Windows CE Tools
dd...@my-deja.com
C/C++ programming for Windows CE? I'm thinking of
jumping back into the fray.
Thanks.
DD
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Jim M
>What development tools are minimally required for
>C/C++ programming for Windows CE? I'm thinking of
>jumping back into the fray.
>
>Thanks.
>
>DD
The CE dev tools are essentially free from MS (minimal charge for
burning + shipping). These come on 2 CD's and contain all the
compilers and the most recent SDK's.
Check out the following link:
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/embedded/ce/tools/emvt30order.asp
If you want to do proper development, having NT or 2000 will help you
more than trying to do it under Win98 (don't know about ME yet).
Getting a real CE device will give you a good idea on how your program
runs. Using the emulator supplied with the tools isn't too reliable
for judging how well the app will work outside the emulator. The
device will cost a few hundred ($whatevers) unless you scrounge a
freebie.
Getting a network card for the device (as well as your PC) will make
debugging easier (serial debugging is slower than floppy-disk access).
This will add up to a couple of hundred notes.
As for which language, well it's either C/C++ or VB, and that's all
your choice.
Good luck,
Jim M
--
@ Derbyshire
dd...@my-deja.com
Toolkit. Is this really necessary? That puts the cost of entry into
this technology in excess of $1500. Is Visual C++ Standard Edition (at
about $100) sufficient.
Thanks.
In article <8nu1be$eca$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
dd...@my-deja.com wrote:
> What development tools are minimally required for
> C/C++ programming for Windows CE? I'm thinking of
> jumping back into the fray.
>
> Thanks.
>
> DD
>
Chris Marriott
<dd...@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:8nu7i4$mb6$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> The Microsoft site suggests purchasing Visual Studio and the Windows CE
> Toolkit. Is this really necessary? That puts the cost of entry into
> this technology in excess of $1500. Is Visual C++ Standard Edition (at
> about $100) sufficient.
Even less than that - the learning edition of VC++ will suffice. All you're
using the is the VC++ development environment, not the compiler.
Regards,
--
Chris
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Chris Marriott, SkyMap Software, UK (ch...@skymap.com)
Visit our web site at http://www.skymap.com
Astronomy software written by astronomers, for astronomers
rz
salt. Also, I'll present multiple choices, even though some of them are
significantly more expensive than others.
If you want to develop for Windows CE 3.0 and only for Windows CE 3.0,
Visual Studio is unnecessary, and the Windows CE tools (toolkit and SDKs)
that work with it are not only unnecessary but incompatible with the eVC.
If you want to develop for non-CE versions of Windows, you will need
VisualStudio. I believe it by itself can exist nicely with eVC (neither one
bothers the other).
If you want to develop for CE 2.x and _not_ CE 3.0, then you can use
VisualStudio with the CE toolkit and appropriate SDKs (one for HPC, one for
PPC running CE 2.01, one for HPC Pro, and one for PPC running CE 2.11), but
I'm not sure how many SDKs are still available, without access to old MSDN
disks. Or, you can try to use eVC; I gather it comes with SDK(s?) for CE
2.1x, but not 2.0x. See below for more info.
If you want to develop for CE 3.0 and CE 2.1x, I _think_ eVC will work, and
comes with appropriate SDK(s?). If eVC does not come with SDKs for 2.1x,
then see the next paragraph.
If you want to develop for CE 3.0 and CE 2.0x (or earlier) you are faced
with more "interesting"
choices; the eVC does not come with SDKs for CE 2.0x, and the SDKs for eVC
are incompatible with the SDKs for VisualStudio. The cleanest approach would
be to use separate computers. Another choice would be to use eVC for CE 3.0,
and VisualStudio for everything else, but I haven't seen any notes about
success with this approach. The third choice I can conceive is making older
SDKs work with eVC; I've seen notes about success stories (use dejanews to
search archives of comp.os.ms-windows.ce,
microsoft.public.pocketpc.developers,
microsoft.public.win32.programmer.wince,
microsoft.public.windowsce.app.development, and
microsoft.public.windowsce.embedded.vc). Unfortunately, I think at least
some SDKs are completely unavailable (except on old copies of MSDN disks).
UGHH! I _think_ I've presented this mess somewhat clearly.
I won't try to explain the information you quote. I certainly won't try to
explain Microsoft's choices.
--
-----------------------------------------
To reply to me, remove the underscores (_) from my email address.
Robert E. Zaret
PenFact, Inc.
20 Park Plaza, Suite 454
Boston, MA 02116
www.penfact.com
dd...@my-deja.com wrote in message <8nu7i4$mb6$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
>The Microsoft site suggests purchasing Visual Studio and the Windows CE
>Toolkit. Is this really necessary? That puts the cost of entry into
>this technology in excess of $1500. Is Visual C++ Standard Edition (at
>about $100) sufficient.
>
rz
The emulators used with all of the CE toolkits/SDKs require full UNICODE
support, so they will only work under NT or 2000. You can install and use
these tools without the emulator, but need an actual device for testing. I
gather eVC will install on Win 98 SE, but not plain Win 98. I'm not sure
about Win 95. I know that VisualStudio and its CE tools (toolkits and SDKs)
install and work under Win 95 and Win NT 4.
--
-----------------------------------------
To reply to me, remove the underscores (_) from my email address.
Robert E. Zaret
PenFact, Inc.
20 Park Plaza, Suite 454
Boston, MA 02116
www.penfact.com
rz wrote in message ...
John A. Grant
news:FzpMw...@world.std.com...
[...discussion of Windows CE development tools...]
Just out of curiosity, how does CE fit in with this new
PocketPC thing, from a developer's point of view. Is it
the same O/S, just repackaged?
--
John A. Grant * I speak only for myself * (remove 'z' to reply)
Radiation Geophysics, Geological Survey of Canada, Ottawa
If you followup, please do NOT e-mail me a copy: I will read it here
Jim M
>"rz" <r_zaret@pen_fact.com> wrote in message
>news:FzpMw...@world.std.com...
> [...discussion of Windows CE development tools...]
>
> Just out of curiosity, how does CE fit in with this new
> PocketPC thing, from a developer's point of view. Is it
> the same O/S, just repackaged?
Yep. PocketPC is just Windows CE 3.00 running on a plam-sized
handheld. I reckon they'll be tarting the 2.11 HPC(Pro) up to CE3.00
eventually, but there is no news of that yet.
There are a few API changes, but they're mainly to do with shell
interaction (menu bars, how much screen you want to use etc...), but
the rest is the same underneath. 3.00 also adds a mini direct X for
direct video memory access capabilities. This combined with the
refined OS code makes the devices bareable for playing things like
AVI's, MP3's and some of the games that have appeared recently.
Hope this helps,
rz
--
-----------------------------------------
To reply to me, remove the underscores (_) from my email address.
Robert E. Zaret
PenFact, Inc.
20 Park Plaza, Suite 454
Boston, MA 02116
www.penfact.com
Jim M <}Jimbo{@brit-cit.demon.co.uk> wrote in message ...
>"John A. Grant" <jaz...@zsc.nrcan.zc.ca> wrote:
...
>direct video memory access capabilities. This combined with the
>refined OS code makes the devices ~bareable~ for playing things like
>AVI's, MP3's and some of the games that have appeared recently.
>
(I added the ~s)
So folks are no longer embarrassed to listen to MP3s on a Windows CE device
in public?
(sorry, I couldn't resist).
Chris Marriott
John A. Grant <jaz...@zsc.nrcan.zc.ca> wrote in message
news:8nutka$gh...@nrn2.NRCan.gc.ca...
> "rz" <r_zaret@pen_fact.com> wrote in message
> news:FzpMw...@world.std.com...
> [...discussion of Windows CE development tools...]
>
> Just out of curiosity, how does CE fit in with this new
> PocketPC thing, from a developer's point of view. Is it
> the same O/S, just repackaged?
A "Pocket PC" is just a marketting name for what was previously called a
"PPC" running Windows CE version 3. I have an HP Jornada Pocket PC - an
excellent device.