CF2 pre-installed in devices?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ignacio Machin \( .NET/ C# MVP \)
  • Start date Start date
I

Ignacio Machin \( .NET/ C# MVP \)

Hi,

Does anybody knows when/if MS will force/require that the CF 2.0 be
preinstalled in devices just like now the old version is?
 
No public announcements on that, to this point. What problem would that
solve? You can, of course, install 2.0SP1 on any of the Windows Mobile
devices.

Paul T.
 
It would solve the fact that you wouldn't have to install CF 2 yourself
before you can run your CF 2 application. It would also mean you could write
an autorun application based on CF2.

Simon.
 
But by the simple fact that it takes a long time to make and deliver a
device, whatever was "required" would most likely be out of date by the time
a consumer had the device in their hands, so it's really not helping to
prevent you from deploying the latest CF version.


--
Chris Tacke
OpenNETCF Consulting
Managed Code in the Embedded World
www.opennetcf.com
 
Yes, but there would still be tons of devices around that didn't have CF2 in
ROM. You're going to leave them out of your supported list? You've just
cut your target market down to almost nothing, until maybe a year after
those CF2 devices come out?

I just released a new OS for one of our devices and considered putting CF2
in ROM, but there were too many backward compatibility issues with that, as
well as SQLCE/SQL Mobile. If you're doing database stuff, remember that
CF2-based programs don't support SQLCE, so now you have to have SQL Mobile
in the device ROM, or installed by the user, in order to use your CF2
database program. Well, OK, you say, put SQL Mobile in ROM and I'll change
the source code for all of my database applications and rebuild them. No
problem, except that the file format for SQL Mobile doesn't match SQLCE, so
the guy can't just copy the local database that he puts on all devices to
start out with. In fact, the only way to port a database from SQLCE to SQL
Mobile is with a tool that requires *both* databases to be installed on the
system that runs it.

Yes, you get stuck with the lowest common denominator and yes, it prevents a
few isolated scenarios from working, but, from the device manufacturer
viewpoint, it's the best of poor set of choices.

Paul T.
 
Who said anything about SQL Server? I would find it a very powerful feature
to be able to write autorun applications using CF2 for many many reasons.

When your working with a client like we are, we know which devices are
targeted. The client might buy a whole batch of similar 5000 devices from one
provider. Your argument is based on a software application that might be sold
off the shelf where you don't know who your target audience is.

Simon.
 
In that case, you're set. If the OEM of the device *does* put .NET CF 2 in
the device, you're home free. For most OEMs, I don't think that this makes
sense for general devices, but for a 5000 piece order, we'd do a special
build of the OS for a customer.

Paul T.
 
Yes, who said anything about SQL Server - not me.

IMHO having the CF in the ROM is, for the market as a whole, unnecessary
becasue it's almost always out of date by the time the device ships. That
means you have 3MB of flash wasted holding binaries that will be replaced in
the field by the first CF appliaction to be installed. The new CF install
can't physically overwrite what's there, so it does a side-by-side physical
install, with only a logical replacement.

Your argument is that it should have CF 2.0 in ROM so you can run some CF
2.0 autorun on a set of devices, not that you want the latest CF 2.0 in ROM
(so I assume you'll install the latest CF if your app needs it)? So every WM
device should pay a 3MB+ penalty just some a select few can use managed
autorun? This is why MS shouldn't be dictating what an OEM does. Define
the platform and let the OEM make that choice. The market will tell them if
they are right or not and they will react accordingly.

Autorun is designed for simple stuff, not full-up apps, so I don't really
see the benefit of having managed code at that point, but if you must write
it in managed code, what's wrong with using CF 1.0, which *is* in all WM
devices?

If you want to argue for having the CF in ROM things like the huge perf
benefit of having the CF in ROM are far more persuasive.

And if you actually are deploying to 5000 devices from one provider, it
seems to me you'd have plenty of business leverage to request that they put
whatever version of the CF you want in ROM, regardless of version.

Of course, that's all just my opinion.
 
Back
Top