Is it possible to run Windows Media Player 10 Mobile on WM2003 as opposed to WM2003SE? I use an Axim X5 and I'll probably be using it for a while. I think it would be nifty if I could make small little slideshows and use my axim to shot them to people.
Nope. WMP10 was released as part of an "updated ROM" for WM2003SE. Even many SE devices (like my e805) don't have it (and never will AFAICT). :|
In Pocket PC 2002, we had "End-User Updates", or EUUs, in which Windows Media Player updates were delivered -- using CABs that were untouched, straight from Microsoft.
Yeah. It should be pointed out, however, that e.g. iPAQ 36xx users have never received the WMP 8.5 available for 32M ROM machines in EUU3, so Compaq didn't really pay much attention to "poor" 36xx users (it should have been Compaq's task to make it installable into RAM.)
(Incidentally, I've written about this a lot in my article on PPC-based multimedia / streaming / netsharing-related article at http://www.freeweb.hu/menneisyys/streaming/ - warning, it's non-English!)
Can't help but to think that someone might be able to make a truckload of cash by writing some kind of updater system which attempts to update some of these missing components compliments of a newer ROM. Of course, no ROMs would be able to be shipped and it would be up to the user to find them, but it's still almost like 98Lite in concept and the ROMs are there if you know where to look.
Of course, it wouldn't be possible to update all DLLs etc due to various system dependencies that they might have, but I am willing to suspect that it would still be possible to upgrade some components this way, as long as the chain of all dependencies could be worked out and if none of them rely on the actual hardware to be the same (of course, there have been cases where this hasn't been a problem as the hardware is the same: point in case the Toshiba e800 users who are running with the newer ATI video drivers lifted from a Compaq hx4700 ROM).
Granted, this isn't an easy task but factor in that the CE device driver model hasn't significantly changed since CE 2.11 or 3.0 (correct me if I am wrong) and the base implementation of the Win32 API hasn't exactly changed signicantly and technically there is some kind of hope with respect to feasability in the technical sence.
The variation in hardware on these Pocket PC devices isn't anywhere near what the variation is wssith desktop PCs, so it would be interesting to see how much binary code between two devices ROMs in fact are that much different (excepting the vendor specific bundles stuff of course).
Just an idea. Something needs to give and there's probably more chance of this happening than the vendors investing $$$ to provide us with the updates.
Janak, as an MVP I'm fairly certain you're aware of and understand how the OEM/Microsoft partnership works with regard to the ROMs, so I find it hard to believe you're blaming Microsoft for not providing the updated codecs to the public. The blame should be pointed squarely at the OEMs for failing to live up to your perception of their obligation to you.
Oh, I'm fully aware, but I'm not happy with that arrangement. In Pocket PC 2002, we had "End-User Updates", or EUUs, in which Windows Media Player updates were delivered -- using CABs that were untouched, straight from Microsoft. We've regressed from there to the situation where OEMs have to assemble and distribute the ROM, which they tend to be less proactive in doing.
Yes, but in Pocket PC 2002 days I'm betting you would find there were fewer differences between the devices from a hardware perspective. I believe that the OEMs actually PUSHED for the "assemble their own ROM" so they could customize what was included depending on the intended use of the device, and so that they could build stripped down, less expensive models. Keep in mind that in this case, the customer for Microsoft is the OEM - they're buying the software license. Also keep in mind that this arrangement means that Microsoft is not bearing the brunt of support for multiple customized versions of the OS and included software - each OEM gets to support their own flavor. It's the price of allowing flexibility.
Quote:
Also, it's in Microsoft's interest to promote Windows Media, right? Why not at least provide a RAM installer for WMP10? That would sidestep the whole issue (it'd bring up the RAM issue, but at least that's mitigable). Again, Microsoft used to do this: WMP 7 (or was it 7.1)? was released as a RAM download.
While I don't disagree with you, I'm not sure how well WM10 installed outside the ROM would play with the WM9 that still exists in the ROM. I don't remember; when WM7 was released as a RAM download, did a previous version of WMP already exist on the device? It's been so long in terms of technical evolution that I don't remember ;-)
Quote:
So it's not quite open-and-shut as you suggest. OEMs often won't bother, because they don't have a vested interest in Windows Media. But Microsoft does.
Actually, if enough people make noise and KEEP making noise, as well as voting with their wallets and making sure the reasons are communicated up to the top of the companies, the OEMs will find they, too, have a vested interest in making sure the updates are made available. And not just for Windows Media Player, but for all their chosen components. There are lots of options out there these days. We have to make sure the big players are aware of that, and that they don't have some sort of automatic lock on our purchasing dollar if they fail to support us.
I think it's actually GOOD that Apple is doing well with the iPod and with their update model. Maybe it will help to serve as a wakeup call. But don't hold your breath - until the iPod does most or all of what a PDA does, it's not truly competition. The "big boys" are watching it, without a doubt, but it won't drive their decision making QUITE yet. After all, the success of the PocketPC doesn't really lie in being the best in any single arena. It lies in the flexibility of the product - the ability to do many things well. The iPod excels at one thing - playing media.
Yes, but in Pocket PC 2002 days I'm betting you would find there were fewer differences between the devices from a hardware perspective. I believe that the OEMs actually PUSHED for the "assemble their own ROM" so they could customize what was included depending on the intended use of the device, and so that they could build stripped down, less expensive models.
I'm aware of that. But we have to draw the line somewhere. Personally, I would have set the bar a little higher.
Quote:
Also keep in mind that this arrangement means that Microsoft is not bearing the brunt of support for multiple customized versions of the OS and included software - each OEM gets to support their own flavor. It's the price of allowing flexibility.
Well, the EUUs were also "released" by the OEMs, but it didn't need an entire ROM reassembly, so it had a greater chance of being released.
Quote:
While I don't disagree with you, I'm not sure how well WM10 installed outside the ROM would play with the WM9 that still exists in the ROM. I don't remember; when WM7 was released as a RAM download, did a previous version of WMP already exist on the device?
Yes -- the original version of WMP, v4. It only played music, and in fact it did it better than WMP7, but hey, it still stayed in ROM.
Quote:
Actually, if enough people make noise and KEEP making noise, as well as voting with their wallets and making sure the reasons are communicated up to the top of the companies, the OEMs will find they, too, have a vested interest in making sure the updates are made available.
How does one vote with their wallet? HP hasn't released updates to WMP10 for all their units. Neither has Toshiba, Dell, Asus, etc. Are you suggesting we go over to Palm?
Quote:
And not just for Windows Media Player, but for all their chosen components.
Ah, but you see, some of the components evolve faster than others. WMP has moved much faster than the rest of the OS.
Quote:
I think it's actually GOOD that Apple is doing well with the iPod and with their update model. Maybe it will help to serve as a wakeup call. But don't hold your breath - until the iPod does most or all of what a PDA does, it's not truly competition.
I'm fully aware.
Quote:
The "big boys" are watching it, without a doubt, but it won't drive their decision making QUITE yet.
In fact, I think OEMs are going in the opposite direction. The fact that HP released the 6315 after SE was released, and without it, clearly suggests the consumerization of the device where ROM updates are the exception, not the norm.
Quote:
After all, the success of the PocketPC doesn't really lie in being the best in any single arena. It lies in the flexibility of the product - the ability to do many things well.
Somehow, though, I don't expect all the WMA-compatible media players to be updated with Janus DRM support. I think the Pocket PC situation with respect to WMP is symptomatic, not an aberration. I'd love to be wrong.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Menneisyys
Yeah. It should be pointed out, however, that e.g. iPAQ 36xx users have never received the WMP 8.5 available for 32M ROM machines in EUU3, so Compaq didn't really pay much attention to "poor" 36xx users (it should have been Compaq's task to make it installable into RAM.)
Well... about this I'm not quite so sure. The problem here is that the EUU wouldn't be the same for the 36xx as the rest of the Pocket PCs, and (I think; it's been so long) WMP was only RAM installable for Pocket PC 2002 on the 36xx units in the first place anyway. But hey, if MS had made a RAM version installable, that would have solved the problem in the first place.
Yeah . It should be pointed out, however, that e.g. iPAQ 36xx users have never received the WMP 8.5 available for 32M ROM machines in EUU3, so Compaq didn't really pay much attention to "poor" 36xx users (it should have been Compaq's task to make it installable into RAM.)
Well... about this I'm not quite so sure. The problem here is that the EUU wouldn't be the same for the 36xx as the rest of the Pocket PCs, and (I think; it's been so long) WMP was only RAM installable for Pocket PC 2002 on the 36xx units in the first place anyway. But hey, if MS had made a RAM version installable, that would have solved the problem in the first place.
--janak
Yes, PPC2k2's WMP8 ran from RAM on 31xx/36xx devices (16M ROM, as opposed to the 32 of the other iPAQ's) as well. Indeed, it should have been MS's job to make it RAM-installable, but they failed that; and, Compaq has also failed releasing WMP8.5 for the 36xx users too. How much we waited for it/wanted it...
Is it possible to run Windows Media Player 10 Mobile on WM2003 as opposed to WM2003SE? I use an Axim X5 and I'll probably be using it for a while. I think it would be nifty if I could make small little slideshows and use my axim to shot them to people.
It might be TECHNICALLY possible, but the reality is that you can't get it anywhere - Microsoft could have made a RAM-based installer available, but they didn't and left it up to the OEMs. :?
__________________ Want to contact me personally? Use this. Want to read my personal blog? Check it out. Want to follow me on Twitter? Here you go.
Re: Why Photostory 3 Video Won't Play on your Pocket PC Without WMP10 Mobile
Quote:
Originally Posted by Menneisyys
What's so revolutionary about this? Tons of PPC slideshow viewers are capable of this. Just a quick list of the PPC slideshow'ers and the transition effects + special features they have off my forthcoming picviewer/editor roundup...
Which one of those products does the "Ken Burns" zooming/motion panning?
__________________ Want to contact me personally? Use this. Want to read my personal blog? Check it out. Want to follow me on Twitter? Here you go.
Crud.....I used to like listening to music, it was so easy! Now it's almost impossible to listen to music on my PPC. It's to the point where it's easier just to hire the band to setup in my livingroom. Unfortunately there's a downside to having U2 living in your house full time. 8O
I too quite liked it when MS provided RAM upgrades for WMP. I guess it comes back to the issue of OEMs wanting to control what is available for present devices in such a way that it forces the need to buy new hardware in order to upgrade.
Personally I see providing easy upgrade access for WMP as a positive thing for the platform.
as jason just touched on, there is really NO reason MS could not have offered a RAM based upgrade. Heck it dosnt even need to upgrade, just make it a player that stands next to the old one, much like pocketTV and betaplayer do.
On the other hand, I don't think wmv9 is something you wanna mess with on the pocket pc. It's pretty clear on the pc that the wmv9 codec is alot more cpu intensive then the old wmv, you would be getting poorer performance on a pocket pc.
Re: Why Photostory 3 Video Won't Play on your Pocket PC Without WMP10 Mobile
Linear Mode
LinkBacks (?)
