06-04-2002, 05:21 PM
|
|
Contributing Editor Emeritus
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 8,228
|
|
Dear MS Mac team, have you ever heard of a Pocket PC?
http://news.com.com/2100-1040-930299.html?tag=fd_top
Ok, the news first: "Microsoft plans to release on Monday the first significant update to the Mac OS X version of Office and will also introduce a version of its instant messaging program designed for the latest Mac operating system."
This is what caught my eye: "Software that will allow a Palm handheld to synchronize directly with Office will be made available as a free download July 15."
If I recall correctly, Palm has been able to sync with Microsoft Entourage, the Outlook equivalent, since mid-2000. Someone forward this the Microsoft Mac development team along with a gratis iPAQ or something and let them get busy! Thanks to Robert Anderson for the link. So help me if I see any sort of connection between a Palm and the X-Box before there is something for the Pocket PC, I'll scream... again. 
|
| |
|
|
|
06-04-2002, 06:15 PM
|
|
Ponderer
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 68
|
|
I couldn't believe that they would include a palm conduit but not a PPC conduit? What are they thinking? I have been a mac fan for years and thought that I had glanced over the PPC version in the article but no!
I use a PPC in my everyday life and would love to use it in conjuction with my mac. I hope that someone will give a hint to the mac team and put something together in the future.
Rick Takagi
Join us at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pshug/
|
| |
|
|
|
06-04-2002, 06:21 PM
|
|
Contributing Editor Emeritus
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 8,228
|
|
I will admit it is much easier for them to do a Palm conduit vs a Pocket PC conduit. I think they use the standard Palm conduits and just write the conduit for the MS software. For Pocket PC they essentially have to to Mac ActiveSync from the ground up - unless they wanted to piggy back on the work that http://www.pocketmac.net/ is doing, which I think would be a good idea. But it is seemingly being ignored. 
|
| |
|
|
|
06-04-2002, 06:51 PM
|
|
Oracle
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 864
|
|
MS needs to really put together some sort of "Mactive Sync" the multimedia advantage of PPC is perfect compliment for the multimedia centric MAC users...
|
| |
|
|
|
06-04-2002, 06:58 PM
|
|
Ponderer
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 68
|
|
I wish that Pocketmac would release a demo. I would be willing to pay the 50.00 if I had faith in it but I hear mixed reviews.
Rick Takagi
|
| |
|
|
|
06-04-2002, 07:10 PM
|
|
Pupil
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 34
|
|
The Mac software to sync Palm with MS Office is a software licensed from a third company.
Anyway, it would be easy for MS to port AS to Mac. Why they dont is probably because there is not enough demand for it.
A former Mac user.
|
| |
|
|
|
06-04-2002, 07:16 PM
|
|
Ponderer
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 68
|
|
I think many Mac users would start using a PPC if a solid conduit were available. As it stands, there is no reason for a mac user to switch from a palm. I think a conduit could only benefit the PPC platform at a fairly small price.
Rick Takagi
|
| |
|
|
|
06-04-2002, 08:09 PM
|
|
Neophyte
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 1
|
|
One problem with porting ActiveSync to Mac would be problems with installing new software to the Pocket PC. Most Installations are stored in .exe format, which a mac cannont run. Like the software already available, Microsoft could write a program to rip the installation files out of the .exe, but probably do not wish to do that. Another would be that the PPC owner would have to already own a PC, to install whatever software made the PPC recognize the mac.
|
| |
|
|
|
06-04-2002, 08:16 PM
|
|
Oracle
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 864
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Chimaera
One problem with porting ActiveSync to Mac would be problems with installing new software to the Pocket PC. Most Installations are stored in .exe format, which a mac cannont run. Like the software already available, Microsoft could write a program to rip the installation files out of the .exe, but probably do not wish to do that. Another would be that the PPC owner would have to already own a PC, to install whatever software made the PPC recognize the mac.
|
This is why we need more wide spread cab file installation thereby allowing all computers that can transfer the file to the PPC able to install the app directly via the PPC itself.Tthere is no reason (except synchronization with some apps) that cab file installation shouldn't be almost by default, software writers can always make Mac compatible conduits after the fact if the program requires it to synchronize.
|
| |
|
|
|
06-04-2002, 08:33 PM
|
|
Contributing Editor Emeritus
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,350
|
|
That is a good thing about PocketMac: they also offer a CabExtractor.  (see http://www.pocketmac.net for more details).
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Linear Mode
