Discussion : Programming Language
Christian Morency
As way of knowing what people would like as an on-board programming
language for Windows CE, I have decided to start this discussion.
The lack of support regarding programming language by Microsoft is
almost a shame. VC++ and the VC++ add-on requires an investment that few
people can afford. Long time ago, Microsoft started out by creating a
small Basic, they included a similar Basic on the Model 100 (a small
handsheld PC partially designed by Bill Gates) and still used by some
journalist !
On the other hand, some developers had good ideas like BasiCE and
PocketC which are probably to date the only available programming tool
for WindowsCE. However, BasiCE is somehow lacking a general
compatibility with standard Basic or, for that matters, anything near
QBasic. PocketC is, well, C like *smile*, why write 30 lines of codes
when you simply want to display a line !
I hope people will reply to this post so that a developer out there will
listen to the user. After all, Psion user has their Epoc, TI-8x has
their TI-Basic and other, Why can't we have our own on-board
"transparent" programming language !
Here's what I would like to have :
- Simple programming language that can controls the WindowsCE API
- QBasic-like would be great...
- Possibility of compiling .exe file or cross-compiling using VC++
add-on for WinCE !!! A MUST.
Please continue to talk about this, it might mean something in the end
*smile*.
Best,
Chris Morency
Benoit_...@my-dejanews.com
a basic like one would be good. It is very hard to use the win32 api from
any basic like language specially because of the lack of unsigned data types
and of function pointers. The Win32 api was designed for a C like language
and I think that we would need some thing like that. Also I'm not sure I can
see why you would want the language to be crosscompilable using the VC++ add
on, if you have the ressource to buy it you wouldn't need to use this
integrated language in the first place. I actually think that it would be
best if this language was at least partially interpreted so it could run on
all the different cpus which are outthere for CE.
I think my wish list would be almost completely answered by a Java SDK in
rom. This would allow us to run all those java applet which are outthere and
to easily create with a simple text editor some java applications. The Visual
J++ WinCE addon requires way too much ram to be even remotely usable, and a
Java VM should be in rom anyway. I don't really care if the JVM would use the
sun specification or if it was extended with MS specific extensions as long
as all winCE machine have one which is compatible. This would actually be a
great way for microsoft to impose its own flavor of java
>
> Here's what I would like to have :
>
> - Simple programming language that can controls the WindowsCE API
> - QBasic-like would be great...
> - Possibility of compiling .exe file or cross-compiling using VC++
> add-on for WinCE !!! A MUST.
--
Benoit Cerrina
Benoit....@writeme.com (no spam please)
www.geocities.com/siliconvalley/peaks/240
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum
Benoit_...@my-dejanews.com
sizes would fit very well within the limited ressources of a CE machine.
Ben Goetter
says...
> - QBasic-like would be great...
Hey, whatever.
Aside from my Scheme (possibly the first programming language to be
hosted on the P/PC), I know of versions of XLisp and Python for the H/PC.
And I believe I remember hearing of a Forth for the H/PC. "Let a hundred
flowers bloom." Icon would be cool, as would Prolog.
Next Pocket Scheme copious-free-time feature: better Winapi support.
Christian Morency
> > - QBasic-like would be great...
> Hey, whatever.
As you said, whatever... it's not that I'm fond with QBasic, it's just
that it is easy, many people could write for it...
> Aside from my Scheme (possibly the first programming language to be
> hosted on the P/PC), I know of versions of XLisp and Python for the
> H/PC.
> And I believe I remember hearing of a Forth for the H/PC. "Let a
> hundred
> flowers bloom." Icon would be cool, as would Prolog.
Scripting language can be good, as long as they would permit a good use
of the API... I have yet to see any software written for any Windows CE
version of these software *smile*... As for BasiCE, well at least people
released some programs. The main problem I think is the lack of
compiling procedure, ie on how to make your software a stand-alone ! Eh,
C and C++ console-type programming would be great, but we would need a
way to compile without the VC++ and VC++ Add-on.
I've taken a look at Python, the python.org website doesn't host a lot
of documentation or tutorials... it's not that I'm lazy, but I'm pretty
sure the user out there are looking for a simple and in your face
programming language, not a language you have to spend several hours
just to learn how to display a simple line !
Take a look at Epoc32 and TI-whatever their language *smile*, if I
remember right, they even released a compiler for TI-Basic, that
translate the program to asm...
> Next Pocket Scheme copious-free-time feature: better Winapi support.
I haven't look at Scheme... yet... and you probably still need the
scheme program to run your program. The only language out there that
doesn't requires the interpreter is probably PocketC, yet you need to
have the runtime !
Best,
Rich Falconburg
before it can be truly useful to build applications. Same with PocketC. I
like it --- as far as it goes. Having to invest big $$ for a bloated
environment just to write a simple tool is how big business thinks. I
remember the days of writing some very useful utilities using BASIC alone
and in most every case it was included with the computer. Let's be
honest... in many ways these little boxes have more than twice the power of
some of those early PCs. There's really no reason a capable programming
language couldn't be written that runs ON the H/PC. There are other
environments such as XLisp and Python but we need something for the masses.
Christian Morency wrote in message <35AB8F86...@geocities.com>...
<snip>
>Here's what I would like to have :
>
>- Simple programming language that can controls the WindowsCE API
>- QBasic-like would be great...
>- Possibility of compiling .exe file or cross-compiling using VC++
>add-on for WinCE !!! A MUST.
>
Ben Goetter
> scheme program to run your program. The only language out there that
Correct. No point in finishing the half-done runtime-only work until I
get a little further with the Winapi support. If ever.
> I've taken a look at Python, the python.org website doesn't host a lot
> of documentation or tutorials...
www.python.org? Please look again! (Not that I'm a Python advocate -
I'm already betrothed to another unpopular language - but lack of
documentation is less of a problem in this particular case than others.)
> scheme program to run your program. The only language out there that
> doesn't requires the interpreter is probably PocketC, yet you need to
> have the runtime !
You'll need some form of runtime support for just about anything -
including the much-ballyhooed Java, or C++ apps written with (ugh) MFC.
More a question of distribution mechanism and size overhead than anything
else. The higher-level the runtime, the more likely that your H-P applet
will run on a NEC. The smaller the runtime, the more likely that it will
be distributed with the applet. Embed the runtime into the applet, and
you solve distribution at the expense of storage overhead. Tradeoffs.
len lutz
things
like declarations, but included data structures, and even arrays of
structured. all goto's
(and gosub's) could use lables, so it felt like a function call. (ok, all
global vars.... I know).
As much i like c/c++, it seems that basic runs (all be it a bit slower), on
a smaller
platform. The basic for the newton was a wonderful product (ask J,
Schettino).
Sonething like it would be great for the "Palm Sized"
Christian Morency wrote:
> Hi,
>
> As way of knowing what people would like as an on-board programming
> language for Windows CE, I have decided to start this discussion.
>
> The lack of support regarding programming language by Microsoft is
> almost a shame. VC++ and the VC++ add-on requires an investment that few
> people can afford. Long time ago, Microsoft started out by creating a
> small Basic, they included a similar Basic on the Model 100 (a small
> handsheld PC partially designed by Bill Gates) and still used by some
> journalist !
>
> On the other hand, some developers had good ideas like BasiCE and
> PocketC which are probably to date the only available programming tool
> for WindowsCE. However, BasiCE is somehow lacking a general
> compatibility with standard Basic or, for that matters, anything near
> QBasic. PocketC is, well, C like *smile*, why write 30 lines of codes
> when you simply want to display a line !
>
> I hope people will reply to this post so that a developer out there will
> listen to the user. After all, Psion user has their Epoc, TI-8x has
> their TI-Basic and other, Why can't we have our own on-board
> "transparent" programming language !
>
> Here's what I would like to have :
>
> - Simple programming language that can controls the WindowsCE API
> - QBasic-like would be great...
> - Possibility of compiling .exe file or cross-compiling using VC++
> add-on for WinCE !!! A MUST.
>
> Please continue to talk about this, it might mean something in the end
> *smile*.
>
> Best,
> Chris Morency
--
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Most of what I have learned was taught to me by others.
That requires me to teach others what I have learned.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Tim Nicholson
database apps -- more powerful than can be created with VisualCE or
mobileForms.
Including the following capabilities:
* filters -- on status or categories or whatever
* customizable toolbars including "quick search" fields
* multiple screens through the use of tabs
* custom menus which can launch other apps, run "macros", etc.
* Auto-synchronization -- could perhaps be obtained simply by accessing MS
Access tables supported by the new CE ADO product.
I think this would accommodate most of my needs, but it would be great to
have a more traditional programming language too. This would allow amateur
programmers (or real developers for that matter) to create more robust
programs.
The problem with the current programming languages like BasiCE are that they
are console-driven not event/object driven and they don't give access to the
CE object store or any other CE/Win32 functions...
Does anyone have experience with Epoc32? What is it like? What are some
apps written with it? Can you, for example, create forms-based database
apps? Telnet? Browsers? Games?
----------------------
Christian Morency wrote in message <35AB8F86...@geocities.com>...
jim...@my-dejanews.com
In article <OdoZ9I2...@uppssnewspub05.moswest.msn.net>,
"Rich Falconburg" <rich_fa...@pgn.com> wrote:
> I can't agree more. BasicCE has real potential but needs more added
> before it can be truly useful to build applications. Same with PocketC. I
> like it --- as far as it goes. Having to invest big $$ for a bloated
> environment just to write a simple tool is how big business thinks. I
> remember the days of writing some very useful utilities using BASIC alone
> and in most every case it was included with the computer. Let's be
> honest... in many ways these little boxes have more than twice the power of
> some of those early PCs. There's really no reason a capable programming
> language couldn't be written that runs ON the H/PC. There are other
> environments such as XLisp and Python but we need something for the masses.
>
> Christian Morency wrote in message <35AB8F86...@geocities.com>...
>
> <snip>
>
> >Here's what I would like to have :
> >
> >- Simple programming language that can controls the WindowsCE API
> >- QBasic-like would be great...
> >- Possibility of compiling .exe file or cross-compiling using VC++
> >add-on for WinCE !!! A MUST.
> >
> >Please continue to talk about this, it might mean something in the end
> >*smile*.
> >
> >Best,
> >Chris Morency
> >
> >
> >
>
>
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
John N Pocock
Python port, but then Python by default expects to use Tk as its GUI engine
(as far as I can understand the info on python.org), and the Scheme port,
which has no GUI (I think), and surely we will only get "mass market"
programming going on CE if people can easily develop windows apps.
John N Pocock
===========
Christian Morency <anaki...@geocities.com> wrote in article
<35AB8F86...@geocities.com>...
> Hi,
>
> As way of knowing what people would like as an on-board programming
> language for Windows CE, I have decided to start this discussion.
>
> The lack of support regarding programming language by Microsoft is
> almost a shame. VC++ and the VC++ add-on requires an investment that few
> people can afford. Long time ago, Microsoft started out by creating a
> small Basic, they included a similar Basic on the Model 100 (a small
> handsheld PC partially designed by Bill Gates) and still used by some
> journalist !
>
> On the other hand, some developers had good ideas like BasiCE and
> PocketC which are probably to date the only available programming tool
> for WindowsCE. However, BasiCE is somehow lacking a general
> compatibility with standard Basic or, for that matters, anything near
> QBasic. PocketC is, well, C like *smile*, why write 30 lines of codes
> when you simply want to display a line !
>
> I hope people will reply to this post so that a developer out there will
> listen to the user. After all, Psion user has their Epoc, TI-8x has
> their TI-Basic and other, Why can't we have our own on-board
> "transparent" programming language !
>
Benoit_...@my-dejanews.com
can see if you read the discussion on the pythonCE page
(http://www.digicool.com/~brian/PythonCE/index.html)
good luck for scheme, I'm waiting for the api support impatiently
In article <MPG.10154da8f...@news.halcyon.com>,
goe...@angrygraycat.com.xyz (Ben Goetter) wrote:
> In article <35AB8F86...@geocities.com>, anaki...@geocities.com
> says...
> > - QBasic-like would be great...
>
> Hey, whatever.
>
> Aside from my Scheme (possibly the first programming language to be
> hosted on the P/PC), I know of versions of XLisp and Python for the H/PC.
> And I believe I remember hearing of a Forth for the H/PC. "Let a hundred
> flowers bloom." Icon would be cool, as would Prolog.
>
> Next Pocket Scheme copious-free-time feature: better Winapi support.
>
--
Benoit Cerrina
Benoit....@writeme.com (no spam please)
www.geocities.com/siliconvalley/peaks/240
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
Bruce Sutherland
I don't see what the big deal is. All you need to program an HPC is an
NT 4 based system, an HPC, Visual C++, and the Visual C++ for WinCE
add-on. (Plus reference books and other "small" expenses). What could
be simpler? Everyone must have a spare $5000 or so lying around to
invest in this! (At least Microsoft must think so!)
;)
On Tue, 14 Jul 1998 17:01:06 GMT, Christian Morency
<anaki...@geocities.com> wrote:
>Hi,
>
>As way of knowing what people would like as an on-board programming
>language for Windows CE, I have decided to start this discussion...
Evan Ruff
source and compile for Mac/Windows/Linux/Windows CE! This would great!
Evan
John N Pocock wrote in message <01bdafc3$d8bfbd90$91c809c0@wimborne>...
Alasdair Manson
<anaki...@geocities.com> wrote:
>After all, Psion user has their Epoc
The programming language shipped off-the-shelf as part of the EPOC
application suite is called OPL which stands for Organiser Programming
Language (it's origin is in the Psion Organiser II product - derived
from Psion Archive)
There is no reason why MS couldn't license OPL from Symbian and create
a Windows CE version - OPL is a tokenised, runtime-interpreted
language and is, therefore, platform-independent.
It is true that OPL offers a very thin layer to objects which are
stored in the ROM of various EPOC devices (for obvious reasons) but
there is no reason why a CE implementation shouldn't map to suitable
Win API calls.
Why not send MS mail asking them to license OPL :-) Feel free to give
them my name as a point of contact within Symbian...
regards
Alasdair
A Symbian employee in a personal capacity
Rich Wellner
says...
> sure the user out there are looking for a simple and in your face
> programming language, not a language you have to spend several hours
> just to learn how to display a simple line !
Try www.cetus-links.org for links concerning Python. Also to save you
several hours that line is:
print 'hello world'
:)
rw2
Jim Dompier
>
> As way of knowing what people would like as an on-board programming
>
> The lack of support regarding programming language by Microsoft is
> almost a shame. VC++ and the VC++ add-on requires an investment that few
> people can afford. Long time ago, Microsoft started out by creating a
> small Basic, they included a similar Basic on the Model 100 (a small
> handsheld PC partially designed by Bill Gates) and still used by some
> journalist !
>
> On the other hand, some developers had good ideas like BasiCE and
> PocketC which are probably to date the only available programming tool
> for WindowsCE. However, BasiCE is somehow lacking a general
> compatibility with standard Basic or, for that matters, anything near
> QBasic. PocketC is, well, C like *smile*, why write 30 lines of codes
> when you simply want to display a line !
>
> I hope people will reply to this post so that a developer out there will
> listen to the user. After all, Psion user has their Epoc, TI-8x has
> their TI-Basic and other, Why can't we have our own on-board
> "transparent" programming language !
>
> Here's what I would like to have :
>
> - Simple programming language that can controls the WindowsCE API
> add-on for WinCE !!! A MUST.
>
> Please continue to talk about this, it might mean something in the end
> *smile*.
>
> Best,
> Chris Morency
>
I *thought* I had read in a trade journal or possible from the MSDN that
an add on for Visual Basic was in the works. I cannot remember where I
read this but I will try and confirm it for later posting. I would like
to write some apps for WinCE PPC in VB....
--
Jim Dompier
Jim Dompier
says...
>
> I don't see what the big deal is. All you need to program an HPC is an
> NT 4 based system, an HPC, Visual C++, and the Visual C++ for WinCE
> add-on. (Plus reference books and other "small" expenses). What could
> be simpler? Everyone must have a spare $5000 or so lying around to
> invest in this! (At least Microsoft must think so!)
>
One of the strengths of Visual Basic is, it allows just about anyone to
write software, quickly and relatively inexpensive, for the Windows
Platform. This strengthens Windows as a platform and Microsoft knows
this.
They are in need of a similar situation with Windows CE. It would be in
there best interest to have WinCE development capability built in to VB
and VC++ without any additional costs to the developer.
Perhaps they are pre occupied with other things and are not thinking
smart these days...
--
Jim Dompier
Christian Morency
> Try www.cetus-links.org for links concerning Python. Also to save you
>
> several hours that line is:
> print 'hello world'
Read the tutorial a little bit today... and noticed that command
*blush*...
Best,
Chris
Christian Morency
Answers embedded,
> The programming language shipped off-the-shelf as part of the EPOC
> application suite is called OPL which stands for Organiser Programming
>
> Language (it's origin is in the Psion Organiser II product - derived
> from Psion Archive)
Sorry for not knowing about the difference between Epoc and OPL.
Unfortunately, I haven't touched a Psion yet... and sometimes would like
just to have more control over my HPC *smile*
> There is no reason why MS couldn't license OPL from Symbian and create
>
> a Windows CE version - OPL is a tokenised, runtime-interpreted
> language and is, therefore, platform-independent.
HEY Microsoft, been listening to any of this !!! *smile*
> It is true that OPL offers a very thin layer to objects which are
> stored in the ROM of various EPOC devices (for obvious reasons) but
> there is no reason why a CE implementation shouldn't map to suitable
> Win API calls.
That would be a great idea of course, unfortunately, MS might be a
little bit possessive about their OS and might consider this an attempt
to insert another programming language in their CE... I sometimes wonde
if they really want the end-day-to-day-user to have such controls over
the CE OS ! Maybe they only want the CE software to be developped by
VC++ developers !
> Why not send MS mail asking them to license OPL :-) Feel free to give
> them my name as a point of contact within Symbian...
Well, will MS acknowledge or even reply, I would highly be interested in
seeing something as OPL on Windows CE !
Best,
Chris
Benoit_...@my-dejanews.com
>
> That would be a great idea of course, unfortunately, MS might be a
> little bit possessive about their OS and might consider this an attempt
> to insert another programming language in their CE... I sometimes wonde
> if they really want the end-day-to-day-user to have such controls over
> the CE OS ! Maybe they only want the CE software to be developped by
> VC++ developers !
>
I think that a realistic expectation would be to have the windows scripting
host ported to windowsCE. Its a free download for 95 NT with some samples and
you can try it it allows you to do some scripting using vbscript or jscript
and possibly other scripting languages which have to be plugged in (I don't
believe any other are available now) this is integrated in Win98 and in NT5.0
and since its a Microsoft product this would satisfy any qualms they might
have about third party software inbedded in winCE -- Benoit Cerrina
Ben Goetter
dejanews.com says...
> I think that a realistic expectation would be to have the windows scripting
> host ported to windowsCE.
Once WCE supports cross-process COM, that would make a lot of sense. As
of 2.0, however, the scripting host wouldn't be able to do much
scripting.
Ben Goetter
says...
> There is no reason why MS couldn't license OPL from Symbian and create
> a Windows CE version - OPL is a tokenised, runtime-interpreted
> language and is, therefore, platform-independent.
Very amusing. As if Microsoft doesn't have any tokenized, interpreted
languages of its own.
Scott Krug
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsce/hpc/developer/wcetkvb.asp
Jim Dompier wrote in message ...
Scott Krug
Benoit_...@my-dejanews.com wrote in message
<6ol1r2$imd$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
>
>>
>> That would be a great idea of course, unfortunately, MS might be a
>> little bit possessive about their OS and might consider this an attempt
>> to insert another programming language in their CE... I sometimes wonde
>> if they really want the end-day-to-day-user to have such controls over
>> the CE OS ! Maybe they only want the CE software to be developped by
>> VC++ developers !
>>
>
>I think that a realistic expectation would be to have the windows scripting
John Musielewicz
Like what?
Sent using LXTCP and the HP 200LX
"A portable solution"
Eric Foster-Johnson
be useful on CE. (Always use the right hammer for the
job.) I'm most interested in Tcl/Tk because it
works reasonably well on a Win32 platform and allows
you to create graphic user interfaces.
Tcl/Tk is written in C and a Win32 port is available.
See www.scriptics.com for the sources. The "Tk" part
(the GUI toolkit) is used by other languages such
as Perl and Python for creating UIs.
Have fun,
-Eric
--
Eric Foster-Johnson
http://www.pconline.com/~erc/
mail: e...@pconline.com
GTE
CE? I am sure there would be a big market for this. Unfortunately, I don't
think this would be the best marketing move at the moment for Psion...
Alasdair Manson wrote in message <35ad36cd....@nntp1.ba.best.com>...
>On Tue, 14 Jul 1998 17:01:06 GMT, Christian Morency
><anaki...@geocities.com> wrote:
>
>>After all, Psion user has their Epoc
>
>The programming language shipped off-the-shelf as part of the EPOC
>application suite is called OPL which stands for Organiser Programming
>Language (it's origin is in the Psion Organiser II product - derived
>from Psion Archive)
>
>There is no reason why MS couldn't license OPL from Symbian and create
>a Windows CE version - OPL is a tokenised, runtime-interpreted
>language and is, therefore, platform-independent.
>
>It is true that OPL offers a very thin layer to objects which are
>stored in the ROM of various EPOC devices (for obvious reasons) but
>there is no reason why a CE implementation shouldn't map to suitable
>Win API calls.
>
>Why not send MS mail asking them to license OPL :-) Feel free to give
>them my name as a point of contact within Symbian...
>
Alasdair Manson
Goetter) wrote:
>Very amusing.
I wasn't being flippant
>As if Microsoft doesn't have any tokenized, interpreted
>languages of its own.
In which case, it goes back to the original, perfectly fair in my
opinion, question - why doesn't CE ship with a simple, yet powerful,
high-level language out of the box ?
Perhaps the languages you are alluding to aren't appropriate for
highly mobile devices ? Is that it ?
Ben Goetter
says...
> In which case, it goes back to the original, perfectly fair in my
> opinion, question - why doesn't CE ship with a simple, yet powerful,
> high-level language out of the box ?
Presumably because neither the WCE product definition team nor any of the
many WCE OEMs who own the actual boxes you're naming thought it was
important enough to waste engineer time.
This is a minute market: people who actually want to write programs on
their mobile devices, wrists and eyesight be damned. Up to us ISVs to
see if there's any market at all.
Ben Goetter
> > This is a minute market: people who actually want to write programs on
> > their mobile devices, wrists and eyesight be damned.
>
> useful.
Well, to you and me, sure. And if it had a blood-gas calculator in ROM,
it'd be more useful to a paramedic or ER type. But neither of us make a
big enough market to justify the engineering expenditure at the OEM
level.
Death to Spammers!!!
>
>What's about porting the great PIM applications of the Psion 5 to Windows
>CE? I am sure there would be a big market for this. Unfortunately, I don't
>think this would be the best marketing move at the moment for Psion...
And how about you all buy a Series5 ?
Then, all your problems to find a build-in easy_to_learn
tokenized_and_processor_independent language will end ;-)
Regards
--
Amandio J.S. Bacalhau < kr...@mail.geocities.ooops >
(To email cut 'ooops' and use 'com' instead)
John Musielewicz
> In article <35ae902d...@nntp1.ba.best.com>, ali-m...@psion.com
> says...
> > In which case, it goes back to the original, perfectly fair in my
> > opinion, question - why doesn't CE ship with a simple, yet powerful,
> > high-level language out of the box ?
>
> Presumably because neither the WCE product definition team nor any of the
> many WCE OEMs who own the actual boxes you're naming thought it was
> important enough to waste engineer time.
>
Goes to show the PDT doesn't understand the market their defining
for. The OEM's just follow the product definition.
> This is a minute market: people who actually want to write programs on
> their mobile devices, wrists and eyesight be damned.
Neither do you, it seems. Being able to program the device on the run makes it more
useful.
Anthony Hook
> > There is no reason why MS couldn't license OPL from Symbian and create
> > a Windows CE version - OPL is a tokenised, runtime-interpreted
> > language and is, therefore, platform-independent.
>
> languages of its own.
Well Ben, why don't they use it then ?
Given that OPL was developed especially for the likes of the PSION, I
would have thought this much easier to port to WinCE rather than playing
around with whatever language you're on about (QBasic?) which is aimed at
PCs using much larger displays.
A agree that this is unlikely as Microsoft are too self involved to do
this - but saying this, they do seem to buy in most of their technology.
Seeing as though EPOC32 is making its way as the standard for small scale
devices such as smart phones, I don't see a good enough reason why PSION
can't do this with OPL as well. Personally though I do find OPL programs a
little tedious to write, even though the language is quiet easy to learn.
Having to suffix integer variables with a % is one thing that annoys me.
... Anthony
r...@nicholson.com
Anthony Hook <a...@cs.bham.ac.uk> wrote:
>> > There is no reason why MS couldn't license OPL from Symbian and create
>>
>> languages of its own.
>Given that OPL was developed especially for the likes of the PSION, I
>would have thought this much easier to port to WinCE rather than playing
>around with whatever language you're on about (QBasic?) which is aimed at
>PCs using much larger displays.
If I recall, M$ wrote the Basic that ran on a TRS-80 Model 100, which
had a much smaller display in total pixels than any CE handheld.
And both OPL and GWBasic are pretty old fashioned compared to modern
embedded languages like jscript.
--
Ron Nicholson r...@nicholson.com http://www.nicholson.com/rhn/
#include <canonical.disclaimer> // only my own opinions, etc.
r...@nicholson.com
Eric Foster-Johnson <e...@pconline.com> wrote:
>I would suggest that a number of scripting languages would
>be useful on CE. (Always use the right hammer for the
>job.) I'm most interested in Tcl/Tk because it
>works reasonably well on a Win32 platform and allows
>you to create graphic user interfaces.
Aren't *nix scripting languages like Perl, Tcl and Python just a little
too big (in terms of memory requirements and cpu cycles) for an
inexpensive battery operated handheld. Moore's law will give you
more memory next year, but not necessarily more cpu cycles per battery.
Bob Wilson
perspective. Their development of Windows CE is not intended specifically
for PPCs and HPCs but for a vast range of embedded applications which
currently use proprietary OS's of one description or another. Many of these
devices do not have keyboards or screens which is why CE is licensed in a
modular fashion. HPC's are but one portion of this enormous market and why
they may be important to us is it really sensible to expect Microsoft to
commit new resources to what is currently a very minor portion of their CE
marketplace?
I also suspect that whoever tackles this problem is in a no-win situation
because we will be looking for different capabilities in a language. Let me
anticipate some the complaints that would be received
1) It isn't object oriented
2) Because its object-oriented programs take up far too much memory and
run very slow
3) Its too slow because its an interpreted language
4) I can't write large applications because there is no linker and a
single monolithic file would be too large to handle
5) I only want to write simple programs, the progam editor, compiler and
linker take up too much valuable program space and require large amounts of
RAM at run-time.
6) A bug in my program caused the HPC to crash and the only way I could
recover it was to remove the power-supply and back-up battery for a few
seconds, replace them, re-boot my machine, restore data from my PC which
caused problems because wiping all the data from the HPC meant that the user
profile had been lost and a new partnership with the PC had to be
created....add further nightmare scenarios (and punctuation) at will.
And so it goes. I apologise if this sounds cynical, its not intended to be.
As a professional programmer I would love to able to develop programs for my
CE device in situ. Like others on this list who have expressed opinions I
find it frustrating that I cannot find a suitable language, the real problem
is that we have different requirements and expectations.
Bob
Alasdair Manson wrote in message <35ae902d...@nntp1.ba.best.com>...
>On Thu, 16 Jul 1998 09:19:40 -0700, goe...@angrygraycat.com.xyz (Ben
>Goetter) wrote:
>
>>Very amusing.
>
>I wasn't being flippant
>
>>As if Microsoft doesn't have any tokenized, interpreted
>>languages of its own.
>
>In which case, it goes back to the original, perfectly fair in my
>opinion, question - why doesn't CE ship with a simple, yet powerful,
>high-level language out of the box ?
>
Eric Eilebrecht
to script existing apps - but if you just want to use it to write simple
programs on the road, dll servers are perfectly adequate.
That said, I think a better way to do this would be to include a Web browser
with support for JavaScript (and VBScript). That way your programs could
have UI's that are appropriate to a pen-based machine (rather than the
command-line-based WSH).
Eric
Ben Goetter wrote in message ...
>In article <6ol1r2$imd$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, Benoit_Cerrina@my-
>dejanews.com says...
>> I think that a realistic expectation would be to have the windows
scripting
>> host ported to windowsCE.
>
Eric Eilebrecht
badly need a Web browser with scripting support. On *both* the HPC and the
PSPC.
Eric
Tim Nicholson wrote in message ...
>Most of the apps that *I* would want to create for CE would be forms-based
>database apps -- more powerful than can be created with VisualCE or
>mobileForms.
>
>Including the following capabilities:
>* filters -- on status or categories or whatever
>* customizable toolbars including "quick search" fields
>* multiple screens through the use of tabs
>* custom menus which can launch other apps, run "macros", etc.
>* Auto-synchronization -- could perhaps be obtained simply by accessing MS
>Access tables supported by the new CE ADO product.
>
>I think this would accommodate most of my needs, but it would be great to
>have a more traditional programming language too. This would allow amateur
>programmers (or real developers for that matter) to create more robust
>programs.
>
>The problem with the current programming languages like BasiCE are that
they
>are console-driven not event/object driven and they don't give access to
the
>CE object store or any other CE/Win32 functions...
>
>Does anyone have experience with Epoc32? What is it like? What are some
>apps written with it? Can you, for example, create forms-based database
>apps? Telnet? Browsers? Games?
>
>----------------------
>Christian Morency wrote in message <35AB8F86...@geocities.com>...
John Musielewicz
> You can't have everything from day one!
Why not?
> Look at this from Microsoft's
> perspective. Their development of Windows CE is not intended specifically
> for PPCs and HPCs but for a vast range of embedded applications which
> currently use proprietary OS's of one description or another. Many of these
> devices do not have keyboards or screens which is why CE is licensed in a
> modular fashion. HPC's are but one portion of this enormous market and why
> they may be important to us is it really sensible to expect Microsoft to
> commit new resources to what is currently a very minor portion of their CE
> marketplace?
>
Of course it is. With customers like you I can see why M$ is so rich.
Your argument would hold water if M$ was a little startup company
that didn't have that much money to spread around.
But its not. Its an enormous corporation with billions behind it.
I've made estimates that the CE handheld platform grossed a half a
billion dollars. Thats not exactly small change and you know M$ took
its share. Plus the fact that software development is not that
expensive compared to the profits. Its not like they building the
handhelds too. They can afford to have a portion of their CE department
set aside to specifically address the needs of palmtoppers even
ones the marketing department disagrees with.
I think that M$ plain isn't going to develop this platform
much, probably just enough so people can halfway use it and
then it'll be see ya, hope you're happy, if not tough. I doubt
they ever intended to.
> Alasdair Manson wrote in message <35ae902d...@nntp1.ba.best.com>...
> >On Thu, 16 Jul 1998 09:19:40 -0700, goe...@angrygraycat.com.xyz (Ben
> >Goetter) wrote:
> >
> >>Very amusing.
> >
> >I wasn't being flippant
> >
> >>As if Microsoft doesn't have any tokenized, interpreted
> >>languages of its own.
> >
> >In which case, it goes back to the original, perfectly fair in my
> >opinion, question - why doesn't CE ship with a simple, yet powerful,
> >high-level language out of the box ?
> >
> >Perhaps the languages you are alluding to aren't appropriate for
> >highly mobile devices ? Is that it ?
> >
> >regards
> >
> >Alasdair
> >A Symbian employee in a personal capacity
> >
>
>
Benoit_...@my-dejanews.com
just a host for the same scripting engines which run on the browser, what I
mean is that if you have the browser with this ability, making the wsh is
very easy and straightforward. On the other end, a full fledge scriptable
browser is a lot more complicated than writing a ce version of wsh. In
article <6ov1nu$o9p$2...@holly.prod.itd.earthlink.net>, "Eric Eilebrecht"
<eri...@earthlink.net> wrote:
Alasdair Manson
<b...@electrosurf.co.uk> wrote:
>2) Because its object-oriented programs take up far too much memory and
>run very slow
That doesn't have to be the case - perhaps your impression has been
skewed by too much exposure to MS technology !
Thanks for your comments.
Bob Wilson
I can happily (!?) go along with that observation
Regards
Bb
Alasdair Manson wrote in message <35b3730c...@nntp1.ba.best.com>...
Michael K. Utvary
It seems to me that there are two basic facts evolving from this
discussion:
a) most of us want to work with an affordable programming language ;
b) due to the different applications, at least two different pl's are
necessary:
One could be a C like thing with GUI support, graphics, sound etc.
delivering progs with fast execution speed. This would surely be the
platform for the developers of games, graphics tools (hell, we still don't
have any draw/view software) etc. Don't laugh, but - as one of you
mentioned in this discussion - some of the HPCs are a lot more powerful
than all those old home computers. Who wouldn't like to run a RPG or an
adventure game on a portable machine ???
The other development platform should be something specialized on forms,
database programming, RAS support, business graphics output, etc. I'm
thinking of an environment similar to VB or MS Access (or a mix of both)
with a lot of predefined, easy to use routines and functions.
Case one is already partially covered by PocketC (Kevin Cao is doing great
work there), but the stability of the environment is still a bit shaky, so
let's wait for improvements. Nice aspect: PocketC can be programmed
directly on the HPC, which reduces boredom in the airport lounge ...
Case two is another pair of socks. To my knowledge, VisualCE does part of
the job, but is database-oriented only. So here a more open language would
be great. Who applies for writing it ? :-)
Ciao, Mike
Eric Eilebrecht
covered by HTML technologies, half of which are already present in WinCE.
All we need is for the browser to support scripting - and we need that
anyway just for general Web browsing.
And I think Java is the obvious answer for the more performance-critical
stiff, but that's certainly debatable. :)
Eric
Michael K. Utvary wrote in message
<01bdb4a1$b75865c0$5eea...@CKRE219W.kni.neste.com>...
Benoit_...@my-dejanews.com
> And I think Java is the obvious answer for the more performance-critical
> stiff, but that's certainly debatable. :)
are you working for sun? The java concept is pretty nice and there are good
things to say about it but I never heard anybody praise java for its
performance!!!
Franck D Rougier
Benoit_...@my-dejanews.com wrote in message
<6oggd1$pm2$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
>An almost perfect candidate would be the windows scripting host, its small
>sizes would fit very well within the limited ressources of a CE machine.
Franck D Rougier
Who really wants to develop application while out in the streets? What kind
of concentration do you get to write a full fledge software while riding the
subway? Get real, maybe what we want is a basic scripting language like the
WSH, JavaScript or VBScript and of course those should be present and
supported in ROM. Also, don't forget about the aim of CE in general. It is
made for all sort of CPUs and hardware. Who would want to program their
point of sale booth?
I think MS made a great job in having most of its development tools
available to the CE platform. However, we might want to ask them for a:
* better web browser with ActiveX, Java and scripting along all the CE
platform (H/PC, P/PC, A/PC and the embedded system)
* Runtime libraries for MFC and Visual Basic build standard in all devices
of course those should be in ROM.
I hope Microsoft hears us especially when MFC and a decent web browser are
missing in the PPC.
Franck.
Eric Eilebrecht
And I wasn't exactly praising Java's performance - but I bet it would be at
least as good as Pocket C (which was someone else's suggestion)....
Eric
Benoit_...@my-dejanews.com wrote in message
<6p2j21$tcr$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
>
>
>> And I think Java is the obvious answer for the more performance-critical
>> stiff, but that's certainly debatable. :)
>are you working for sun? The java concept is pretty nice and there are
good
>things to say about it but I never heard anybody praise java for its
>performance!!!
>
Alasdair Manson
<{remove_this}de...@technologist.com> wrote:
>People Get real!!
>
>Who really wants to develop application while out in the streets? What kind
>of concentration do you get to write a full fledge software while riding the
>subway? Get real
You get real !
Don't slip into the solipsist state where you assume that because you
don't want to develop an application while mobile, nobody else does.
That attitude devalues your contribution almost entirely.
These devices are mobile devices and, just as some people want to
schedule or manage contacts while mobile, other people want to send
messages and write applications while mobile.
Still, with the CE based machines, out of the box, the decision is
made for you - you should be delighted.
Christian Morency
Well back in the late 70's and early 80's that was the fun !!! Easy
programming and all... I must admit that I, to date, has less fun
(serious fun (not about playing game)) with my WinCE than with my old
Model 100 !!!
Example : Now let's say you want to make a simple program to input a
series of entry and make a calculation out of it... of course PExcel
(READ BORING)... way of doing it...
Best,
Chris
Franck D Rougier wrote:
> People Get real!!
>
> Who really wants to develop application while out in the streets? What
> kind
> of concentration do you get to write a full fledge software while
> riding the
Fred Bouvry
>
> I probably shouldn't say who I work for, but it's definately *not*
> Sun. :)
> And I wasn't exactly praising Java's performance - but I bet it would
> be at least as good as Pocket C (which was someone else's
> suggestion)....
No idea for who you are working for :-)
(NNTP-Posting-Host: *.redmond.*)
Java is 'nasty' for Microsoft so there is no point for me to discuss
the advantages of it.
But if one day I have to program in Visual Basic instead of Java,
I think I would quit my job...
Period.
Fred.
--------------------------------------------
Fred Bouvry mailto:f...@mailandnews.com
Psion5 Page: http://users.skynet.be/palmtop/
Benoit_...@my-dejanews.com
> platform (H/PC, P/PC, A/PC and the embedded system)
ActiveX deals with compiled executable and the way it is implemented right
now would probably not be practical for the variety of Cpu available to CE
machine, for the rest I agree interpreted (java) and scripting language
support in rom would be great, I would add a wsh and support for java app,
those would be almost no additional work if we had the browser -- Benoit
Benoit_...@my-dejanews.com
thing as PocketC I think they should have thought of another name for it, it
has nothing to do whatsoever with C, not even the basis of the language, this
should be reserved to compiler at least close to the ANSI standard (usually
with an ANSI mode and some machine or OS specific extensions).
In article <usF#cmTt9...@uppssnewspub05.moswest.msn.net>,
"Eric Eilebrecht" <eri...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> I probably shouldn't say who I work for, but it's definately *not* Sun. :)
> And I wasn't exactly praising Java's performance - but I bet it would be at
> least as good as Pocket C (which was someone else's suggestion)....
>
> Eric
len lutz
while on a cruse).
Franck D Rougier wrote:
> People Get real!!
>
> Who really wants to develop application while out in the streets? What kind
> of concentration do you get to write a full fledge software while riding the
> subway? Get real, maybe what we want is a basic scripting language like the
> WSH, JavaScript or VBScript and of course those should be present and
> supported in ROM. Also, don't forget about the aim of CE in general. It is
> made for all sort of CPUs and hardware. Who would want to program their
> point of sale booth?
> I think MS made a great job in having most of its development tools
> available to the CE platform. However, we might want to ask them for a:
>
> * better web browser with ActiveX, Java and scripting along all the CE
> platform (H/PC, P/PC, A/PC and the embedded system)
--
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Most of what I have learned was taught to me by others.
That requires me to teach others what I have learned.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Franck D Rougier
I never said I didn't want to develop application for my CE machine, but I
should have said that I use a P/PC. These machine don't have keyboards and
entering text is as painful as it is for me to be masochist and want to
write even the simplest code.
It is another issue when you talk about H/PC.... Anyway, it's true that I
enjoy programming in assembly on my HP48GX which has a wide array of
languages...
About :
>Still, with the CE based machines, out of the box, the decision is
>made for you - you should be delighted.
I don't want Bill to make decision on what I want and you know the attitude
I have against MS. But tell me do we have any choice? I "choose" MS because
there is no other option in this vast and closed market.
Franck.
Alasdair Manson wrote in message <35b56ca2....@nntp1.ba.best.com>...
>On Tue, 21 Jul 1998 23:32:12 -0400, "Franck D Rougier"
><{remove_this}de...@technologist.com> wrote:
>
>>People Get real!!
>>
>>Who really wants to develop application while out in the streets? What
kind
>>of concentration do you get to write a full fledge software while riding
the
Phil Fraering
> In article <35AE3D42...@pconline.com>,
> Eric Foster-Johnson <e...@pconline.com> wrote:
> >I would suggest that a number of scripting languages would
> >be useful on CE. (Always use the right hammer for the
> >job.) I'm most interested in Tcl/Tk because it
> >works reasonably well on a Win32 platform and allows
> >you to create graphic user interfaces.
> Aren't *nix scripting languages like Perl, Tcl and Python just a little
> too big (in terms of memory requirements and cpu cycles) for an
> inexpensive battery operated handheld. Moore's law will give you
> more memory next year, but not necessarily more cpu cycles per battery.
Well, since the processors shrink, you will get less power consumed per
clock cycle as well; this has been the case, at least, on non-intel
CPU's.
And Python is apparently already available for Windows CE, as is
a smalltalk implementation called Squeak.
--
Phil Fraering "I invented the term /object oriented/, and I can
p...@globalreach.net tell you I did not have C++ in mind." - Alan Kay
/Will work for *tape*/
Benoit_...@my-dejanews.com
>
> And Python is apparently already available for Windows CE, as is
> a smalltalk implementation called Squeak.
this one might work but I couldn't figure it out (never used small talk
before) I'll try again when I have time
TJG
>
>Hi Franck,
>
>Well back in the late 70's and early 80's that was the fun !!! Easy
>programming and all... I must admit that I, to date, has less fun
>(serious fun (not about playing game)) with my WinCE than with my old
>Model 100 !!!
>
>Example : Now let's say you want to make a simple program to input a
>series of entry and make a calculation out of it... of course PExcel
>(READ BORING)... way of doing it...
>
>Best,
>Chris
>
Chris,
You know, I've said much the same thing on a listserver thread and got much the
same reply from the 'professional' programmers that I've seen here. Everyone
else (those who work with computers as an end product) seems to want some high
powered application development language or some out-of-the-mainstream language
which they personally know. From my conversations with other engineers here in
the field, not IT-types but plain ole' EEs, MEs, and CEs, what they want is a
simple tool THEY can use to write a simple program in without having to take
more courses from the computer weenies.
It really is hell having the 'customees' telling the 'customers' what they may
or may not know. I wonder how the world ever invented computers if there were
no IT departments around or degreed computer geeks??? couldn't have been that
smart people could understand this stuff without having a professor pour the
'best way' into their ears, could it???
--
" "
Buster Keaton, "The General"
abtec
Rich Falconburg <rich_fa...@pgn.com> wrote in article
<OdoZ9I2...@uppssnewspub05.moswest.msn.net>...
[deleted]
> environment just to write a simple tool is how big business thinks. I
> remember the days of writing some very useful utilities using BASIC alone
> and in most every case it was included with the computer. Let's be
> honest... in many ways these little boxes have more than twice the power
of
> some of those early PCs. There's really no reason a capable programming
[deleted]
I agree. My XT with a whole 512K ram, and 720K FDD ran Basic. But you
must realise that the HPC running Windows CE needs a hell of a lot more
resources. So I suppose you have options, go back to them historic days or
put up with whats offered or make your own.
I like many others would love to create the basic you are talking about,
but everybody wants everything for nothing. :-) If somebody paid something
I like many others would be interested.
And yes, I also agree with the arguement of bloated applications. If you
want a light weight, then you have to put up with the lack of
functionality. If you want rich functionality, then you have to put up
with the bloatness.
Regards
Leigh
Rich Falconburg
abtec wrote in message <01bdb44b$cbbdc380$LocalHost@leejen>...
>
>I like many others would love to create the basic you are talking about,
>but everybody wants everything for nothing. :-) If somebody paid something
>I like many others would be interested.
I understand your frustration and you're absolutely right. It's
unfortunate. There are a few of us that will actually pay for sofware that
fits our need and performs as advertised but I realize that's a pretty small
percentage. I'm giving PocketC a serious look since it's more fully
developed than anything else I've run across. It will take more work but
may be the best bet for now and at $25 it's a steal. Too bad there hasn't
been more developement on BASICE. It's really a good start.
>And yes, I also agree with the arguement of bloated applications. If you
>want a light weight, then you have to put up with the lack of
>functionality. If you want rich functionality, then you have to put up
>with the bloatness.
>
Lack of certain functions is not a problem. It's the exclusion of some
basic capabilities to include things many will never use that frustrates me.
I realize that graphics and whizbang bells and wistles are all the rage but
often there is so much overhead absorbed to include some of this that a lean
and mean enviroment goes wanting. Power is not always equivalent to rich
functionality.
>Regards
>Leigh
>
Still peckin'
rich
Alasdair Manson
>If you
>want a light weight, then you have to put up with the lack of
>functionality. If you want rich functionality, then you have to put up
>with the bloatness.
Just because that is the case with some OS, it isn't the case with all
OS and customers have a choice. There are alternatives.
abtec
Then select away.
Horses for courses?
Regards
Leigh
Alasdair Manson <ali-m...@psion.com> wrote in article
<35bd0347...@nntp1.ba.best.com>...
TJG
rich_fa...@pgn.com says...
>
>
>abtec wrote in message <01bdb44b$cbbdc380$LocalHost@leejen>...
>>
>>I like many others would love to create the basic you are talking about,
>>but everybody wants everything for nothing. :-) If somebody paid something
>>I like many others would be interested.
>
>
> I understand your frustration and you're absolutely right. It's
>unfortunate. There are a few of us that will actually pay for sofware that
>fits our need and performs as advertised but I realize that's a pretty small
>percentage. I'm giving PocketC a serious look since it's more fully
>developed than anything else I've run across. It will take more work but
>may be the best bet for now and at $25 it's a steal. Too bad there hasn't
>been more developement on BASICE. It's really a good start.
>
>>want a light weight, then you have to put up with the lack of
>>functionality. If you want rich functionality, then you have to put up
>>with the bloatness.
>>
>
>basic capabilities to include things many will never use that frustrates me.
>I realize that graphics and whizbang bells and wistles are all the rage but
>often there is so much overhead absorbed to include some of this that a lean
>and mean enviroment goes wanting. Power is not always equivalent to rich
>functionality.
>
>>Regards
>>Leigh
>>
>
> Still peckin'
>
>rich
>
>
>
The Newton platform's third party NSBasic managed to shoehorn a lot of BASIC
functions and Newton interface capabilities into one small package. You could
write (and still can write) line-entry-type programs or take the plunge and
master the visual interface commands. Of course, it had NewtonScript to build
on, but it managed to survive on a platform with a smaller marketshare than
WinCE.
I'd personally be willing to pay the $50 to $100 to get a functional BASIC on
my CE. The cost of ownership of a CE device is not been so high that people
with the need cannot afford such an add-on, especially as you can usually pick
up a CE device for very little if you're patient (bought 2 CE devices so far,
and, added together, they cost less than half my MP120, and have more
capabilities I can actually use). Since my job-related programming has to be
done on my own time (too much other work to do) I need a language I can easily
step into, either by using the background I have or by using an application
which has a similar approach. In that area, either a BASIC or Pascal-like
language would fit the bill (from past
BASIC/BASICA/TurboBASIC/QuickBASIC/VisualBASIC/VBA and 4th Dimension scripting
experience).
Mark Spohr
can find a wide variety of inexpensive (free to low cost) good
programming environments for the PalmPilot.
The Pilot has a different OS philosophy that is a smaller, more
reliable OS that hasn't been taken over by bloatware.
Unfortunately, Microsoft has historically relied on ever
increasing computer power and storage to compensate for sloppy,
bloated code. This has so far worked to their advantage.
(Unfortunately, bugs are a different problem.)
The problem is that small handheld devices are a different breed
and the typical MS approach has given us WinCE which is too
large, too slow, too power hungry (and too buggy) to work well on
this platform.
The Pilot has a wide range of development environments from "C"
and C++ to several excellent rapid application development
environments.
I had high hopes for the WinCE platform when it first came out
but I've realized that Microsoft just doesn't have the right
mindset to make it work. I've given up on the WinCE platform and
have found that the Pilot platform has gotten it right.
Regards,
mark
John Schettino
>This may be the wrong newsgroup to post this in but I know you
>can find a wide variety of inexpensive (free to low cost) good
>programming environments for the PalmPilot.
>The Pilot has a different OS philosophy that is a smaller, more
>reliable OS that hasn't been taken over by bloatware.
>Unfortunately, Microsoft has historically relied on ever
>increasing computer power and storage to compensate for sloppy,
>bloated code. This has so far worked to their advantage.
>(Unfortunately, bugs are a different problem.)
>The problem is that small handheld devices are a different breed
>and the typical MS approach has given us WinCE which is too
>large, too slow, too power hungry (and too buggy) to work well on
>this platform.
This is the usual pilot/anti MS comment, which is (at least to me) now
becomming pretty funny. The Pilot OS is small and lightweight (and
lacking several key features) specificially because it was designed
for an underpowered CPU with very little memory and a tiny screen. It
does what it does very well, but by choosing those constraints to cut
hardware costs, it will either need to scale up or it will quickly
become relegated to the "glorified organizer" class that it seems to
be dominating right now.
CE was designed to scale from very small/embedded platforms to low-end
laptops and desktops. As such, it can be either resource restrained or
not. It seems reasonable in these days of sub $100 prices per 64mb of
dram, sub $200 prices for 32mb flash storage, and larger, deeper gray
and color lcds to expect more features in an OS, not less.
On the one side, there are the Palm folks saying less is more, on the
other are the liberetto folks saying anything less than full Windows
(or MacOS, if Apple ever releases their tiny Mac clamshell) is no
good. CE really does sit (and sit quite well) right in the middle.
There is a market for all three classes of machine.
>The Pilot has a wide range of development environments from "C"
>and C++ to several excellent rapid application development
>environments.
And it didn't have those from day one. These tools took a little time
to appear. CE has a nice RAD database/forms app (VisualCE) Visual
Basic, Visual C++, ADO/CE, IRDA, TCP/IP, Wave in/out audio, support
for color, and other nifty features.
>
>I had high hopes for the WinCE platform when it first came out
>but I've realized that Microsoft just doesn't have the right
>mindset to make it work. I've given up on the WinCE platform and
>have found that the Pilot platform has gotten it right.
Closing your mind to a platform based on the current state of hardware
is a dangerous thing. The future is usually only 6 months away, and as
you yourself realize, every future improvement in hardware makes CE a
more potent OS. 32mb machines, 200mhz strongArm CPUs, cheap low power
color screens... all these are here now, or will be in the next 6-9
months. CE can use them, when they're available.
-=====
John Schettino
js...@byteme.gte.com
(you know not to use the byteme part, right?)
http://members.aol.com/pdcjohns
John Schettino
I've been working with a company who's done BASICs for quite a while
for lots of other platforms, and they're getting close to finishing a
CE-hosted development environment. It's been under development for
quite a while. This will be for HP/Cs, not PSP/Cs, at least initially.
I'll pass on additional information as I get it, and am allowed to
speak...
This will be a commercial product, but I don't have any idea what the
pricing will be. But hang in there, something good will be coming out
in the not too distant future.