS, and didn't become
> > > by NOT knowing waht it is doing. You can criticize them all you want,
> > > until someone does better....
> > > And like I mentioned, Palm has a 90% share today, care to wager how
> > > this will be in five years? And criticism can you have then? That MS
> > used