Windows Mobile Build Tools
ISDi
I don't know if this is the right group or not. If it is not, let me
know which is the right group.
I am looking to upgrade the development environment to support
application development for Windows Mobile 6.x. I also need to support
Windows Mobile 5.x. I would *like* to still be able to support Windows
Mobile 4.x (4.20 and 4.21 and up) as well as some 3.x.
I have Windows Mobile 5 PPC SDK and Windows Mobile 5 SmartPhone SDK
available. I run Visual Studio 2005 XXX on Windows XP SP2.
Here are my questions:
- If I upgrade the SDK to 6, should I uninstall the two above?
- What versions of Windows Mobile does SDK 6 support? I was unable to
find a clear list.
- If I must support 4.x, what SDK / tools should I install along side
SDK 6 (if SDK6 doesn't support 4.x)?
- What version of Visual Studio does Windows Mobile 6.5 Developer
Toolkit (DTK) require?
- Is the Windows Mobile 6.5 Developer Toolkit (DTK) useful?
Thanx
-isdi-
![Paul G. Tobey [eMVP]'s profile photo](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/a/default-user=s40-c)
Paul G. Tobey [eMVP]
>
> I don't know if this is the right group or not. If it is not, let me
> know which is the right group.
>
> I am looking to upgrade the development environment to support
> application development for Windows Mobile 6.x. I also need to support
> Windows Mobile 5.x. I would *like* to still be able to support Windows
> Mobile 4.x (4.20 and 4.21 and up) as well as some 3.x.
>
> I have Windows Mobile 5 PPC SDK and Windows Mobile 5 SmartPhone SDK
> available. I run Visual Studio 2005 XXX on Windows XP SP2.
Visual Studio 2008 supports Pocket PC 2003 and later. There's no such
naming as Windows Mobile 4.x or 3.x. If you're not clear on what you need,
figure out what version of the OS you are *actually* targeting, not the
version number, but the actual name, Pocket PC 2002, for example, and post
back. With those version numbers, you're mixing up the version of the
underlying Windows CE operating system and the naming convention for Windows
Mobile.
> Here are my questions:
> - If I upgrade the SDK to 6, should I uninstall the two above?
There is no SDK "upgrade". All SDKs are installed side-by-side. Some
versions of Visual Studio will support this one and that one (Windows Mobile
5 and Pocket PC 2003), and not another (Pocket PC 2002), but there's no need
to install only those supported by your version of VS. If you install the
WM5 SDK, the *only* support in there is WM5, no WM6, no Pocket PC 2003.
Install the SDKs for the versions of Windows Mobile you need to target.
> - What versions of Windows Mobile does SDK 6 support? I was unable to
> find a clear list.
I'm not sure if I'm answering the question. There are two WM6 SDK packages,
one for Professional (Pocket PC), and one for Standard (Smartphone). All
WM6-based devices are supported, if you install both SDK packages. If you
install only one or the other, that's what you get.
> - If I must support 4.x, what SDK / tools should I install along side
> SDK 6 (if SDK6 doesn't support 4.x)?
What does 4.x mean? Pocket PC 2003? As mentioned, VS2008 supports the
Pocket PC 2003 and Smartphone 2003, when you install those SDKs.
> - What version of Visual Studio does Windows Mobile 6.5 Developer
> Toolkit (DTK) require?
A quick read of the download page should answer this. Easier and faster to
find the answer to questions like this than to ask, generally. The toolkit
itself doesn't require a version of Visual Studio. Of course, if you want
to actually use the emulators to test code, you need VS2005 or VS2008 (and
the WM6 SDKs; the 6.5 toolkits are really just add-ons right now; presumably
real SDKs will be released at a later time).
> - Is the Windows Mobile 6.5 Developer Toolkit (DTK) useful?
To whom? For what? If you are writing code that must use gesture APIs and
run on Windows Mobile 6.5 devices, it's essential. If you're writing code
that will run on all devices from WM5 on up and doesn't use gesture APIs,
it's not necessary.
Paul T.
ISDi
instrument no spam DOT com> wrote:
> Visual Studio 2008 supports Pocket PC 2003 and later.
OK.
I think I mentioned I'm using VS 8.
> There's no such
> naming as Windows Mobile 4.x or 3.x. If you're not clear on what you need,
> figure out what version of the OS you are *actually* targeting, not the
> version number, but the actual name, Pocket PC 2002, for example, and post
> back. With those version numbers, you're mixing up the version of the
> underlying Windows CE operating system and the naming convention for Windows
> Mobile.
OK. I was trying to make it simple. I made the assumption that people
would understand what I was looking for. I probably would have said
the same thing if I were answering the question. Except I would not
have been snotty about it.
This is correct. There is no such thing as Windows Mobile 3 or 4. I
was specifically referring to:
Microsoft Pocket PC version 3.x,
Microsoft Pocket PC version 4.20.x and
Windows Mobile 2003 Second Edition version 4.21.x.
I wasn't mixing the CE versioning at all. I just did not want to type
out the entire names.
They may have changed the names across versions, but the version
numbers from PPC3 to Windows Mobile 5 sure look sequential to me.
> > Here are my questions:
> > - If I upgrade the SDK to 6, should I uninstall the two above?
>
> There is no SDK "upgrade". All SDKs are installed side-by-side. Some
> versions of Visual Studio will support this one and that one (Windows Mobile
> 5 and Pocket PC 2003), and not another (Pocket PC 2002), but there's no need
> to install only those supported by your version of VS. If you install the
> WM5 SDK, the *only* support in there is WM5, no WM6, no Pocket PC 2003.
> Install the SDKs for the versions of Windows Mobile you need to target.
OK.
The newest version of SDK6 I saw is a 'refresh'. Which means it's an
upgrade. It even states that prior versions of SDK6 have to be
uninstalled prior to installation.
So this remains true with SDK6. I did not know that. Sometime last
year I was told or read that SDK6 was a replacement for prior
versions.
As a result, I was under the impression that Microsoft was changing
the paradigm.
> > - What versions of Windows Mobile does SDK 6 support? I was unable to
> > find a clear list.
>
> I'm not sure if I'm answering the question. There are two WM6 SDK packages,
> one for Professional (Pocket PC), and one for Standard (Smartphone). All
> WM6-based devices are supported, if you install both SDK packages. If you
> install only one or the other, that's what you get.
This was based on bad information I had. You've answered the question
and cleared the issue up.
Thank You.
>
> > - If I must support 4.x, what SDK / tools should I install along side
> > SDK 6 (if SDK6 doesn't support 4.x)?
>
> What does 4.x mean? Pocket PC 2003? As mentioned, VS2008 supports the
> Pocket PC 2003 and Smartphone 2003, when you install those SDKs.
This has been answered. It was based on bad information.
>
> > - What version of Visual Studio does Windows Mobile 6.5 Developer
> > Toolkit (DTK) require?
>
> A quick read of the download page should answer this. Easier and faster to
> find the answer to questions like this than to ask, generally. The toolkit
> itself doesn't require a version of Visual Studio. Of course, if you want
> to actually use the emulators to test code, you need VS2005 or VS2008 (and
> the WM6 SDKs; the 6.5 toolkits are really just add-ons right now; presumably
> real SDKs will be released at a later time).
I saw that it requires VS 2008. I was hoping that someone had
installed it on VS 8.
There have been times in the past where a there was a workaround for
a stated tool dependency.
>
> > - Is the Windows Mobile 6.5 Developer Toolkit (DTK) useful?
>
> To whom? For what? If you are writing code that must use gesture APIs and
> run on Windows Mobile 6.5 devices, it's essential. If you're writing code
> that will run on all devices from WM5 on up and doesn't use gesture APIs,
> it's not necessary.
I had already gathered this from the description of what it offers.
To answer my own question, no it isn't. However, it looks like it is
required to target Windows Mobile 6.5.
-isdi-
Paul G. Tobey [eMVP]
> instrument no spam DOT com> wrote:
>
>> Visual Studio 2008 supports Pocket PC 2003 and later.
>
> OK.
> I think I mentioned I'm using VS 8.
VS8 != Visual Studio 2008. VS8 = VS2005. Just wanted to be sure that this
was clear to anyone else reading.
>
>> There's no such
>> naming as Windows Mobile 4.x or 3.x. If you're not clear on what you
>> need,
>> figure out what version of the OS you are *actually* targeting, not the
>> version number, but the actual name, Pocket PC 2002, for example, and
>> post
>> back. With those version numbers, you're mixing up the version of the
>> underlying Windows CE operating system and the naming convention for
>> Windows
>> Mobile.
>
> OK. I was trying to make it simple. I made the assumption that people
> would understand what I was looking for. I probably would have said
> the same thing if I were answering the question. Except I would not
> have been snotty about it.
> This is correct. There is no such thing as Windows Mobile 3 or 4. I
> was specifically referring to:
> Microsoft Pocket PC version 3.x,
> Microsoft Pocket PC version 4.20.x and
> Windows Mobile 2003 Second Edition version 4.21.x.
> I wasn't mixing the CE versioning at all. I just did not want to type
> out the entire names.
> They may have changed the names across versions, but the version
> numbers from PPC3 to Windows Mobile 5 sure look sequential to me.
>
The numbers don't flow like that. The furthest back that Visual Studio 2005
or 2008 support is Pocket PC 2003. Visual Studio .NET 2003 supports Pocket
PC 2002, but only for C# and VB.NET development with .NET Compact Framework
1.0. Anything earlier than that and you'll need the (obsolete), eMbedded
Visual C++ 3.0. There's no such thing as Pocket PC 4.20, in terms of a
platform name. That sounds like Pocket PC 2003, while 4.21 might be Pocket
PC 2003 Second Edition, but, again, the development environments don't quote
that form of version numbering. I'm guessing that your Pocket PC 3.x is
actually Pocket PC 2002, since that's the version that immediately preceded
Pocket PC 2003.
>
>> > Here are my questions:
>> > - If I upgrade the SDK to 6, should I uninstall the two above?
>>
>> There is no SDK "upgrade". All SDKs are installed side-by-side. Some
>> versions of Visual Studio will support this one and that one (Windows
>> Mobile
>> 5 and Pocket PC 2003), and not another (Pocket PC 2002), but there's no
>> need
>> to install only those supported by your version of VS. If you install
>> the
>> WM5 SDK, the *only* support in there is WM5, no WM6, no Pocket PC 2003.
>> Install the SDKs for the versions of Windows Mobile you need to target.
>
> OK.
> The newest version of SDK6 I saw is a 'refresh'. Which means it's an
> upgrade. It even states that prior versions of SDK6 have to be
> uninstalled prior to installation.
> So this remains true with SDK6. I did not know that. Sometime last
> year I was told or read that SDK6 was a replacement for prior
> versions.
> As a result, I was under the impression that Microsoft was changing
> the paradigm.
Yes, there was an updated version of the WM6 SDKs. That didn't support new
devices, as far as I can recall, but updated the contents of the WM6 SDK and
changed how things were named, dumping Smartphone and Pocket PC and
switching to Standard, Classic and Professional. That was, as far as you
can tell so far, a one-off realignment fix, rather than a change in the
plan. I guess we'll see when the real 6.5 SDK is released.
> I saw that it requires VS 2008. I was hoping that someone had
> installed it on VS 8.
> There have been times in the past where a there was a workaround for
> a stated tool dependency.
Since there's really no connection between the SDK and Visual Studio that I
can see, other than that you'll want the Device Emulator Manager to fire up
the emulator you want (available in both VS2005 and 2008), I don't see any
reason you wouldn't have as much luck with VS2005 as VS2008. You can't set
the target for deployment from Visual Studio 2008 to be Windows Mobile 6.5
Professional, anyway, for example. You still have the same choices as
before installing the DTK for deployment (no 6.5). It seems like the DTK
was sent out mostly to give early access to the gesture APIs and to give
emulators that could be used to understand the new paradigms in things like
the start menu. It doesn't feel like a real SDK, yet. There's no help,
etc.
>> > - Is the Windows Mobile 6.5 Developer Toolkit (DTK) useful?
>>
>> To whom? For what? If you are writing code that must use gesture APIs
>> and
>> run on Windows Mobile 6.5 devices, it's essential. If you're writing
>> code
>> that will run on all devices from WM5 on up and doesn't use gesture APIs,
>> it's not necessary.
>
> I had already gathered this from the description of what it offers.
> To answer my own question, no it isn't. However, it looks like it is
> required to target Windows Mobile 6.5.
You need it only if you are targeting 6.5 for gestures or physics things
that require the 6.5 API for that. As far as I can tell, actually doing the
deployment from Visual Studio, you still target WM6.1 and just happen to
plug in your 6.5 device.
Paul T.
Chris Tacke, eMVP
> I think I mentioned I'm using VS 8.
VS8 == Studio 2005
VS9 = Studio 2008
VS10 == Studio 2010
> Microsoft Pocket PC version 3.x,
There was "Pocket PC" It had no version number, and was based CE 3.0.
Tools:
- eVC 3.0
- eVC 4.0
- Sort-of in Studio 2003 (IIRC)
> Microsoft Pocket PC version 4.20.x and
There was "Pocket PC 2002". It also had no version number.
OS: CE 4.2
Tools:
- eVC 4.0SP2
- Studio 2003.
> Windows Mobile 2003 Second Edition version 4.21.x.
"Pocket PC 2003 Second Edition". It also had no version number.
OS: CE 4.2
Tools:
- eVC 4.0 (SDK - I don't recall)
- Studio 2003 Pro (SDK - I don't recall)
- Studio 2005 Standard (SDK auto-installed)
- Studio 2008 Pro (SDK auto-installed)
"Windows Mobile 5". This was the first on that included version numbering.
OS: CE 5.0
Tools:
- eVC 4.0 with separate SDKs
- Studio 2005 Standard with separate SDKs
- Studio 2008 Pro (can't recall if SDKs auto-install)
"Windows Mobile 6".
OS: CE 5.0
Tools:
- Studio 2005 Standard with separate SDKs
- Studio 2008 Pro with separate SDKs
"Windows Mobile 6.1".
OS: CE 5.0
Tools:
- Studio 2005 Standard with separate SDKs
- Studio 2008 Pro with separate SDKs
- SDKs are same as 6.0, separate emulators available
"Windows Mobile 6.5".
OS: CE 5.0
Tools:
- Studio 2005 Standard (maybe - I've not ttried)
- Studio 2008 Pro
- SDKs are same as 6.0, separate emulators available
Versions of CF you can target vary from platform to platform and tool to
tool. These do not include compat for generic CE devices and the list for
them is actually different.
> I wasn't mixing the CE versioning at all.
I disagree. You were.
> Sometime last
> year I was told or read that SDK6 was a replacement for prior
> versions.
That info is incorrect. It is not a replacement. It is an SDK for WinMo 6.x
devices.
> As a result, I was under the impression that Microsoft was changing
> the paradigm.
The SDK describes what is in the platform. There is no way for it to
"filter" out what isn't available in oplder platforms or to selectively use
older LIBs based on your target. The LIBs for WinMo 6 certainly won't work
with PPC 2003, even if you use only functions that are available, as they
were compiled for a newer OS. I imagine it might be possible to make a tool
that is smart enough to figure all of that out, but it would be a monumental
waste of effort.
> I saw that it requires VS 2008. I was hoping that someone had
> installed it on VS 8.
Yes, they've drawn a line in the sand for minimum requirements. Makes their
test matrix more manageable.
> I had already gathered this from the description of what it offers.
> To answer my own question, no it isn't. However, it looks like it is
> required to target Windows Mobile 6.5.
No, it's not required. Compiled apps are forward compatible (in fact I know
a couple companies that still use eVC 3.0 to compile for WinMo 6.x). It's
only required if you want to take advantage of new features in the 6.5
platform (and even then you can probably use them with manual inclusion,
declaration and pathing - debugging may be another story though)
r_z_...@pen_fact.com
wrote:
>On Jun 9, 9:21 am, "Paul G. Tobey [eMVP]" <p space tobey no spam AT no
>instrument no spam DOT com> wrote:
>
>> Visual Studio 2008 supports Pocket PC 2003 and later.
>
> OK.
> I think I mentioned I'm using VS 8.
>
>> There's no such
>> naming as Windows Mobile 4.x or 3.x. If you're not clear on what you need,
>> figure out what version of the OS you are *actually* targeting, not the
>> version number, but the actual name, Pocket PC 2002, for example, and post
>> back. With those version numbers, you're mixing up the version of the
>> underlying Windows CE operating system and the naming convention for Windows
>> Mobile.
>
> OK. I was trying to make it simple. I made the assumption that people
>would understand what I was looking for. I probably would have said
>the same thing if I were answering the question. Except I would not
>have been snotty about it.
Paul tends to be terse, and/or less than gentle. I wouldn't say
"snotty". Apart from style, he correctly pointed out that we are not
mind readers. If you use incorrect terminology, we will have trouble
understanding. Unfortunately, the terminology for Windows Mobile and
Windows CE is confusing, so being explicit is pretty much required.
And that means using the _full_ name for each platform ("Windows
Mobile 5 Pocket PC" is not the same as "Windows Mobile 5 Smartphone",
and "Windows Mobile 5" includes three different platforms, supported
by 3 different SDKs).
> This is correct. There is no such thing as Windows Mobile 3 or 4. I
>was specifically referring to:
> Microsoft Pocket PC version 3.x,
> Microsoft Pocket PC version 4.20.x and
> Windows Mobile 2003 Second Edition version 4.21.x.
As others have indirectly pointed out, these don't exist either
> I wasn't mixing the CE versioning at all. I just did not want to type
>out the entire names.
Unfortunately, you really need to, because pieces are ambiguous.
> They may have changed the names across versions, but the version
>numbers from PPC3 to Windows Mobile 5 sure look sequential to me.
>
>
>
>
>> > Here are my questions:
>> > - If I upgrade the SDK to 6, should I uninstall the two above?
You can simultaneously install all the SDKs a specific compiler
supports. And you can at least sometimes install multiple compilers
(VC 6, eVC 3, eVC 4, ...) simultaneously. Although I've become
enamored of virtual machines and am inclined to install one compiler
(with all SDKs it supports) per virtual machine.
>>
>> There is no SDK "upgrade". All SDKs are installed side-by-side. Some
>> versions of Visual Studio will support this one and that one (Windows Mobile
>> 5 and Pocket PC 2003), and not another (Pocket PC 2002), but there's no need
>> to install only those supported by your version of VS. If you install the
>> WM5 SDK, the *only* support in there is WM5, no WM6, no Pocket PC 2003.
>> Install the SDKs for the versions of Windows Mobile you need to target.
Alternate explanation: each SDK supports one and only one platform. So
the original Pocket PC has an SDK, Pocket PC 2003 has an SDK,
Smartphone 2003 has an SDK, etc.
>
> OK.
> The newest version of SDK6 I saw is a 'refresh'. Which means it's an
>upgrade. It even states that prior versions of SDK6 have to be
>uninstalled prior to installation.
Coming out with a new version of an SDK that replaces on older version
of that SDK makes sense. Requiring an uninstall for the previous
version is unusual, except when the earlier version is a beta. I would
be surprised if installation of one SDK (e.g., Windows Mobile 5
Professional) required uninstalling another (e.g., Windows Mob lie 5
Standard).
> So this remains true with SDK6. I did not know that. Sometime last
>year I was told or read that SDK6 was a replacement for prior
>versions.
> As a result, I was under the impression that Microsoft was changing
>the paradigm.
They have changed the naming convention several times. From dull to
really bad.
>
>
>> > - What versions of Windows Mobile does SDK 6 support? I was unable to
>> > find a clear list.
Each SDK supports one and only one platform. And each platform is
based on (or maybe part of) one and only one version of Windows
Mobile. See above.
-----------------------------------------
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 400
Boston, MA 02116
www.penfact.com
ISDi
Wow. Thanx for all the descriptive answers. All of you helped clear
up different aspects of my issue.
Thank You.
Product Names & Product Versions:
OK.
All the answers say the same thing in one way or another.
Take a look at the image at http://img248.imageshack.us/img248/7356/versionssmall.png.
The image is a collage from three of the devices I use for testing.
What does the version number under the Product Name reference?
I totally accept that I have misunderstood what those version numbers
refer to. I did not think that they reference the version of WinCE on
which they were based.
Platform Targetting:
OK.
I picked up some bad info. This has been corrected. Thank You.
I did not install SDK 6 because of the bad info I had and I had no
need to install it. I will have a requirement to target Windows Mobile
6 starting in about 30 days.
Visual Studio:
I never said I had VS 9 / VS 2008. I said I have VS 8 / 2005.
I often refer to VS 2005 it as VS 8 because that what it states in
the about box. Also because because it's easier for me to think in
terms of VS 6, VS 7, VS 7.1, VS 8 instead of VS 6, VS 2002, VS 2003,
VS 2005, etc.
Proper Names:
The point is spot on. I should have taken the time from the start to
fully type what I meant.
So, to sum it up:
- There is no need to uninstall other windows mobile, etc SDKs.
This was based on bad information and I did not see anything about it
on the Windows Mobile Developer Center or though a web search. Hence
asking here.
- In general terms, to target a given platform, I still need to get
the SDK for that platform.
- To support Pocket PC 2002, I still need Embedded VC 4.x (Which I
*think* I have installed on the computer where I have VS 6 installed).
- Windows Mobile 6.5 Developer Kit does require Visual Studio 2008
(VS 9.x?).
The requirement appears to be for the simulators and other tools. I
could probably get away with compiling and linking as long as I manage
details.
- Whether the DTK is useful or not is up in the air.
I am sure that once I use the tools, they will be useful. Right now,
I don't see anything that makes me think I 'must' install it.
Thank You for all of the answers. I really appreciate them since the
initial questions appears confusing.
-isdi-
r_z_...@pen_fact.com
wrote:
>Ola Folks,
>
> Wow. Thanx for all the descriptive answers. All of you helped clear
>up different aspects of my issue.
> Thank You.
>
> Product Names & Product Versions:
> OK.
> All the answers say the same thing in one way or another.
> Take a look at the image at http://img248.imageshack.us/img248/7356/versionssmall.png.
>The image is a collage from three of the devices I use for testing.
>What does the version number under the Product Name reference?
Ah, yes. Not only has Microsoft made a mess out of the names for the
platforms, but the About boxes are confusing (not quite the right
word, but I can't do better without being improper). The version
number refers to the underlying Windows CE operating system!
clip
>
> - To support Pocket PC 2002, I still need Embedded VC 4.x (Which I
>*think* I have installed on the computer where I have VS 6 installed).
Actually, you may need eVC 3. I know the Pocket PC 2002 SDK came out
when eVC 3 was around, and I still use them. I installed eVC 4 and
still use it occasionally, but never tried to use it with older SDKs.
I will also point out that it is possible to build for Pocket PC 2002
and have executables that run on all later Pocket PCs. That's what I
do. But you may not like being restricted to _highest_ common
denominator. And you won't be able to debug directly on newer
platforms. And you might not like eVC 3 or eVC 4.
>
>
>Thank You for all of the answers. I really appreciate them since the
>initial questions appears confusing.
The sections of this note that I deleted suggest your fog is clearing.
Good news!