Database Info

An Open Letter: Windows Mobile

Large post: full letter can be found: http://austechreview.zoomshare.com/files/Open_Letter/An_Open_Letter_WM.htm
AN OPEN LETTER:
TO the individuals working in the Microsoft Windows Mobile division, to the hardware vendors for the platform, to the many Windows Mobile communities, to the avid enthusiasts of the technology, to the new-comers, to the onlookers and especially to those frustrated users of old and new alike.
I address this discussion to you all, as diverse and wide ranging audience for we all share a common trend in our lives, which, regardless of the corner we examine, be it: our work environments; our social interactions; or simply our personal lives, we find ourselves using (or looking to use) what perhaps best represents the apex in the convergent technologies trend - the Windows Mobile device.
We are speaking of a device whose form today can take on the properties of a phone, a portable music player, a mobile media centre, a camera, a camcorder, a webcam, a high speed modem, a GPS navigation unit, a portable gaming device, a radio, a mobile CRM, web-browser, email client, information management center and as a mobile office. I don’t doubt more could probably be added to that list, but those are just some of the features these devices are largely capable of and all of this functionality rests right there populating our pockets, belts or briefcases.
Despite this unprecedented functionality in convergence and the leaps ahead these devices have made in quite recent times, the changes have been largely hardware driven and when they have been software driven it has largely been by third parties or by hardware manufactures doing the platform vendors job. It seems these changes have not gone unnoticed, consciousness in the community, due to years of the same pattern - in contrast with the events of this year - have finally began to demand answers to the why’s and where’s of the Windows Mobile platform. It is time for a discussion on the issues with this platform and where it’s heading [CSM forum discussion]. With that in mind let’s ask ourselves some whys:
Why is it 2007 and only now with the consumer rollout of Windows Mobile 6 this year (the later part for most of it) are we only now - after all these years - finally seeing support for VGA resolutions in Windows Mobile? It’s not like the technology to support it hasn’t existed, 3rd party workarounds are a plenty, but they are often tedious and have results which require the user to make compromises often combined with GUI deficiencies.​Why is it that this is now supported in WM6, yet my HTC advantage with WM6 still requires me to load this 3rd party software? Is Microsoft not giving you the code to activate the resolution options HTC? Or Microsoft do you not feel it prudent to work with HTC to encourage them to adopt such a simple capacity as letting us use VGA on our VGA devices?​
Why has it taken so many years to do something with the X button, despite an array of 3rd party applications demonstrating the productivity and ease of use gains from enabling options with this part of the software?Why have manufactuers like HTC had to release their own X button software? ​Why, have roll-out and constant updates been such a prevalent facet of Windows for PCs, yet you feel no need to roll-out updates for your WM line, contrary to the capacity of the platform to support it?
Why after all these years of Windows Mobile, are syncing issues still so prevalent?
Why, despite the obvious adoption of WiFi technology and its virtual inclusion in all WM devices can we still not Sync over WiFi? Did HTC not inform Microsoft that they had put WiFi onto virtually all of their Windows Mobile devices these days? I ask because from the hoops you often have to jump through to get wireless networking connection in WM one might wonder.​Why, has it taken HTC and O2 to give limited users a Media Centre application despite the popularity of Media Centre software on PCs and in the home, and despite the capacity of these devices being capable of viewing, pictures, video, music, radio and more recently TV?
Why have hardware vendors had to produce this software?​
Call it a crazy division of labour thing, but shouldn’t hardware vendors in this case be sticking to well, hardware?​Why has Microsoft not worked with them then to release better versions of the software or encourage them to release such software to the wider community? Media integration of this kind has been such a Grand strategy across the rest of the Microsoft divisions, did the WM division not get invited to the meetings for this strategy?​
Just because these devices are largely aimed at professionals doesn’t mean this functionality cannot be built on. Yes I largely use this device, like most, for its superior information management and touch screen functionalities. But that doesn’t mean I don’t want to enjoy or use its other capabilities. ​Why after so many years of this platform being around, after so many operators adopting its hardware and after the recent popular release of devices like the Touch or last year the HTC TyTN series, why after all this do so few people still know about the capabilities of Windows Mobile devices?
Is this a problem limited to Australia? Apparently, it might be. You’re advertising on behalf of the hardware vendors in India, which makes sense having the second largest market, but while your off advertising in India, the IPhone is advertising (if it even has to) across the rest of the Western World!​
It never ceases to amaze me how few people know about these devices, even people in IT, if they do know about them they are largely unaware of there capacities, and secondarily associate them with all the bugs and problems of Windows.​
This lack of awareness is largely a marketing and promotions issue, but heres the kicker it’s a two party problem. If the hardware vendors and Microsoft haven’t noticed you’re futures are tied together. It’s in both of your interests to promote these devices. Microsoft you especially, because there are multiple hardware vendors but only one software vendor in this game, and the devices are by name Windows Mobile devices, which people will aptly associate with……Microsoft.​People have a million and one choices of mobile devices in the market, and more contemporarily a wider choice of touch based technology devices. People aren’t going to magically seek out the Windows Mobile products, especially with their price tag, if they aren’t aware of it, and further aren’t educated on its features.​

Why Why, did you allow the iPhone to gain such a hype and pre-eminent status? Hardware vendors and Microsoft, your devices have been largely capable of everything the iPhone can do, sans multi-touch, and much much more as we have discussed. They have had this capacity for years, why did you allow the IPhone to capture the mass market like this?
The answer most likely lies in the marketing as we have already discussed, but surely by now you’re picking up on my pattern here. That being, both the hardware and software vendors need to work with each other to promote these devices, enhance its functionality and use of the convergent technology.​
It’s a two way street too hardware vendors you need to encourage Microsoft, you both should be listening to users; hardware vendors chances are your hearing the gripes with WM more than Microsoft, are you communicating it back to them and encouraging these changes?​Why after so many years of Windows Mobile do I still have to install or buy 3rd party software to get half-descent time-management functionality out of these devices? Why are the tasks and calendar options barely more customisable or expanded then they were in Windows 2002 or earlier?
Why after so many years of Windows Mobile do I still virtually have the same basic interface? Why despite all this hardware power and the fact that we are using touch-screens do I have an interface that has remained virtually unchanged for all these years?
I know these are aimed at enterprise users (hi) but do we not deserve a nicer interface? The interface isn’t even all about aesthetics; it’s also about productivity, look at how much more the devices can be enhanced through 3rd party software like Wisbar desktop etc. ​
Are there plans to change this? Or will I have to buy a “Zune phone” to get some nicer interfaces? ​Why did it magically take for the iPhone to come out before we finally got some hardware (and software from the hardware vendor no less) that actually takes advantage of the fact that we are using touch-screen devices – referring to the HTC Touch of course.
Why isn’t there more collaboration between Microsoft and even 3rd party software vendors?
One of the greatest benefits this platform has over the iPhone and over symbion is the range of software. Why isn’t this more widely, promoted and encouraged? This isn’t perhaps so much a serious question that needs answering, since there are many community based sites that review and promote WM software but it’s a key and crucial benefit of the Windows Mobile platform and one that needs to be more readily promoted, advertised and enhanced.​I, like most fellow Windows Mobile users, have either enjoyed using my Windows Mobile device or had to use it because there was no alternative – most likely a mix. And the Why’s I have asked today are not likely to dissuade me or anyone else from buying a Windows Mobile device and I have no illusions that there are many more whys people would like answered.
The point has been to briefly illustrate the mediocrity and failings both Microsoft and its hardware vendors have settled for with this platform combined with a reiteration of the many benefits and possibilities of the platform as one of the pinnacles of convergent technology.
Furthermore as should be apparent now, encourage a closer and more importantly, public, strategic collaboration between the hardware vendors and Microsoft. Both of your futures are tied to this platform, it’s a robust hardware device with many software features and a tonne of uses, but these must be enhanced, visually and functionally.
Secondly the platform must be promoted. You have a technologically advanced and highly convergent device rivalled by no other platform. The devices despite being geared for enterprise have many features consumer users could gain from them, particularly since the cost of many of the devices has become comparably affordable (aka HTC Touch). Its time consumers were made aware from joint marketing between the hardware and software vendor.
The IPhone has done a good job (as was expected from the hype and the eye candy interface) of capturing the consumer market. Now despite a consensus that the IPhone isn’t ready for business use, don’t be naïve enough to think this will always be the case. I don’t want to give Apple any ideas, but it strikes me if they were to buy up Pocket Breeze or Agenda Fusion etc and adapt it to the IPhone platform, maybe add some functional word, excel and pdf viewing capabilities, and correct some limited (and quite fixable issues) with the interface, you would surely have a sleek stylish well known business rival to the Windows Mobile platform.
Apple has the easy job here, it’s the only face behind the iPhone, its not HTC producing a device and then powered by Windows, its just apple and its iPhone; it doesn’t have to worry about collaborating with a partner, only telecommunication carriers that are dying to supply the device to consumers.
It stands to reason that if Windows Mobile can do this and more, and without the restrictions of the iphone, it should be the HTC Touch et al, that carriers are dying to sell to consumers, yet its not is it?
More dangerously, as mentioned, the transformation to a business capable device is a lot easier than the task of making a business device (despite its many consumer features) appeal to the mass market, especially after Apple has stolen the thunder to appear like the pre-eminent technological device.
I hope this generates some discussion amidst the Windows Mobile users and perhaps even between the hardware vendors and Microsoft, who should together be hatching out a strategic direction for these devices and who perhaps would see fit to work more closely with the communities who use their devices, so that some of the basic issues mentioned at the start, aren’t taking years to respond to.
Regards,
Osiris.

iAnywhere Blue SDK from Sybase

New Sybase iAnywhere Blue SDK Extends Bluetooth Functionality on the Android Platform
Android developers gain the following benefits of using up-to-date profiles on Sybase iAnywhere’s qualified Bluetooth compliant v2.1 +EDR stack:
Rich functionality through a flexible architecture that eliminates lock-in with a specific Bluetooth chip vendor
Faster time-to-market and increased return-on-investment by reducing development costs and testing cycles
Proven expertise from Sybase iAnywhere’s extensive experience working in wireless networking protocols and through hundreds of design wins representing tens of millions of enabled products in the market
Business-to-Business Technical support and full product documentation enable easy integration into the Android framework
Loyal, longstanding and large customer base of OEMs that ensure the highest quality code is written to specification with industry proven reliability, functionality and portability
This is great news for Android and wanted to provide the official info and press release.
http://www.sybase.com/detail?id=1064587

non developer
can you explain in non dev terms what this means for us? i think i have an idea but im not sure.

[Q] Qt on WP7: Possible but why not?

Qt apps work on WinCE. If WP7 is built on top of WinCE, why would Qt apps not be allowed on Win7?
I'm just trying to make sense of it here. Is it an artificial Microsoft restriction for their platform?

Because third-party apps are managed in .NET compact framework. Qt is a C++ framework and thus unmanaged. This is a smart move by MS as it increases system stability and enhances user experience.

leonard2010 said:
Because third-party apps are managed in .NET compact framework. Qt is a C++ framework and thus unmanaged. This is a smart move by MS as it increases system stability and enhances user experience.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If that's the lame reason they give for it not being doable then I will just need to hack Qt onto it. Dumbest move in Nokia's history!

discourse said:
If that's the lame reason they give for it not being doable then I will just need to hack Qt onto it. Dumbest move in Nokia's history!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
givin that one of the main reasons that windows mobile 6 and for that matter windows desktop can be unstable is poor quality 3rd party programs i think the move was a very good one, forcing programers to stick to strict controls means they have to develop good software, also givin MS got most of the flak for these crap programs i think it was a good move on their part

at the cost of lower performance and code easily being stolen. MS don't care about developers. Hacking a silverlight app onto CE and calling it a new OS was a terrible shortcut and will cost them in the long run.

It's a matter of time until Microsoft releases a Native Development Kit. In a recent interview Brad Watson from Windows Phone 7 Development team said:
Brad Watson said:
8) What about native SDK? Android got theirs later, should we expect Microsoft to provide a native SDK also, or just forget about it ?
BLW – if by native SDK, you are asking will we allow anyone to run C or C++ unmanaged code on the device, the answer is “not now.” Our primary concern is ensuring that there is a fantastic customer experience on the phone. We recently announced that we have satisfaction rates for the phone at 93%. That’s amazing. We attribute at least some of that to the fact that customers can buy apps that they don’t have to worry will trash their phones, and they don’t have to worry because of the managed platform.
Over time we will certainly relax certain restrictions on the phone, but we cannot compromise the integrity of the phone experience or the marketplace experience.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Microsoft has to release a NDK because the competition has a NDK. Hopefully the competition will have more and more NDK applications (Firefox, Skype) which would make them more appealing to the user.
When such a NDK will be present, Qt (at least lighthouse) will be ported to Windows Phone 7

indiekiduk said:
at the cost of lower performance and code easily being stolen. MS don't care about developers. Hacking a silverlight app onto CE and calling it a new OS was a terrible shortcut and will cost them in the long run.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
While I agree it's far from the entirely new OS we were promised I very much doubt it will cost them in the long run. They have provided a OS experience that is second to none, this is all because of the limitations they have put in place.
I would expect the platform to open up somewhat for the next wave of [higher-end] devices giving existing users an iOS-like experience where you can certainly upgrade to utilize multitasking and all that jazz but it will cost you some of the current smoothness of the UX.
The fact that .Net assemblies are easily decompiled into fully working Visual Studio projects hasn't been a huge problem on the desktop and as obfuscating tools become better and better I see no reason why it should lead to a problem on the mobile platform either. Looking thru some of the recent marketplace apps they are all but decipherable for the average developer. Also, as more and more processing moves to the cloud it becomes less and less of a problem - most startups are neither willing not capable of mirroring your closed-source/protected backend services.

The missing NDK is not the sole reason. The OS IS different. As others have pointed out, quite some GDI stuff is just not there, or doesn't do anything. So, Qt would probably just not start. And as there will never be (as MS said) (official) OpenGL drivers on WP7 you can't switch the backend.
And there has to be already some kind of NDK, as e.g. Navigon Select is a semi-native application and it is not created by OEMs.

Hades32 said:
The missing NDK is not the sole reason. The OS IS different. As others have pointed out, quite some GDI stuff is just not there, or doesn't do anything. So, Qt would probably just not start. And as there will never be (as MS said) (official) OpenGL drivers on WP7 you can't switch the backend.
And there has to be already some kind of NDK, as e.g. Navigon Select is a semi-native application and it is not created by OEMs.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They say IE9 will have accelerated graphics support, which I presume is based on Direct3D. For WinPhone7 Qt needs a Direct3D backend, which should work on all WinPhone7 devices.
Qt should have the same capabilities of IE9, which AFAIK is not written in managed code.
Qt could also use Google's angleproject which should help in translating "OpenGL ES 2.0 API calls to DirectX 9 API calls".

Since this is a discussion thread, this is going in WP7 General.
~~Tito~~

It will simply not happen. It's that easy. (Not w/o homebrew that is)

By not allowing Qt on WP7, Microsoft and Nokia have just shot themselves in the foot. Instead of offering a smooth migration path for the millions of Nokia users and devs, they've basically alienated the entire community. WP7 is also losing out on thousands of high quality applications like Angry Birds for Symbian^3 and MeeGo that was developed using Nokia's Qt SDK. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mS1dwYmKMjs

discourse said:
If that's the lame reason they give for it not being doable then I will just need to hack Qt onto it. Dumbest move in Nokia's history!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Good luck hacking Qt into it.
Using .NET also increases Security.
WP7 doens't need Qt, and Microsoft should do whatever it can to stop Nokia from putting Qt in WP7.
Those reasons aren't lame, unless you're missing the portion of you brain that controls logic.

discourse said:
By not allowing Qt on WP7, Microsoft and Nokia have just shot themselves in the foot. Instead of offering a smooth migration path for the millions of Nokia users and devs, they've basically alienated the entire community. WP7 is also losing out on thousands of high quality applications like Angry Birds for Symbian^3 and MeeGo that was developed using Nokia's Qt SDK. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mS1dwYmKMjs
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's much easier to develop for WP7 than it is for Symbian/Qt. I don't think the developers will have much of an issue with it. They didn't shoot themselves in the foot, you people just AREN'T developers, and don't understand it.
You know you're talking to clueless people when Angry Birds is the epitome o fa high quality application to them.
Cause you cannot develop Angry Birds in XNA, and you seriously believe porting Angry Birds to WP7 will involve nothing other than a few code line changes and a recompilation?
Give me a break.
I wish Microsoft had partnered with SE or something. Nokia's fanbase are more bat**** crazy over these pet projects than the Android people.

Qt will continue to be the development framework for Symbian and Nokia will use Symbian for further devices; continuing to develop strategic applications in Qt for Symbian platform and encouraging application developers to do the same. With 200 million users worldwide and Nokia planning to sell around 150 million more Symbian devices, Symbian still offers unparalleled geographical scale for developers.
Extending the scope of Qt further will be our first MeeGo-related open source device, which we plan to ship later this year. Though our plans for MeeGo have been adapted in light of our planned partnership with Microsoft, that device will be compatible with applications developed within the Qt framework and so give Qt developers a further device to target.

Windows 8 May Feature Tablet UI

http://www.informationweek.com/news/windows/microsoft_news/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=229400796
Screen shots depicting features that may be part of the next version of Windows have leaked onto the Web and show that the new operating system may borrow some features from other Microsoft products, such as Office.
The screen shots, which were posted over the weekend by Neowin and other tech blogs, reveal that the main user interface for Windows 8, at least in its current build, uses an Office-style ribbon that gives users one-click access to a number of features and commands, such as "Share," "View," and "Copy To Folder."
IBM Chairman Emeritus Irving Wladawsky-Berger talks about cloud as the next evolution in computing, saying that it's a response to end-user frustration with complexity.
Pundits are suggesting the design may reflect Microsoft's desire to make Windows 8 a tablet-friendly OS that can compete with Apple's iPad and Google's Android. Earlier this year, Microsoft confirmed that it would build a version of Windows 8 for ARM chips, which have become the processor of choice for most tablet makers due to their light footprint and low power requirements.
Microsoft has not commented on the authenticity of the screen shots. Reaction to the purported redesign was mixed.
To exploit the natural synergy of smartphones and tablets with the cloud, first nail down solid mobile and cloud strategies.
Cloud and Mobile Computing: Better Together
"Looks too messy, and needs to be made smaller and fit more," wrote Neowin reader "Ely", in the blog's comments section. "If they make it smaller, and fine tune it then it will be fine. If not, hopefully you can turn it off," the reader said.
Another reader, "Joshie", said the changes are appealing: "Office with ribbon on auto-hide is one of the most pleasant software UIs I've ever come across, and I think it's a great way to bring menus and toolbars together in an ultimately space-saving style."
Microsoft has not provided a firm release date for Windows 8, and estimates by market watchers range from late 2011 to the 2012 back-to-school season. Most observers agree, however, that the company needs to ship a tablet-capable OS as soon as possible before it falls too far behind Apple and Google in one of the tech sector's hottest markets.
Even longtime Microsoft partner Hewlett-Packard, apparently frustrated by Redmond's failure to produce a tablet OS, recently said it planned to build slates around its own WebOS, which it gained through its acquisition of Palm, instead of Windows.
Microsoft shares were up .37%, to $25.58, in early trading Monday.

Mono Abandons Open Source Silverlight.

The Mono project is about the only group of people actively talking up .NET and developing it, but in an interview Miguel de Icaza has admitted that Moonlight, the Mono version of Silverlight isn't worth the effort any more.
Microsoft may be reluctant to admit that Silverlight is dead - even though the writing on the wall is so big and clear that you can't miss it - but the Mono project doesn't have to pretend. In fact, because it has limited resources, what the Mono project works on is almost a better guide to what the future of .NET might hold.
In an interesting interview with InfoQ's Jonathan Allen, Miguel de Icaza admits that the Mono project has abandoned Moonlight. When asked why the answer was revealing:
"Silverlight has not gained much adoption on the web, so it did not become the must-have technology that I thought would have to become.
And Microsoft added artificial restrictions to Silverlight that made it useless for desktop programming.
These days we no longer believe that Silverlight is a suitable platform for write-once-run-anywhere technology, there are just too many limitations for it to be useful. These days we believe that in the C# world the best option is to split the code along the lines of the presentation layer. The user would reuse a core part of their application across all platforms, and write a new UI specifically for each platform they target: iOS with MonoTouch, Android with MonoDroid, Mac with MonoMac, Windows with WPF or Winforms or Mac, Web with ASP.NET and Windows and Linux with Gtk
It is not write-once-run-everywhere, but the result are applications that can exploit the native facilities and create native experiences on each platform."
http://www.i-programmer.info/news/89-net/4282-mono-kills-open-source-silverlight.html

Not Surprising
Not too surprised and probably a smart move by the mono team since Microsoft is essentially abandoning silverlight. Why would mono continue to work on an open silverlight implementation if silverlight itself is going to be dropped?