Talk:Windows Mobile

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Good article Windows Mobile has been listed as one of the Engineering and technology good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can delist it, or ask for a reassessment.
This article is part of WikiProject Microsoft Windows, a WikiProject devoted to maintaining and improving the informative value and quality of Wikipedia's many Microsoft Windows articles.
Good article GA This article has been rated as GA-Class on the assessment scale.
Top This article has been rated as top-importance on WikiProject Microsoft Windows's importance scale.

Contents

[edit] More info on Active Syncing

I would like more information on the Active Syncing in regards to Windows Mobile 5.0. For example does it sync wirelessly without using Windows Exhange and on a home network? How about more information about the tables function. Does it allow tables or not wasn't clear about that and does it allow creation of tables within the device? Thank you. Astracat 02:10, 6 January 2007 (UTC)astracat



[edit] Removed the "Challenges" section - completely opinion based

The Challenge section was a joke. Windows Mobile is far from perfect and still has a LOT of room for improvement, but claiming that 2003SE had "essentially unstable phone functions" or that carriers terminated updates "due to support volume and update failures" or that "Gigabyte sized memory cards could easily crash these early-generation models" are complete fabrications. T-Mobile just released another update in July of 2006 and carriers all over the world continue to roll out updates. I've used 2GB cards on 2003SE devices with no problems for many months, and have owned a phone device for nearly 2 years and have no "essentially unstable" experiences, nor do the communitities I operate in.

If someone wants to list some of the real challenges, like the memory leaks that seem to plague WM5, or the eternally long boot times, be my guest. BUt that list looked like it was created by some zealot from another mobile device operating system, or by someone that simply doesn't like Microsoft. Basically, none of it met the standards of Wikipedia:Verifiability Bonsai8 (talk · contribs)

[edit] Long Boot Times

I have a few comments/thoughts on the eternally long boot times: Based on what I have observed and my experience with the Windows CE OS over the years, I would guess some of the slower boot times (even on soft reset!) of many of these newer HTC Pocket PCs (Even those running Pocket PC 2003 with its RAM based object store) is caused by their increasing use of NAND based flash for the OS as well as how their bootloaders handle it.

On many non-Pocket PCs (and even some true Pocket PC devices) it seems boot times are much, much faster. Almost instant for soft reset! (as one would expect)

I suspect that, for god knows what reason, the bootloaders on many of these newer HTC (and other) devices must re-copy THE ENTIRE OS IMAGE back into RAM on every reboot regardless of reset type. (Nand is too slow to XIP so all devices with NAND flash must do this) I find this very odd that any OEM/ODM would make their devices do this...but it sadly seems to be the case for THE MAJORITY and the best I can come up with based on my observations. The Casio BE-300 and Bsquare Maui (AKA Power handheld) and many others, for example, will only reload the OS into RAM from NAND Flash if you perform a HARD RESET. A normal soft reset of most of these devices will take a matter of seconds as the "ROM/OS Image" is already loaded into RAM so that it may execute in place from there and will always be loaded until you pull the battery or perform a hard reset.

Now as for slow boot times of devices that use NOR flash for their ROM... I can't explain that one... Thats just too weird for words when you look at most other WinCE devices. Many of the older WinCE Handheld PC/Pocket PCs and even many newer devices with a custom non-Pocket PC WinCE OS (Such as the MiTAC Mio C310x) seem to boot quite fast on both soft and hard reset. My HP Jornada 728 hard resets in about 10 seconds and soft reset takes about 4(or less). My best guess is that the Pocket PC shell and some of the other resource hogging features like the PIM software, security/Mobile Operator support stuff, etc may also be a culprit. Its possible that maybe its the just the Pocket PC Platform/OS stuff that makes it such a memory hog and makes booting appear slower as I hear that a whopping 14mb of RAM is in use on fresh boot of the HP hx4700 despite running the OS XIP from NOR flash as well as taking 20 seconds to even soft reset! This is quite a shock since most plain Windows CE devices have at most 2-3mb of RAM in use when freshly reset despite using the very same OS! (CE 4.2) Maybe all of these extras that need to load at boot on Pocket PC also cause all these slowdowns.

Another thing that may contribute to the slowness is that OEMs were using very slow flash memory to save costs and the speed of the memory used would not really matter until WM5 appeared. This may also explain the extreme slowness of early and upgraded WM5 devices as well as the very slow boot times of more recent WM2003 Pocket PC devices. I would also guess since WM5 no longer uses RAM to store user settings, bootloader implementations changed drasticly and no longer even attempt to countinue to keep the contents of RAM powered on reset.

To sum it up: I would blame slow boot times less on the OS/Platform and more on the OEM's implementation of their ports of the OS to their hardware. Though, WM5 may have changed this some and much of the slowness may also partially be its fault. It would be great if someone with the knowledge/experience with P/PC could add something mentioning this odd slowness that has been becoming more and more common with recent devices to the main part of this article in some way. Tfgbd 23:05, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Suggestions from a new person interested in Software Development (Microsoft Context)

I chanced upon this page via List_of_Microsoft_topics. And I am aware the main contributors of the WikiWikiWeb page of C2Wiki version of WindowsMobile would not mind using any written material there to enhance this Wikipedia page.

I hope there is more description of current (version 5) Windows Mobile and how it differs from the base of WM2003 products. An example is more facilities to allow use of "persistent storage" so more complicated applications can be built, improved browser capabilities. And I would be interested in limitations (some suggested new functionalities achieved at the cost of performance)

BTW I am wondering whether there is a group of people to build up a new topic on Software Development (Microsoft Context), but I do not know where to post this query. So please delete this part and move to an appropriate page for me. Thanks from Dlwl (talk · contribs) around 04:23, 27 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Added site

Old news which has been deleted.. edits by Lunez

[edit] Recent edits by Lun4tic

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Windows_Mobile&diff=44544284&oldid=44023806

Did anyone notice that under the guise of Lun4tic's edit to "removed spam and commercial sites" that he/she ....

"removed" two freeware sites (pocketpcfreewares.com, freewareppc.com) which are questionable as to whether that qualifies as "commercial". It's free, right? even though it's ad-sponsored, yes? Yet he/she saw fit to "add" a new site - smartphony.net - which is described as having freeware for Windows Mobile smartphones (and also, is ad-sponsored). Following that logic, I am going to remove smartphony.net until we can get a clearer explanation from Lun4tic here.

(Does anyone here think that maybe Lun4tic has a vested interest in that site? I don't see the IP address for where the edits came from - perhaps because I am new and don't know where to look. smartphony.net is registered to a Thomas Hoefter from Hattershiem, DE. Does anyone know if the IP from that edit change happened to come from the same general area?) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Toomer (talk • contribs) 2006-03-20 22:33:37 (UTC)

[edit] A better name for this class of devices

Camphoda

  • Camera
  • Phone
  • Digital
  • Assistant

--Uncleharpoon 21:59, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Market Share

Could we get some numbers on market share? How does it compare with symbian? Mathiastck 17:39, 9 August 2006 (UTC)


Yes, of course Pocket PC and Smartphone compete with Symbian as they are all PDA/Smartphone platforms but Windows Mobile is more than just those 2 platforms and things like PMC that target digital audio players are hardly even close to a PDA-centric OS like Symbian or PalmOS.Tfgbd

[edit] Way too Pocket PC centric and really does not explain other standard platforms under the "Windows Mobile" Brand

This article should either be merged with Pocket PC or rewritten completely, in my opinion.

It has very little to do with the Windows Mobile range of Windows CE based consumer Mobile OSes and barely makes even a passing mention of anything other than Pocket PC.

The Article on Pocket PC 2002 not only really badly written but it should be mentioned that Pocket PC/Smartphone 2002 were only considered Windows Mobile platforms later in their life. The first real WM Platfroms were the 2003 series platforms and even those were not branded as Windows Mobile for their initial release (as evidenced by how they are refered to in the SDK documentation)

People need to realize that Windows Mobile is NOT just Pocket PC and this is the place to do it! This article just does nothing more than confuse people new to the OS and spread misinformation about what it really is and what qualifies as a Windows Mobile platform. So far, there are several consumer-targeted WinCE based OSes under the "Windows Mobile" umbrella brand. Not all of them are open platforms either. They are (so far as I know):

  • Windows Mobile for Pocket PC/Pocket PC Phone Edition
  • Windows Mobile for Smartphone
  • Windows Mobile for Portable Media Center (such as the Zune)
  • Windows Mobile for Automotive (Not to be confused with the less-consumer oriented Windows CE for Automotive/Windows Automotive which is sold to auto manufacturers)
    • (If there is one I missed and someone knows, please don't hesitate to tell me.)

It is also worth noting that not all of the platforms under the Windows Mobile brand are open platforms like Pocket PC or Smartphone. Windows Mobile for Portable Media Center as used in the Zune is a platform closed to 3rd party developers. So is Windows Mobile for Automotive which was introduced in some of new Fiat cars. (Though, I'm not sure if there are plans to make it an open platform in the near future)

I think it would also be a good idea to mention some of the other CE OSes that were devloped by the Microsoft Mobile devices division before they unified the branding as "Windows Mobile". At least a passing mention of Auto PC, Handheld PC and Pocket PC before it became a Windows Mobile platform would be nice.

It should also be noted that Windows Mobile is more or less just a marketing term and most of the OSes have very little to do with eachother other than all being based on Windows CE and the fact that they are targeted at various consumer markets.

As it is, I think someone with better Knowledge of Windows CE's history should rewrite this article from scratch and all the Pocket PC stuff should just be moved to Pocket PC (or just removed entirely as it seems to just be repeating the Pocket PC article anyway) Tfgbd 01:43, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

I agree with you, and hence I added the "Hardware Platforms" section to the article with tries to explain some more about this. Brianreading 20:04, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Refence-Link for "volume" in the section on the Task Bar seems wrong

Clicking on the Volume link takes one to the geometric concept. I don't think that's what is meant. See "Volume: A volume refers to a logical storage unit seen by the computer as a single item. This may be a floppy disk, an entire hard drive, or one or more partitions on hard drives." http://www.angelfire.com/zine2/vmug/glossarypage2.html

Do we need a disambiguation page for volume? Ileanadu 05:23, 3 March 2007 (UTC)Ileanadu

[edit] Obsolescence Section

Is that necessary? Seems more like an advertisement to me at worst, and an opinion at best. 216.152.209.73 01:01, 20 March 2007 (UTC) +1. Too pretentious, and obviously not in the right place.

[edit] Link to wm6wiki.com

Woah what the? I've been done for spamming? All I did was post a relevant link to a wiki that is relevant to the topic... Thats wikipedia's admins for ya, dont like other wikis hey? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ekto (talk • contribs) 04:39, 3 May 2007 (UTC).

Assume Good FaithLife, Liberty, Property 04:41, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

that "wiki" only has three changes in the last 30 days at this time--is that even notable? Springbreak04 02:58, 9 August 2007 (UTC)


[edit] POP3 / IMAP usage

I removed the following description of POP3/IMAP usage from the Outlook Mobile bullet. It seemed like too much detail and probably needs to have a citation:

POP3 access is the most common but has some limitations. It only synchronises inboxes so e.g. when you send emails from Windows Mobile the ‘Sent’ file on your server (e.g. Yahoo!) will not be updated. There can also be a problem with emails disappearing from the server after being downloaded into Windows Mobile. Windows Mobile is set up so it always leaves a copy of emails on the server. However if emails are deleted in Windows Mobile they will be deleted from the server (unlike the full version of Outlook which allows you to change the settings so this doesn't happen). When the ‘Deleted Items’ folder is emptied an ‘instruction to delete’ is created by Windows Mobile and the next time it connects via POP3 it gives this instruction to the server and the relevant emails are deleted. To prevent this happening you should avoid ‘managing’ your inbox from Windows Mobile. Instead, access the server via the web and manage your emails on-line. When you next connect via POP3 your Windows Mobile inbox will clear to the 'managed' state. If you’re not going to use your mobile device for a while it’s sensible to use the ‘Clear All’ function in the 'Services' menu before you put it away. This will clear all the emails from the PDA but not delete them from the server (reducing the risk of them being deleted accidentally in the future).

--Ishi Gustaedr 14:32, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

I agree, it was extraneous and off-topic. Brianreading 17:59, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Windows mobile 6.png

Image:Windows mobile 6.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 23:20, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

I've submitted a rationale for this image. Brianreading 04:15, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Link to WM6Software.net

I've undone the edit that adds this link in the External links section. I've done so based on reasoning from Wikipedia's reference regarding External links, and I've outlined specifically as to which reasons I think apply here:

  1. "Links mainly intended to promote a website."
  2. "Links to sites that primarily exist to sell products or services. For example, instead of linking to a commercial bookstore site, use the "ISBN" linking format, giving readers an opportunity to search a wide variety of free and non-free book sources"
  3. "Links to sites with objectionable amounts of advertising."

Are there any Wikipedians out there who agree or disagree with this? Brianreading 20:03, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Good article

I've read through it and it follows the GA criteria except for some images do not have a fair use rationale. I think it'd be best to remove them and instead use a freely licensed image if possible. There are plenty of images licensed under Creative Commons (Attribution and Share-Alike) on Flickr.[1][2].

And maybe one other nitpick. I think you should mention that WM 6.0 is the latest version and a new release is expected in 2008. MahangaTalk 17:10, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

I agree with you that some images need fair use rationales, but as far as using free image replacements, is this really possible? Derivatives of screenshots (where the bulk of these non-free images are coming from) are still copyrighted. The hardware device photos are all free images already.
Also, it is already noted in the article that Windows Mobile 6 is the latest version and that the new OS is scheduled to be released in 2008. Did you mean this should be added to the lead section? Thanks for your help! Brianreading 04:38, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
Just wanted to follow up on this. I've added fair use rationales to the appropriate images, and updated the lead section. Brianreading 08:13, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, I meant the lead section. I added the current version, feel free to reword. Do you have any details on WM's market share?
Hmm, you're right about the copyright issue. Everything looks good then. I'm making this a GA. MahangaTalk 16:22, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Based on NeXT?

I doubt the next Windows Mobile is based on NeXT, the operating system that would become Mac OS X. Yet, this article says it is in the Next (2008) section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by SteveSims (talk • contribs) 08:46, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

You are correct, although I think the author of that section meant "the subsequent OS" as opposed to NeXT. Microsoft did not show Photon at the Mobius event, but did show an upgrade to Windows Mobile 6. There was no announcement of Photon being dropped. I deleted that section from the article. (See engadget or intomobile.) --Ishi Gustaedr (talk) 17:09, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] External links

I added an External Link to the Smartphone & Pocket PC magazine web site. This is one of the richest sources of information related to Windows Mobile devices. The addition was reverted. I'm curious why. Other links in that section link to single reviews. Why wouldn't a site that has hundreds of articles and reviews be an acceptable link? Thanks. GadgetLover (talk) 20:49, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

The article has 3 citations from the magazine, links to the root domain of any site doesnt provide a unique resource for readers, and is unecessary.--Hu12 (talk) 20:57, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks so much. Appreciate the explanation. GadgetLover (talk) 21:07, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

 ;)--Hu12 (talk) 21:10, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Software Development Section

I wanted to add this statement to this section because I think it's like some of the "market information" you see around wikipedia. But someone said that it's "trivial". I'm not sure why this would be considered as such since it gives current quantative as well as qualitative information about the software development as well as provides evidence to back it up.

There has been a wide assortment of third-party development and the rate at which new applications are created has been increasing at a high rate. For example, as of May 2008, FreewarePocketPC.net boasts over 6,600 applications available for download.

--Rasmasyean (talk) 19:55, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Contradiction

Intro says: the current version being Windows Mobile 6.1, and a new release scheduled for 2010.

"Future versions" section says: Windows Mobile 7 is a major upgrade planned for release in 2nd half of 2009. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.189.129.129 (talk) 08:44, 9 June 2008 (UTC)