Re: A design issue: Should I use ActiveSync or RAPI?
- From: "Ginny Caughey [MVP]" <ginny.caughey.online@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2007 15:01:19 -0400
One advantage of using Rapi is that you can control the syncing process including logging any errors, etc.
--
Ginny Caughey
Device Application Development MVP
"WoodenMecca" <WoodenMecca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:21E095AF-942C-4048-9A1C-5DC2E54C39BE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Appreciated. I guess some experiements are in order. Thanks.
"r_z_aret@xxxxxxxxxxxx" wrote:
On Mon, 24 Sep 2007 10:48:01 -0700, WoodenMecca
<WoodenMecca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>I'm writing a program to sync two flat files between a PC and a device. >I've
>done some study and I'm certain both ActiveSync and RAPI will meet my >needs,
>although the cost is different, so I'm now more inclined to RAPI. But >the
>question is: In terms of user experience, which one is more "seamless?"
RAPI requires ActiveSync (or Windows Mobile Device Center), and
ActiveSync (or WMDC) is free. So I haven't found any cost difference.
>
>From as much (little) as I know about RAPI, it seems that it's run >outside
>of ActiveSync. That is, if I do an ActiveSync provider to sync the two >files,
>the synch'ing will be done during any normal ActiveSync cycle; to users, >this
>is seamless. But if I use RAPI, it seems that it's not automatically >called
>when ActiveSync is running. It seems that the user has to manually >select a
>command or push a button from inside of my app to start a RAPI session >to
>sync the files.
False. ActiveSync and RAPI use the same underlying transport
mechanism. For info about starting apps automatically, see my 22
October 2003 contribution to a thread called " How to check Pocket PC
is Connected or not?" in this newsgroup.
>
>Can somebody tell me if I'm right or wrong?
>
>Right now what I can think of is I do an ActiveSync provider, but it's >just
>a skeleton, i.e., all functions return S_OK as if it's working properly. >But
>at some point (which point is better???), the program does its own >synch'ing
>by using RAPI, which may take up to a few minutes. To me, the benefit is >the
>programming is easier; to users, he doesn't need an extra operation to >sync
>the files, it's all done in one ActiveSync.
I have one app that uses RAPI. I've never even tried to write an
ActiveSync provider. So I can't help you decide between them. But I'm
sure no one will be able to help you choose without more detail.
>
>Is this kind of coexistence allowed under ActiveSync? Or, any other >ideas?
>
>Thanks in advance.
-----------------------------------------
To reply to me, remove the underscores (_) from my email address (and please indicate which newsgroup and message).
Robert E. Zaret, eMVP
PenFact, Inc.
20 Park Plaza, Suite 478
Boston, MA 02116
www.penfact.com
.
- References:
- Re: A design issue: Should I use ActiveSync or RAPI?
- From: r_z_aret
- Re: A design issue: Should I use ActiveSync or RAPI?
- From: WoodenMecca
- Re: A design issue: Should I use ActiveSync or RAPI?
- Prev by Date: Re: Pocket Pc Power Button
- Next by Date: GPS NMEA (Loox "GPS instant fix" update problem)
- Previous by thread: Re: A design issue: Should I use ActiveSync or RAPI?
- Next by thread: Redraw text DrawText
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
