Re: General

I'm not trying to defend Microsoft's implementation, but it may be useful to
understand the why of the ActiveSync quality issues. Sorry for wasting your
time.

Paul T.

"Matthew" <pgh1969pa@xxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:Ob6xWHXsGHA.4956@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Well Paul, I you obvious didn't read my posts referirng to my problems and
where my original post stating my problem. To you I offer the somewhat
abrasive position you've took with me. If you read my posts instead of
offering MS defenses......

I already stated what my problem was more that once and where information
with more about my problem is located. If you wanted to help, you
could've chimed in any time you wanted so please don't accuse me of
complaining with out stating my case!
"Paul G. Tobey [eMVP]" <p space tobey no spam AT no instrument no spam DOT
com> wrote in message news:en3rFuMsGHA.4140@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Their goal is going to be to sell as much hardware as possible, as their
only source of revenue in the mobile space is licensing of the software.
They call this a 'shared success' model, as they don't make money (or at
least not much; tools only, not enough to be worth anything), unless the
hardware vendors sell hardware. Obviously, they don't make *anything*
from sales of ActiveSync, so they aren't super-well funded and it's not a
big group. Everyone in the MVP group picks on them, too, so there's zero
chance that they aren't hearing that they need to do better.

I won't argue about what the first goals of software improvement should
be, but back to the topic of actually *fixing* your problem, as opposed
to simply complaining about it, do you want to post those log files or
what? How about the specific information on the Pocket PC hardware? So
far, all you've given us is "It's an X51v, and I'm pissed". If you just
want to be pissed, then I'll go on to more fruitful work. I don't get
paid for this, you know.

Paul T.

"Matthew" <pgh1969pa@xxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:eTqT2hEsGHA.4444@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
My problem is in the thread above. The upgraded device running WM5
works as does a WM2003 device but a second WM5 device that has not been
updated no long works under AS 4.2! All three worked just fine under
4.0. We can safely say the ROM upgrade was irrelevant to the problem
and AS 4.2 is at the core of the problem.

I'm glad it works for you but I gain no consolation with this knowledge.

It really doesn't matter how much MS tests their software because in the
end perception is reality in the user's eye and the track record suggest
that an OS held together with patches and an 'improved' sync host that's
broken does tell a story. We can blame interacts all day but in the end
the only thing that changed on my computer was AS. The first goal to
improve software should be to do no harm.

"Paul G. Tobey [eMVP]" <p space tobey no spam AT no instrument no spam
DOT com> wrote in message
news:%23iItm$DsGHA.2240@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Again, just like you, I'm going from one point of view. Yours is no
more or less valid than mine. AS 4.2 worked perfectly for me and I had
problems, resolvable, but still problems with 4.0. I'd say that, for
me, that makes 4.2 better.

It sounds to me like there is a problem with the ROM update for your
device which may be responsible for the problem. Note that MS doesn't
build those ROM updates, decide what goes in them (other than to
specify the minimum requirements to be a Pocket PC device), or test
them. The OEM is responsible for that. I'm running the latest ROM
build for my device, also, including the push e-mail support, etc.,
with no problems with AS4.2.

I simply was trying to explain why 4.x is not 3.x in terms of how it
works internally (the 'why' of the change). None of that changed in
going from 4.0 to 4.2, however. The changes there were things
associated with fixing specific incompatibilities found between 4.0 and
4.2beta that caused connectivity, sync, and other problems for people.

I'd like to help you get it fixed, but all I can recommend at this
point is to post the contents of the WCE*.* log files for AS from the
%temp% folder, along with the ROM version information from the device.
Maybe someone will spot something or someone with the same device will
respond...

Paul T.

"Matthew" <pgh1969pa@xxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:%23Bz$CtDsGHA.4852@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Well, I wonder how Apple seems to do a better job with their OS and
itunes over windows and media player. I have yet to own a dap that
didn't have some form of syncing problem with wmp. I've never been
one to beat up on MS for sport but lately I've realized that all their
releases are no more than betas.

I surely wish they would stop offering solutions looking for a
problem. AS 3.8 worked well. AS 4.0 at least worked. AS 4.2 is the
first version I could not resolve my problems and I started with the
palm-sized pc! If I could go back to 4.0 I would but I can't since MS
was kind enough to break it's ability to sync with the new X51v rom.

I like Bill Gates but I sometimes hate the seed he has spawn. They
don't offer accessible support ($25.00 to discuss how they screwed
up!) or listen to what non-corporate customers want or need!

If you have solutions to my problems which get to the root of my
problems, I'd be more than willing to listen. Trying to convince me
that 4.2 is better is a hard sell. I don't care if it connects to an
exchange server or the moon if can't connect to my ppc! It should do
this well *first* before it tries to be something else! Any other
rationalization is pointless! If it can't do it's primary role, who
cares about exchange server!

"Paul G. Tobey [eMVP]" <p space tobey no spam AT no instrument no spam
DOT com> wrote in message
news:%23fCgvC0rGHA.3748@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
No, it's been tested and beta-ed, etc. You don't realize the volume
of stuff that interacts with network adapters on your PC. The beta
of 4.2 worked fine for me, but yet a significant number of people
here are having problems with the released version, even. The
difference is configuration on their PC, which might be running XP or
2000, wireless networking or wired with any one of dozens of network
helper programs, firewalls from half a dozen or more vendors,
anti-virus/anti-scripting programs from dozens of vendors, VPN
clients from half a dozen vendors and in several versions, etc. The
number of combinations that could be found in the real world is
literally astronomical; the size of the AS test team is not.

The basic reason for changing to a network communication scheme is
that you now communicate exactly the same way with Exchange Server as
you do with desktop AS. This is a huge improvement for the AS team
(which is very small). They now have the ability to add features,
fix bugs, etc. without having to fix the same bug in two places. The
initial pain was, I'm sure, an expected problem (although I think the
severity of problems caught them a little off-guard), but the
long-term result should be better responsiveness to problems and
better synching, in general.

It's extremely painful for people who *are* having problems, and you
can certainly pin that on the change to network communications from
just acting like a regular USB device, but, frankly, I don't see that
AS over USB was super-reliable before the change. The change simply
seems to have changed who is running into problems. People who had
3.x working fine and never had a problem with that now may have hell,
while those who were always having problems getting 3.x to work, if
they're still around, may have smooth sailing with 4.x (as I do).

Paul T.

"Matthew" <pgh1969pa@xxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:%23rgX5ObrGHA.4992@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
It's hard to that believe that anyone at Microsoft actually tested
any of their software before it was released. Why in the world did
they screw up AS with all this network crap that doesn't work
escapes me!

I've been using PPCs since the begining and this is a real mess! If
I'm having problems with the 'new and improved' activesync, I wonder
how new users are doing! I thought 4.2 was to fix connection issues
not create them! AS 4.2 is the absolute worst version ever!



"Tim Maher-De Troyer" <tim.maherdetroyer4@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
message news:eAjgAparGHA.2256@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
This is, without a shadow of a doubt, one of the worst pieces of
software ever written.

As a result of it's complete inability to recognise USB devices (O2
XDA II), except intermittently, no proper interface to Windows
Media Player 10.x and above and it's thorough incapacity in
delivering understandable messages I shall be abandoning the entire
charade in favour of BlackBerry (You can get the music!).

This is the biggest load of unusable software that I have
encountered in years.

Dump it and get something written that can connect peripheral PC
like devices.

Tim

















.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: General
    ... Paul T. ... It sounds to me like there is a problem with the ROM update for your ... of stuff that interacts with network adapters on your PC. ... anti-virus/anti-scripting programs from dozens of vendors, ...
    (microsoft.public.pocketpc.activesync)
  • Re: dont synchronize
    ... you set up to access your work network via some sort of software or hardware ... Paul T. ... The ActiveSync ... connection troubleshooter, that may help you, also. ...
    (microsoft.public.pocketpc.activesync)
  • Re: Synchronizing with ActiveSync
    ... Paul T. ... Do you know if ActiveSync via VPN to Exchange works? ... the device's USB RNDIS network adapter is set to use DHCP to get an IP ...
    (microsoft.public.pocketpc.activesync)
  • Re: dont synchronize
    ... What sort of network is the PC ... Paul T. ... recognized on the USB connection and 98% of the time, ... The ActiveSync ...
    (microsoft.public.pocketpc.activesync)
  • Re: Copy file from PPC to desktop
    ... >> Thanks for the reply Paul. ... >> through Activesync or do I need a real network connection. ... >>> a Web server, FTP server, shared folder, etc., on the PC, then you may ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.compactframework)