Re: CF2 pre-installed in devices?
- From: "<ctacke/>" <ctacke[@]opennetcf[dot]com>
- Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2007 12:47:20 -0500
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becasue it's almost always out of date by the time the device ships.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.
--
Chris Tacke - Embedded MVP
OpenNETCF Consulting
Managed Code in the Embedded World
www.opennetcf.com
--
"Simon Hart" <srhartone@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:4B2B3C31-558F-4EE5-8C84-603D28DD6505@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
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.
"<ctacke/>" wrote:
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
--
"Simon Hart" <srhartone@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:DE680076-45E4-499B-8406-D0AF7A0B3594@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
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.
"Paul G. Tobey [eMVP]" wrote:
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.
"Ignacio Machin ( .NET/ C# MVP )" <machin TA laceupsolutions.com>
wrote
in
message news:OsDlyIiSHHA.1200@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
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?
--
Ignacio Machin
machin AT laceupsolutions com
.
- References:
- CF2 pre-installed in devices?
- From: Ignacio Machin \( .NET/ C# MVP \)
- Re: CF2 pre-installed in devices?
- From: Paul G. Tobey [eMVP]
- Re: CF2 pre-installed in devices?
- From: <ctacke/>
- Re: CF2 pre-installed in devices?
- From: Simon Hart
- CF2 pre-installed in devices?
- Prev by Date: Re: Is it possible?
- Next by Date: Re: Is it possible?
- Previous by thread: Re: CF2 pre-installed in devices?
- Next by thread: Re: CF2 pre-installed in devices?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
