Database Info

Universal WM6 ROM and Enterprise Policies

Hi all,
I would like to discuss about the use of Universal with Windows Mobile 6 in professional life...
Could be the base system compliant with general security policy for firms?
Let me know what's your point of view...

mamiware said:
Hi all,
I would like to discuss about the use of Universal with Windows Mobile 6 in professional life...
Could be the base system compliant with general security policy for firms?
Let me know what's your point of view...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
All of the Windows Mobile 6 ROM's I have used fully support the security policy stuff that is enforced by Exchange when using the device for "Direct Push" email (for what its worth).
I have also found that if you add Blackberry software it works well enough with there policy software if that is your enterprises ‘thing’.
As for your unique company policy, only you and your IT guys can judge that. Just about EVERY company has a different view on what is important.
Support for Exchange policies, a few custom CABs and support for our device management tool mean that using Mobile 6 (or 5) in our enterprise is a non issue. Our only issue with the Universal is the fact that strictly speaking Mobile 6 is a licence violation on the device . Not the case with the Vox’s, TyTN2’s and other native Mobile 6 devices we have.
Your biggest hurdle is that most IT departments in any sizeable company are not going to let non company kit onto there networks, and for a lot of company’s that will extend to non approved software/ROM images etc. being banned.

I guess security enhancements with WM6 are not so... "strong".
As IT Security Integrator, i'm very waiting for Exchange 2007 SP1, that should enforce AS Policies even more than non-sp1 release.
I advise you and your IT Admin (i think they already did, though) to have a look to Exchange SP1 release notes.

There are literally hundreds of enterprise applications out there for management of mobile devices that support everything from symbian phones, to pda's, to windows mobile phone devices.
Some of the better ones are SOTI, Afaria, and Pointsec.
They give remote access to handle remote package management, as well as locking the device and access to applications by user, or user group too.

I thought he was talking about Activesync security policy.

Thank you for all replies...
But does Exchange 2003 store any information about your device? I'm thinking about Windows Mobile 6 Universal issue... And what about contacting Microsoft to buy a license upgrade (without any software delivery from them)?

I'm confused: what do you mean with "But does Exchange 2003 store any information about your device? I'm thinking about Windows Mobile 6 Universal issue... "
If you're talking about ROM Upgrades to Crossbow and license issue, well it's just a lack of support from Manufacturers. Afaik microsoft is providing WM6 license upgrade for free, but providing customers with WM6 rom on old devices would mean no market for new devices. Microsoft ships upgrades to OEM only however.. Not to final customers.
However Exchange 2003/2007 should not store any information regarding devices. I mean, any information relevant. It recognize the device assigning it a unique Idetifier at first synch (SID). I could have a deep look about that with exchange 2007, though. Just tell me what you're looking for.

Ok... If Microsoft is providing WM6 license upgrade for free... why cooked ROM are not so... "legal"?
My problem is: I would like to use my device in my professional life... and I would like to use it the best way I can! This means I need WM6... The problem is that HTC does not provide an official upgrade, but we know that we can develop our ROM... So... How can I legally install my WM6 cooked ROM on Universal? Should I buy some license from someone? Or I can simply flash my device with my ROM and run it without caring about Microsoft license because the upgrade is free?

What about the SD-card encoding "thing"? It should be compliant with any security policy, provided you only lose the card, not the whole device, since in that case, the card can't be read, right?

Yeah... The SD encoding it's fine for policies but... the question is... the encryption key is store in the device (and is deleted with an hardreset) or is created from some device hardcode data? To answer this question we can only try to encode-hardreset-access data... and see if we can still read sd files... (i'll try next weekend)
Anyway... another issue is... how encrypt all data store in device memory? is there any good (light and clean) plugin (driver or application) that can encrypt all the contacts and calendar and, above all, exchange login details?
new symantec mobile suite 5 should do that and make device super-compliat to most (all?) enterprise policy... i'd like to buy it but I do not find any way to place order through the internet!

mamiware said:
Yeah... The SD encoding it's fine for policies but... the question is... the encryption key is store in the device (and is deleted with an hardreset) or is created from some device hardcode data? To answer this question we can only try to encode-hardreset-access data... and see if we can still read sd files... (i'll try next weekend)
Anyway... another issue is... how encrypt all data store in device memory? is there any good (light and clean) plugin (driver or application) that can encrypt all the contacts and calendar and, above all, exchange login details?
new symantec mobile suite 5 should do that and make device super-compliat to most (all?) enterprise policy... i'd like to buy it but I do not find any way to place order through the internet!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hi,
You could change shell paths so that all user data is stored on the SD.
Although I have not tried it, I believe it's simple enough to move all databases to the SD Card.
Cheers,
Beasty

Please Sir, only one simple question

Hi,
I use pda from the Qtek 9090 with wm2003. After I have purchased one Qtek 9100 and finally one Universal Qtek 9000 with the hope ... I have expended a lot of money for these pda. These PDA, better, windows mobile, have donate to me bugs, freeze, lost call, lost sms, random reset, ecc ...nervous and austerity.The list is very long!
In all these years I have never seen one, only one windows mobile rom stable and fast, not super-fast, only fast, usable. The same is for windows on desktp or server arch. Random reset, freeze, blue screen, bugs, ecc ...
Now my question is simple: I have read here which you develop new roms for passion. Then, it is not for profit. Then, why all developers not develop with another o.s? Today exist Linux, Symbian, Android, Open moko, and a lot of other probably.
I not understand why use windows. If all Senior present here abdicate windows for linux, per example, probably after less than one year, all of you will develop a very stable, fast and usable operating system!
Really I not understand why ...
Best Regards and many thankS for your attention and your work

If you search around the Forums for threads on "Android" you will find out where they are in the Linux process.
Generally Getting Linux to work on a handheld device is not as simple as installing it on a PC.
Windows Mobile comes from the Manufacturer with everything working, there for it is easier to tweak Windows then to write a whole new base code, like Linux.

Hi,
first, thanks for the answer.
Yes, I know which linux and android are work in progress. But are work in progress from long time, maybe because there are few developer which work on it?
However, usually open source software which control the hardware, drivers, is based on reverse engineering. Because some Manufacturer not provides the datasheet of the hardware. Cause of this, you have reason. But probably if a great number of capable developer want, with the current relase of linux for pda, is possible to make easier this too.
Unfortunately I have some trouble to speak or write English like my native language. However, I hope have wrote aprox correctly.
Best Regards

If we port symbian to out devices, there is a chance that this site could get shut down. You see, each windows mobile device is sold with a license to use windows mobile, similar to how you have to use a serial number to register certain applications.
Because we already have the license to windows mobile, there is not any specific legal problem to creating custom roms.
However, because we have no license for symbian, we are not legally and contractually allowed to port it to our devices, because the makers of symbian recieve no licensing fees from us, which is essentially piracy.

Moved To General Discussion.

I can say that when cooking ROM's, I'm fixing all the pieces of the OS that bug me and add parts that are missing. Through trial and error, I get my greatest OS!

I have no doubt on your work. But if the o.s. born bad, remain bad! Independently from your hard work!
About other o.s. and license: today exists a lot of possibility instead of microsoft products what are know to be bad and expensive ...
However, I hope which one day I can use my pda as use my N95.
Regards

What is wrong with the Windows Mobile Dev. team!?

Disclaimer: I don't want a flame war.
There are so many glaring common sense issues with Windows Mobile. For example:
The fact that an application like nueDynamicClock exists and drastically increases batter life. This functionality should be built in Winmobile in every stock ROM.
Lack of default Winmobile alt-tab. HTC adds this, but shouldn't such a basic functionality be native to the OS?
Mediaplayer on WinMobile, lacks codecs, lacks an interface which makes it easy to casually use a WinMobile phone as a MP3 player (a la iPhone)
Lack of a basic slide lock functionality (which doesn't require a pincode)
Scrollbars, really? WM6.5 finally brings more whole screen scrolling, but that took awhile
I've thought of many other things besides this over the months, but that should be enough to demonstrate my point
Let me be clear. I am not saying WinMobile should become a clone of the iPhone. The range of devices which run WinMobile impresses. The open platform status (not bound to an app store) is a further big advantage. It has many more advantages. However the above shortcommings I mentioned seem so glaring to me. What about the Windows Mobile development team/process allows such problems to persist across multiple versions?
Is it in fact the OEMs that are responsible for these issues? Certainlly, they play a huge role in memory bloat in stock ROMs. Are they also responsible for the slow adoption of more user friendly changes to WinMobile? Is the Windows Mobile development team some kind of committee which started with a Microsoft directive to make a small screen version of Windows. Perhaps they just don't have a single person who will push for the changes which would make WinMobile much more user friendly?
Again, I'm not asking for a radical overhaul of Windows Mobile internals or architecture. Customizations which address all of the above mentioned problems are in fact standard fare, on both stock ROMs and popular cab files here at XDA-developers.
Opinions, ideas, disagreements? Alternatively, if you want to tell me why I'm totally wrong and flame me to a crisp, that's fine as well.
PS. I looked around for a thread which addressed this topic, but didn't find any. I found some close matches but nothing which really addressed this Q.

I cannot help but agree with you. The size and success of XDA-Devs is itself a testament to the inadequacies of Windows Mobile.
Furthermore, the time between OS releases is quite staggering. If Microsoft wants to take/maintain the lead (depending on your perspective) in OS design then they really should be more proactive in providing maintenance releases and bugfixes for their software.
The drive in OS design is towards useability and deskilling so anyone can use a device. To use even the basic functions of WM requires a skill level many people simply don't have.
Profile management is another conspicuous absentee.

bad news about WM 7

Hi People,
Here is an extract from smartphone mag that has some bad news in it, It seems M$ is starting a fresh and non of your programs will run on WM7. Plus there will be no updates for any current phones, so I dont see much prospects for cooking WM7 that will be of any use for us. Anyway I shall let you read it yourself
Jay
Jim Karpen,
your Web Guide
Read New Windows Mobile Content Every Week day at Smartphonemag.com
Web Guide: Windows Phone 7 Won’t Run Old Apps, Won’t Work on Current Phones
Shocking news this past week about the forthcoming Windows Phone 7 Series. Not only will it not run current apps, but also current phones such as the forthcoming HTC HD2 from T-Mobile may not be upgradeable. This week, I'll point you to more information about this, as well as additional detail about Windows Phone 7 and videos of this software in action.
Current Phones Won't Run Windows Phone 7
windows Phone 7 Series Won't Run Current Apps
The other bit of news was somewhat expected, but still something of a shock: none of your current software will work on a Windows Phone 7 device. According to a post by a Microsoft executive, making a clean break from the past will allow the new phones to be as powerful and user-friendly as possible.
What does that mean? That the developers will need to rewrite their software to work on the new phones. The exec did say that Microsoft will continue to work with partners who plan to deliver Windows Mobile 6.5 devices, and that it will continue to support these products.
The big question is, Will developers bother to rewrite their software? Given that so much of the smartphone action is in the Android and iPhone arenas, they may simply choose to focus on those platforms rather than rewrite their software for Windows Phone 7. An indication of the declining interest in Microsoft's platform may be the recent announcement by Skype that they were pulling their Windows Mobile version of Skype and have ceased development of it.

It is known for quite some time, just say goodbye to our clients to finally kato no one wants their products, they are great clowns of silent men like this Seventh, very ugly and totally sure that will become famous shows blue screen, as gathered from XP

What behaviour in the mobile operating system market could be described as anticompetitive?

I am a retired programmer with too much time on my hands; as such, I wrote a complaint to a regulatory body about how I can't install the operating system I want on my device because it will render it unusable (if I can't call for help on a phone because of drivers, what good is it?). I received a response requesting an interview with an officer who specializes in anticompetition cases and I would like to make sure I have my eggs all in one basket.
The current mobile phone market I liken to the desktop OS market of the 90s, where you had companies like Xerox, Microsoft, IBM, and so on; in the 90s, there were antitrust lawsuits where a particular company was accused of intentionally creating barriers to customers seeking to install software by other companies on personal computers. Obviously, that was settled in the 2000s, but IMO it did appear to make a positive change even if we are still fighting against IE. This may not be relevant, but that's what my mind went to when I realized I couldn't uninstall the Play Store.
Nobody uses "cellular telephones" as telephones anymore; instead, they are mobile computers. Computers in the 80s/90s had plenty of OS options (you may recall using OS/2 or BSD), but you can't do that with mobile computers... is that a good thing?
In my retirement, I'd like to develop and build a mobile phone operating system that is not android (nor lineageOS); this would either be Linux or BSD-based with a simple package manager, but the user would have the option to compile their own software also. This would ideally *not* hinder the underlying function of the device (i.e. telephony), but I don't see how manufacturers could be compelled to provide binary drivers. The current mobile market makes it obviously a very high barrier to entry for any who want to develop new operating systems for mobile computers. Is this anticompetitive? Perhaps not, but I'd like to hear some opinions and if you would kindly point me towards some resources I would appreciate it.

IMO the OS is not the problem - a command line based OS can be written by any talented student nowadays - preferably in C++, yes there are enough templates on the Internet, it is the device drivers what have to fit the hardware that make the whole thing difficult. I know that some OEMs put their device drivers' source code to the public.

jwoegerbauer said:
IMO the OS is not the problem - a command line based OS can be written by any talented student nowadays - preferably in C++, yes there are enough templates on the Internet, it is the device drivers what have to fit the hardware that make the whole thing difficult. I know that some OEMs put their device drivers' source code to the public.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
To install a new OS on a phone, the phone must first be booted into a bootloader such that the 'image' of the OS can be loaded. The image for the OS should be built with the drivers present such that when booting, the OS kernel can load the relevant drivers as it probes the hardware in the phone, and then the software installed on the user layer can access that hardware through the relevant system calls. How possible is it for the bootloader to load a custom OS in the general sense? The majority of instructions I find are on enthusiast/developer websites with the actual manufacturers giving basically no input (that is to say, I haven't seen on manufacturer's websites or instruction manuals where they give instructions for booting your choice of OS).
Would it be fair to say that mobile developers, like Google/Samsung/LG/Amazon/etc are restricting users from being able to install their own OS on their device? Is driver access a reasonable thing to ask for?
Again, I'm retired, so I have time on my hands, but I'm old and there's realistically not a lot of that time left. I don't want to try developing my own BSD-based mobile OS if there's no way for me to install it on my own devices; that effort could go into another project if it is otherwise wasted. I suppose it is worth asking whether I should bother returning the bureau's request for an interview.