Remote Desktop? So why not remote sync? without exchange server!!

[msafi]

if it's possible to access your desktop via the internet why isn't it possible to synchronize PIM with it.

i'm not talking about WiFi sync. i'm talking about internet sync, without exchange...it should be possible. the only thing we need is the software.

[Jon Westfall]

if it's possible to access your desktop via the internet why isn't it possible to synchronize PIM with it.

i'm not talking about WiFi sync. i'm talking about internet sync, without exchange...it should be possible. the only thing we need is the software.

My guess is that this hasn't been developed because...

1. Each user would have to set up a routable IP for their machine or configure their firewall to pass ports through to the machine. This is pretty advanced stuff. The only other way would be a central server to coordinate stuff and a client app to connect it. This is beyond what most developers can put together without corporate backing.

2. Security would be an issue - how do you want to secure the PIM data in transport? How would you prevent spoofing of devices, etc..

3. Reliability - how reliable would the average cable / dsl / dial-up / satellite connection be?

All three above probably contribute to the reason that an exchange server is required. As for setting up a personal exchange server for your home computer, that would be overkill and beyond many users' abilities.

Possibly with time, but I don't see an app to do this coming in the next 12 months.

[msafi]

1. Each user would have to set up a routable IP for their machine or configure their firewall to pass ports through to the machine. This is pretty advanced stuff. The only other way would be a central server to coordinate stuff and a client app to connect it. This is beyond what most developers can put together without corporate backing.
i don't know what you mean. the configuration that's going to be required should be very similar to the configuration that allows remote desktop connection.

2. Security would be an issue - how do you want to secure the PIM data in transport? How would you prevent spoofing of devices, etc..
i don't know whole lot about security issues, so...i'll skip this, but...

3. Reliability - how reliable would the average cable / dsl / dial-up / satellite connection be?
more and more people are switching to high-speed, and highspeed connections are becoming more reliable every day. i can't remember the last time i had to reset my router or the last time it dropped the connection. but i'll admit it, it used to be pretty crappy.

all in all, i would very much like this feature, and i would choose it over exchange any day, but that's just me.

[Janak Parekh]

i don't know what you mean. the configuration that's going to be required should be very similar to the configuration that allows remote desktop connection.
Alas, ActiveSync is a much more complicated protocol than RDP, so more hassle is required. Why they did it that way is something I don't know. This more complicated protocol presumably has more security issues that need to be worked out, and that's why it's not available at this time.

--janak

[Sven Johannsen]

if it's possible to access your desktop via the internet why isn't it possible to synchronize PIM with it.

i'm not talking about WiFi sync. i'm talking about internet sync, without exchange...it should be possible. the only thing we need is the software.

Actually, yes you are talking about WiFi sync. All the IP sync methods are essentially the same. Wifi just has the IP stuff going over a radio rather than two pair of wires. The sync process with a desktop has security issues and the capability to do that remotely was removed.

Remote Desktop has it's own security features. Why can't you sync over that? Remember you don't have any real connection between your Remote Desktop session and your PPC. Just like you can't drag files from a PC running Remote Desktop into the Remote Desktop window. They are independent. All you really have at the PPC is a virtual display of the screen and a conduit over which to pass keystrokes. Adding the ability to phoney up a virtual USB port on the terminal services session to virtually connect AS on the PPC too is probably as involved as just fixing the AS security issues.

I was initially a bit miffed about the removal of IP sync as well, but have given it some more thought. I wonder what I'm missing. When I am at Starbucks, I can still access most any file on my PC, given the right stuff is set up. What I can't do is sync. That means I can't get the PIM stuff I've changed onto my PC at home...so what? I'm not there. I can guarantee there is nobody adding contacts and appointments to my PC at home while I am not there, so there is really nothing I need to sync from my PC to my PPC. As a backup method, I'd much rather just run a backup to my SD card If I've added some real critical stuff to my PIM DBs . If I'm still out when the disaster strikes, I can be back up.

I've heard the developer gripe that USB AS is so slow compared to WiFi and it costs them time, and I feel for them. I've heard the general consensus that it is just so convenient to sync from the chaise on the patio, rather than have to walk all the way to the PC... I don't feel for you. A) try BT B) get some exercise ya couch potato.

So I am getting kind of resolved to the situation, and I don't feel that betrayed anymore. Is lack of WiFi SYNC, that big a deal? Why? And that's real question, because if there are real answers, it figures into the priorities of what does and doesn't get done. Believe it or not the Mobile Devices Division does not have unlimited resources, and there are things above and below the line, just like in every other business.

[Janak Parekh]

I've heard the developer gripe that USB AS is so slow compared to WiFi and it costs them time, and I feel for them. I've heard the general consensus that it is just so convenient to sync from the chaise on the patio, rather than have to walk all the way to the PC... I don't feel for you. A) try BT B) get some exercise ya couch potato.
There are other legitimate reasons for wanting network sync.
It's the fastest non-cabled sync; Bluetooth is much slower. This was the biggest reason for me -- when I'm with my laptop, I'd like to not have to rely on carrying a USB cable as well. As it stands, I end up using those minisync cables, but still, it means I'm tied to additional accessories I didn't need with previous versions.
LAN sync is still legitimately an order-of-magnitude faster than the USB 1.1 syncs that most (even WM5) devices have. This becomes a much bigger issue when syncing DRM music -- sync, even with AS 4.1, is unbelievably slow. If you don't believe me, try a dedicated USB2 or Firewire music device.
Gaining Exchange Server sync features without having to need an Exchange Server setup (or mailbox). And, even if you have EAS sync, you still can't sync Notes, Files, etc. via it. So I am getting kind of resolved to the situation, and I don't feel that betrayed anymore. Is lack of WiFi SYNC, that big a deal? Why?
Absolutely -- the feature was there. Moreso, it's like saying "is the lack of multitasking a big deal?" or "is the lack of multiple categorization a big deal?" -- some people's workflow directly benefits from network sync.

--janak

[msafi]

i don't care about WiFi sync. all i wanted was to add a to-do item to my desktop outlook while i'm out or something.

but i completely agree with people who say that WiFi sync should've stayed. it doesn't make any sense to remove a feature that once existed for any reason. it should at least be OPTIONAL. we know what we want. we don't need microsoft to decide what's good and what's bad for us. they should just inform the user that the feature has security issues and put a disclaimer there, and that would've been sufficient.

what i think really happened is that the AS4 team fell behind schedule and couldn't implement the WiFi sync feature in time, so they submitted an incomplete product with the security issues as excuse...

[emuelle1]

It would be nice to see a 3rd party app come out. MS often performs at their best when they have a competitor to stomp out. Of course, what they really do is get a list of gripes from the competitor's users and work to make their product better in those areas. It often seems that they don't pay as much attention to those of us who have been using their software.

[Sven Johannsen]

Janak, OK, some good reasons there, but they know our reasons (MVP). I was looking for some good scenarios from regular users. Not rants or bashes, BTW, but real instances, usage patterns.

It's the fastest non-cabled sync; Bluetooth is much slower. This was the biggest reason for me -- when I'm with my laptop, I'd like to not have to rely on carrying a USB cable as well.
So you are syncing AdHoc to your laptop? Bet you are in the minority. Just my guess.
LAN sync is still legitimately an order-of-magnitude faster than the USB 1.1 syncs that most (even WM5) devices have. This becomes a much bigger issue when syncing DRM music -- sync, even with AS 4.1, is unbelievably slow. OK, it's faster. A lot faster. But this is coming from a guy that insists he needs a second display on his watch so he can time getting to the train. Not all of us are that busy. I can afford to set my PPC in the cradle in the evening and let it update my DRMd tunes overnight, while I sleep. Beyond things like that though, I find it hard to imagine that that much changes between syncs to make the time that big a deal to most folks. If you are redoing your playlists enough that syncing them becomes a time issue, you have more spare time than you let on. ;)

Exchange Server sync features without having to need an Exchange Server setup (or mailbox). And, even if you have EAS sync, you still can't sync Notes, Files, etc. via it.
Not sure I understand the first part of this. What 'Exchange' feaures did we have due to WiFi/IP sync, that we don't have anymore over USB or BT? I agree that EAS isn't even a suitable sub for what I have now with USB/BT sync for those reasons you mentioned. I have an Exchange Server and I don't use EAS because I use Files, Notes, Favorites, Phatnotes, Vehicle Manager, etc. and I did use Access, but they took that away too :(

As far as third party app sync though, I'm not sure there is anything stopping those ISVs from developing a solution that doesn't use AS. We can still connect to our PCs via IP, we just can't use AS to do what it did. Yea, it would cost them to do that, but that is true of MS as well. Playing the expense vs return card should be OK for everyone.

To be clear, not saying I like the removal of WiFi Sync. You know as well as I that my last line on priorities applies. To change that needs better justification than, it's faster, we used to have it, they were just to lazy to do it. There needs to be some compelling reason to do the work to fix the security issues. It's not coming back the way it was. That's a given.

[Janak Parekh]

Janak, OK, some good reasons there, but they know our reasons (MVP). I was looking for some good scenarios from regular users. Not rants or bashes, BTW, but real instances, usage patterns.
I think they've been discussed before; I know a few WiFi sync threads have come up on the frontpage, and there have been a quite a few users that have used it. You might want to try searching them.

So you are syncing AdHoc to your laptop? Bet you are in the minority. Just my guess.
Actually, no. I'm in WiFi AP range in many, many places, and can associate both my laptop and my Pocket PC to that AP. I'll talk about the alternative in the Exchange discussion below.

I can afford to set my PPC in the cradle in the evening and let it update my DRMd tunes overnight, while I sleep.
Actually, not really -- due to quirks in the DRM setup you need to watch over the sync. Admittedly, if OEMs implement USB2 this can be easily worked around.

Not sure I understand the first part of this. What 'Exchange' feaures did we have due to WiFi/IP sync, that we don't have anymore over USB or BT?
Here's a simple use case: let's say I usually enter new addresses and appointments on my desktop, because I'm at it during the day and it's much faster to do that way. I'm usually pretty good at remembering to sync, but I might occasionally forget. I don't keep the device cradled all the time because it's a phone and it's often in my pocket. Then, when I'm on the road (or, simpler, elsewhere on the large WiFi network here), I need an address. I do have a network connection (GPRS, 1xRTT, WiFi, whatever), and I'd like to initiate a sync.

(That's what I used to do with Pocket PC 2002/2003. Actually, I now a) use a laptop; and b) use Exchange ActiveSync now to prevent this exact problem. As you pointed out, b) is no good for things like my eWallet. However, it's incredibly convenient to be able to sync wirelessly, and as such it's become my main sync mechanism.)

As far as third party app sync though, I'm not sure there is anything stopping those ISVs from developing a solution that doesn't use AS.
It's still very difficult -- you have to build conduits for the MS DBs and whatnot. It's worth pointing out that no one has built a third-party sync engine for the ground up for Pocket PCs -- even IntelliSync and such use the AS framework.

--janak

[Sven Johannsen]

I've read the discussions. Most seem to revolve around, we had it before, it's fast, I like to do it from the couch. Your situation with the Phone Edition being in your pocket, or at least not typically cradled makes a lot of sense. I just don't work that way, so that problem doesn't present itself. I haven't had phone editions that long, so I still am treating them more like a PPC then a phone, connecting them whenever I'm at the desk. I'm also not a heavy mobile phone user when I.m home or at my desk at work, so that flavors my usage too. To alleviate your issue, I would like to see BT AS work the way my phone works in the car. They see each other, they connect, that simple. An auto sync via BT when in range, with user settings of course, would help you at least keep from leaving your PC after a bunch of updates, without syncing. I just think it should work that way anyway.

I just can't believe it would be that hard for third party vendors to do their own sync thing, assuming an IP connection between the PC and PPC. I think AS being there was just kind of convenient. Look at all the apps that sync with internet data, weather, currency exchange, TV guides. Can't be that much tougher to sync with a desktop data file.

[Janak Parekh]

I've read the discussions. Most seem to revolve around, we had it before, it's fast, I like to do it from the couch. Your situation with the Phone Edition being in your pocket, or at least not typically cradled makes a lot of sense.
Yeah - I don't put forth the couch agreement because BT is usually good enough for that. However, in large corporate or academic environments, LAN sync has a lot of practical uses.

--janak

[Sven Johannsen]

Yeah - I don't put forth the couch agreement because BT is usually good enough for that. However, in large corporate or academic environments, LAN sync has a lot of practical uses.

Well, I still don't really see it, because the stuff I have or change on the PPC, I have. Nothing is happening on the desktop that I need access to. Nobody is updating contacts, calendar, etc there. So beyond it being a backup function for what I've added on the go....what is there that needs syncing. I think I could make use of syncing Inbox, considering I have PoP3 with an ISP and my desktop is downloading and removing new mail from the server, but I could fix that by just closing Outlook before I leave home. Then I could check for new mail from the PPC.

Guess the gist of what I'm thinking is that nothing new happens on my desktop PC when I'm not there, so what is it that I need to 'sync'.

P.S. might be easier to mitigate the speed issue by fixing the USB AS so that it works at USB speeds. ;)

[Janak Parekh]

Well, I still don't really see it, because the stuff I have or change on the PPC, I have. Nothing is happening on the desktop that I need access to. Nobody is updating contacts, calendar, etc there.
I outlined a scenario in my earlier post that addresses exactly this comment. It's even more common for Smartphones. Here's my opinion: once you try Server ActiveSync, you'll see the value of having a network-based sync solution.

P.S. might be easier to mitigate the speed issue by fixing the USB AS so that it works at USB speeds. ;)
ActiveSync 4 already did this by switching the network transport to RNDIS. However, as far as I know most of the devices are still USB 1.1.

--janak

[Sven Johannsen]

Well, I still don't really see it, because the stuff I have or change on the PPC, I have. Nothing is happening on the desktop that I need access to. Nobody is updating contacts, calendar, etc there.
I outlined a scenario in my earlier post that addresses exactly this comment. It's even more common for Smartphones. Here's my opinion: once you try Server ActiveSync, you'll see the value of having a network-based sync solution.

Is that the one where you are sitting at your desk, but not connected? I understand that one, but we kind of agreed that BT could work for this. I'm talking more about when you aren't at your PC to change stuff.

It seems from another thread, that it isn't even that easy to do AS from Starbucks or a friends house, due to NAT, firewall, DNS issues anyway. I don't dispute the benefits of network sync. Just not sure I want to fall on my sword for it. There are plenty of other things more important, roundtripping, consistant sync experience, Voice Command over BT, etc.