Re: WM5 MS BT Stack
- From: "Tim Raml" <TimRaml@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 12:48:03 -0800
Additionally, is this BSP thing a WM5 only?
"Greg Scott [MS]" wrote:
> Peter is exactly right. To add to this, the Windows Mobile UI allows you to
> configure COM ports 0 to 9 by default. But we allow OEMs to modify which
> ports to expose on the final device based on what is available on their
> device. So far it seems most OEMs leave two ports.
>
> The BT stack supports COM ports using the standard "COM" prefix as well as
> the "BSP" prefix (Bluetooth Serial Port). App developers can register a BT
> COM port on the "BSP" prefix and not take up a COM port. Although most
> legacy apps are configured to use "COM0-9:". And if an app is aware that it
> is using Bluetooth I would recommend it use Bluetooth sockets.
>
> Thanks,
> Greg
>
> --
> Greg Scott
> Software Design Engineer, Windows CE
> Microsoft Corporation
> _____________________________________________________________
> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
> _____________________________________________________________
>
> "Peter Foot [MVP]" <feedback@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:erzO2FhGGHA.1332@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > The issue is that it only offers COM ports 0 to 9, and most of these are
> > already assigned to other things, especially on a phone edition device.
> > Its not a limitation of the Bluetooth settings per-se. Other options would
> > be to support alternative port prefixes (but would require consuming
> > applications to accept them) or allow port numbers greater than 9 which
> > requires some additional support from consuming apps as the port naming is
> > slightly more complicated. Alternatively Microsoft could move some of the
> > system ports which are not likely to be used directly by third party apps
> > into these extended port numbers to free up more in the 0-9 range.
> >
> > Peter
> >
> > --
> > Peter Foot
> > Windows Embedded MVP
> > www.peterfoot.net | www.inthehand.com
> >
> > "Tim Raml" <TimRaml@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> > news:4F59B488-FF5A-48BD-9062-3CAC0E39D200@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >> Not sure if someone will be able to answer this but...
> >>
> >> Why does the MS stack limit you to only 2 outgoming and incoming com
> >> ports
> >> (via the user interface)? 2 is better than the 1 you get from widcomm
> >> but
> >> can't I have 10?
> >>
> >> http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/wcecomm5/html/wce50conCOMPortEmulationFacility.asp
> >>
> >> From that, one could interpret or misinterpret to mean that it is in fact
> >> capable of 10.
> >>
> >> There's obviously going to be some degradation and data loss in the
> >> throughput but why not let me decide that having 6 ports in use at the
> >> same
> >> time is too much? Yes, with 2 loopback test application running on 2
> >> different serial ports, there is loss but I can live w/ it, it's not that
> >> much loss but I want more ports :)
> >
> >
>
>
>
.
- References:
- Re: WM5 MS BT Stack
- From: Peter Foot [MVP]
- Re: WM5 MS BT Stack
- From: Greg Scott [MS]
- Re: WM5 MS BT Stack
- Prev by Date: Re: WM5 MS BT Stack
- Next by Date: Re: Language packs for Windoew CE/PocketPC ?
- Previous by thread: Re: WM5 MS BT Stack
- Next by thread: Create setup for PPC application
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
