Re: CE vs Embedded XP
From: iesoft (iesoft_at_discussions.microsoft.com)
Date: 03/16/05
- Next message: winCE Newbie: "how to test NDIS?"
- Previous message: Michael Schaffner, P.E.: "Re: Does kernel(HAL layer) provide string functions?"
- In reply to: Carl: "Re: CE vs Embedded XP"
- Next in thread: tony.gomez_at_gmail.com: "Re: CE vs Embedded XP"
- Reply: tony.gomez_at_gmail.com: "Re: CE vs Embedded XP"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 06:07:03 -0800
Hi Carl,
Thanks for your comments. The booting advantage of CE sounds nice. The
option of being able to run the same application in the desktop version of XP
is also nice.
>From what I have been able to gather from a few different embedded single
board computer manufacturers is that the disk image, and consequently the
drivers required, are what take the longest time to develop.
Our system will require the following:
- Touch Screen (about 8.4” ) for user input, as there is no mouse or
keyboard for normal user input
- Network support for communicating via VPN
- USB communications with our Communications Controller
- RS232 communications with our Communications Controller
- Keyboard/mouse support for field service technician
- Compact Flash support for OS and application(s)
- USB thumb drive support for backup purposes
A couple embedded SBC manufacturers have offered to develop the disk image
and the drivers. Since I've been in meetings the last two days, I haven't
been able to speak with them directly to get more details.
Why does creating the disk image take so long? How do you determine if the
technology you want supported (TouchScreen, USB, rs232, etc.) really is
supported? These questions are for both XP Embdedded and CE.
Thanks,
-Vin
"Carl" wrote:
> From personal experience, I recommend you go with windows ce 5.0.
> Unlike windows xp embedded, it just creates a bin file that you can then
> put in a 32 mb flash drive to boot off of. It'll then be loaded all in
> ram for you. It essentially behaves like firmware in that you can cut
> power to it and have it boot back into the ce desktop without any damage
> to the file system. The reason for this is because it is read only. So
> once booted up, any changes made to the ce system aren't saved. No
> chance of file corruption then. Unlike windows xp embedded where if u
> pull the plug and boot it back up, after doing that for a few times,
> some files might be corrupt then.
>
> But the advantage of windows xp embedded is that you can essentially run
> your application that runs in regular windows in windows xp embedded
> with no changes required. Windows ce 5.0 on the other hand, takes a bit
> longer to develop an application for. As it requires c code and for it
> to be all unicode.
>
> iesoft wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > New to the MSDN Embedded groups...
> >
> > I am trying to decide between CE and Embedded XP for a project I am on.
> > I've read through much of the MSDN Embedded website and I see references to
> > the 500 components CE has versus the 12000 components Embedded XP has, but
> > what I cannot find is the specifics of the 500 components CE has versus.
> >
> > I'd like to review that list for technologies that I require for this
> > project, so I can make a decision on whether or not to use CE.
> >
> > Any help would be greatly appreciated!
> >
> > Thanks,
> > -Vin
>
- Next message: winCE Newbie: "how to test NDIS?"
- Previous message: Michael Schaffner, P.E.: "Re: Does kernel(HAL layer) provide string functions?"
- In reply to: Carl: "Re: CE vs Embedded XP"
- Next in thread: tony.gomez_at_gmail.com: "Re: CE vs Embedded XP"
- Reply: tony.gomez_at_gmail.com: "Re: CE vs Embedded XP"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
