09-22-2003, 10:00 AM
|
|
Pontificator
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,177
|
|
.NET Compact Framework and Product Cycles
Microsoft introduced .NET Compact Framework in ROM as of Pocket PC 2003 and Smartphone 2003. This means that developers can use Microsoft's new tools and languages to develop software not only for desktop and server solutions, but also for mobile solutions. The primary advantage of putting the .NET Compact Framework in ROM is that developers don't have to redistribute the components, between 2 and 3 MB, every time a new application is to be shipped. This advantage went away to some extent when Microsoft released a Service Pack for the .NET Compact Framework weeks after the release of Pocket PC 2003, the so called .NET Compact Framework 1.0 SP1 Redistributable. The Service Pack contained a number of defect fixes some of which lead to performance improvements.
Don't get me wrong. I love defect fixes and performance improvements. The fact that Microsoft just release yet one more Service Pack the .NET Compact Framework 1.0 SP2 Developer Redistributable is proof of that the team is committed to deliver the best bits as soon as possible. Since the changes don't break any developers existing code everyone should be pleased. But I think one piece of the puzzle is missing: the advantage of having .NET Compact Framework in ROM is broken if every developer needs to revert back to the old habit of redistributing 2-3 MB runtime files for each new application.
I have learned that the .NET Compact Framework team's product cycle is tied to that of Visual Studio .NET and not to that of mobile devices. This means that we will see product and service pack releases sometimes in sync and sometimes out of sync. However, I would love to see two things:
1. More frequent End User Updates updating the ROM of Pocket PCs and Smarphones with the latest .NET Compact Framework bits.
2. A slip stream release of the latest .NET Compact Framework builds into the device makers production lines.
I have asked Microsoft to respond to these questions and will report back when they do!
|
| |
|
|
|
09-22-2003, 10:06 AM
|
|
Pontificator
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,177
|
|
BTW, just downloaded NET CF SP2. Now I need to figure which CAB to use...
I have an iPAQ 5550. Which is right: ARMV4 or ARMV4I? :?:
|
| |
|
|
|
09-22-2003, 10:12 AM
|
|
Oracle
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 841
|
|
I read about this a couple of days ago and thought exactly the same... Other advantage of having the .NET Compact framework in ROM was more memory available on the device, while not needing to install the framework... Now this is gone :evil:
Or until a device manufacturer releases a ROM update - hardly the case only two months after the initial release...
|
| |
|
|
|
09-22-2003, 10:28 AM
|
|
Thoughts Media Review Team
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 599
|
|
Can the update not be put into the flash ROM? I thought that the PPC OS supported partial updates? (Can't remember the technical term!)
--Philip
|
| |
|
|
|
09-22-2003, 10:43 AM
|
|
Pupil
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 45
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Philip Colmer
Can the update not be put into the flash ROM? I thought that the PPC OS supported partial updates? (Can't remember the technical term!)
--Philip
|
I guess that the problem is that those updates are manufacturer and device specific... :roll: At least those that have been available, but the idea of a device independent partial update would be nice... 
Best Regards 8)
Alberto Silva
|
| |
|
|
|
09-22-2003, 10:49 AM
|
|
Pupil
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 45
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Andy Sjostrom
I have an iPAQ 5550. Which is right: ARMV4 or ARMV4I? :?:
|
I would choose the ArmV4... I think that the V4I and V4T are used in CE.net devices, not PPC 2003.
Is the SP2 already officially available for download?
Alberto Silva
|
| |
|
|
|
09-22-2003, 12:19 PM
|
|
Pontificator
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,177
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by albsilva
I would choose the ArmV4... I think that the V4I and V4T are used in CE.net devices, not PPC 2003.
Is the SP2 already officially available for download?
Alberto Silva
|
Thanks! I tested ARMV4 and it seems to be working. However, Pocket PC 2003 is a Windows CE. NET device (ie Windows CE 4.2) so I am not sure I understand what you are saying.
|
| |
|
|
|
09-22-2003, 12:20 PM
|
|
Pontificator
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,177
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by albsilva
Is the SP2 already officially available for download?
Alberto Silva
|
Sorry... missed that part! Yes, it is available for download!
|
| |
|
|
|
09-22-2003, 02:03 PM
|
|
Pupil
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 45
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Andy Sjostrom
However, Pocket PC 2003 is a Windows CE. NET device (ie Windows CE 4.2) so I am not sure I understand what you are saying. |
PPC2003 are indeed derived from the CE 4.2 core, like some other devices which are not PocketPC2003 devices. Pocket PC 2003 is IMHO like a skin applied that limits and extends some CE.net funcionalities... the diference to other implementations of this OS are that the 'Pocket PC 2003' is a reference platform defined by Microsoft, while some industrial devices have specific implementations of CE.
Remember the Casio BE300... it was a CE 3.0 device, but not a PocketPC :wink: ...
Regards,
Alberto Silva
|
| |
|
|
|
09-22-2003, 02:27 PM
|
|
Sage
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 713
|
|
Re: .NET Compact Framework and Product Cycles
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Andy Sjostrom
The Service Pack contained a number of defect fixes some of which lead to performance improvements.
|
Any details on the performance improvements? I discontinued working on the .NET CF until forms load at an acceptable speed (I'm back to eVC++ and MFC - it flies! 8) ). it would be nice if they fixed that at least. :roll:
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Linear Mode
