 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Pocket PC Forum / End Users / ActiveSync / July 2006General
This is, without a shadow of a doubt, one of the worst pieces of software ever written. As a result of it's complete inability to recognise USB devices (O2 XDA II), except intermittently, no proper interface to Windows Media Player 10.x and above and it's thorough incapacity in delivering understandable messages I shall be abandoning the entire charade in favour of BlackBerry (You can get the music!). This is the biggest load of unusable software that I have encountered in years. Dump it and get something written that can connect peripheral PC like devices. Tim It's hard to that believe that anyone at Microsoft actually tested any of their software before it was released. Why in the world did they screw up AS with all this network crap that doesn't work escapes me! I've been using PPCs since the begining and this is a real mess! If I'm having problems with the 'new and improved' activesync, I wonder how new users are doing! I thought 4.2 was to fix connection issues not create them! AS 4.2 is the absolute worst version ever! > This is, without a shadow of a doubt, one of the worst pieces of software > ever written. [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > Tim No, it's been tested and beta-ed, etc. You don't realize the volume of stuff that interacts with network adapters on your PC. The beta of 4.2 worked fine for me, but yet a significant number of people here are having problems with the released version, even. The difference is configuration on their PC, which might be running XP or 2000, wireless networking or wired with any one of dozens of network helper programs, firewalls from half a dozen or more vendors, anti-virus/anti-scripting programs from dozens of vendors, VPN clients from half a dozen vendors and in several versions, etc. The number of combinations that could be found in the real world is literally astronomical; the size of the AS test team is not. The basic reason for changing to a network communication scheme is that you now communicate exactly the same way with Exchange Server as you do with desktop AS. This is a huge improvement for the AS team (which is very small). They now have the ability to add features, fix bugs, etc. without having to fix the same bug in two places. The initial pain was, I'm sure, an expected problem (although I think the severity of problems caught them a little off-guard), but the long-term result should be better responsiveness to problems and better synching, in general. It's extremely painful for people who *are* having problems, and you can certainly pin that on the change to network communications from just acting like a regular USB device, but, frankly, I don't see that AS over USB was super-reliable before the change. The change simply seems to have changed who is running into problems. People who had 3.x working fine and never had a problem with that now may have hell, while those who were always having problems getting 3.x to work, if they're still around, may have smooth sailing with 4.x (as I do). Paul T. > It's hard to that believe that anyone at Microsoft actually tested any of > their software before it was released. Why in the world did they screw up [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] >> >> Tim Well, I wonder how Apple seems to do a better job with their OS and itunes over windows and media player. I have yet to own a dap that didn't have some form of syncing problem with wmp. I've never been one to beat up on MS for sport but lately I've realized that all their releases are no more than betas. I surely wish they would stop offering solutions looking for a problem. AS 3.8 worked well. AS 4.0 at least worked. AS 4.2 is the first version I could not resolve my problems and I started with the palm-sized pc! If I could go back to 4.0 I would but I can't since MS was kind enough to break it's ability to sync with the new X51v rom. I like Bill Gates but I sometimes hate the seed he has spawn. They don't offer accessible support ($25.00 to discuss how they screwed up!) or listen to what non-corporate customers want or need! If you have solutions to my problems which get to the root of my problems, I'd be more than willing to listen. Trying to convince me that 4.2 is better is a hard sell. I don't care if it connects to an exchange server or the moon if can't connect to my ppc! It should do this well *first* before it tries to be something else! Any other rationalization is pointless! If it can't do it's primary role, who cares about exchange server! > No, it's been tested and beta-ed, etc. You don't realize the volume of > stuff that interacts with network adapters on your PC. The beta of 4.2 [quoted text clipped - 52 lines] >>> >>> Tim Again, just like you, I'm going from one point of view. Yours is no more or less valid than mine. AS 4.2 worked perfectly for me and I had problems, resolvable, but still problems with 4.0. I'd say that, for me, that makes 4.2 better. It sounds to me like there is a problem with the ROM update for your device which may be responsible for the problem. Note that MS doesn't build those ROM updates, decide what goes in them (other than to specify the minimum requirements to be a Pocket PC device), or test them. The OEM is responsible for that. I'm running the latest ROM build for my device, also, including the push e-mail support, etc., with no problems with AS4.2. I simply was trying to explain why 4.x is not 3.x in terms of how it works internally (the 'why' of the change). None of that changed in going from 4.0 to 4.2, however. The changes there were things associated with fixing specific incompatibilities found between 4.0 and 4.2beta that caused connectivity, sync, and other problems for people. I'd like to help you get it fixed, but all I can recommend at this point is to post the contents of the WCE*.* log files for AS from the %temp% folder, along with the ROM version information from the device. Maybe someone will spot something or someone with the same device will respond... Paul T. > Well, I wonder how Apple seems to do a better job with their OS and > itunes over windows and media player. I have yet to own a dap that didn't [quoted text clipped - 77 lines] >>>> >>>> Tim My problem is in the thread above. The upgraded device running WM5 works as does a WM2003 device but a second WM5 device that has not been updated no long works under AS 4.2! All three worked just fine under 4.0. We can safely say the ROM upgrade was irrelevant to the problem and AS 4.2 is at the core of the problem. I'm glad it works for you but I gain no consolation with this knowledge. It really doesn't matter how much MS tests their software because in the end perception is reality in the user's eye and the track record suggest that an OS held together with patches and an 'improved' sync host that's broken does tell a story. We can blame interacts all day but in the end the only thing that changed on my computer was AS. The first goal to improve software should be to do no harm. > Again, just like you, I'm going from one point of view. Yours is no more > or less valid than mine. AS 4.2 worked perfectly for me and I had [quoted text clipped - 104 lines] >>>>> >>>>> Tim Their goal is going to be to sell as much hardware as possible, as their only source of revenue in the mobile space is licensing of the software. They call this a 'shared success' model, as they don't make money (or at least not much; tools only, not enough to be worth anything), unless the hardware vendors sell hardware. Obviously, they don't make *anything* from sales of ActiveSync, so they aren't super-well funded and it's not a big group. Everyone in the MVP group picks on them, too, so there's zero chance that they aren't hearing that they need to do better. I won't argue about what the first goals of software improvement should be, but back to the topic of actually *fixing* your problem, as opposed to simply complaining about it, do you want to post those log files or what? How about the specific information on the Pocket PC hardware? So far, all you've given us is "It's an X51v, and I'm pissed". If you just want to be pissed, then I'll go on to more fruitful work. I don't get paid for this, you know. Paul T. > My problem is in the thread above. The upgraded device running WM5 works > as does a WM2003 device but a second WM5 device that has not been updated [quoted text clipped - 120 lines] >>>>>> >>>>>> Tim Well Paul, I you obvious didn't read my posts referirng to my problems and where my original post stating my problem. To you I offer the somewhat abrasive position you've took with me. If you read my posts instead of offering MS defenses...... I already stated what my problem was more that once and where information with more about my problem is located. If you wanted to help, you could've chimed in any time you wanted so please don't accuse me of complaining with out stating my case! > Their goal is going to be to sell as much hardware as possible, as their > only source of revenue in the mobile space is licensing of the software. [quoted text clipped - 140 lines] >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Tim I'm not trying to defend Microsoft's implementation, but it may be useful to understand the why of the ActiveSync quality issues. Sorry for wasting your time. Paul T. > Well Paul, I you obvious didn't read my posts referirng to my problems and > where my original post stating my problem. To you I offer the somewhat [quoted text clipped - 149 lines] >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Tim >> Sorry for wasting your time. << The mobile mvp's mantra... "No good deed goes unpunished." ;-/ Posted with the goal of humor, Beverly Howard [MS MVP-Mobile Devices] Paul, I work as a Product Engineer in the automotive industry. Just as in my situation, the customer frankly doesn't care about how hard the task is, the particular relationship dynamics of the supplier chain, the adverse component interactions within the system, or what supplier is ultimately responsible for failures. My end users just want their cars to start, stop, and run properly without excuses or qualification. It's not their job to be concerned with these issues. When their cars malfunction, I think the last thing on thier minds is how complex an automobile is, which supplier had a issue, or do we have system or environmental interactions at play. They want it fixed properly and promptly. I must sweat the details and make things right with the end user in mind so I expect Microsoft to do the same. > I'm not trying to defend Microsoft's implementation, but it may be useful > to understand the why of the ActiveSync quality issues. Sorry for wasting [quoted text clipped - 159 lines] >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Tim >> so I expect Microsoft to do the same. << fyi, your response indicates that you don't have a clue with respect to Paul's motivations in trying to help you only to have you snap at him for simply trying to educate. Neither Paul nor _any_ mvps work for microsoft. Their title is simply a recognition from microsoft of recognition of their _free_ and freely given high quality tech help in this and other forums. If you read and follow mvp postings you will discover that while we may sometimes explain our understandings of ms' motivations, we are in no way defenders or supporters of bad decisions. You use yourself as an example but fail to factor in that you are well paid to execute your job within your company to keep said customer happy and Paul is responding only because he is attempting to help, if nothing else, to help you understand that the anger you display has much more impact on you than ms. If you want to rail at Microsoft, rail away, but do so with the understanding that they have no presence here at the moment and striking out at forum responders does little more that help assure that your questions will be avoided to escape future burns. Beverly Howard [MS MVP-Mobile Devices] I understand. In this case, think of the Pocket PC as a car, then. Let's say that it's a recent model where a US manufacturer is using a Toyota driveline. The car has a problem where it stalls periodically while making left turns. Do you a) call Toyota, since they built the engine, and demand a fix, or b) call the US manufacturer whose nameplate is on the car and demand a fix? In this contrived example, Microsoft is Toyota (would that it were true), and HP, Dell, etc. are the US manufacturers. You paid your money to HP, Dell, etc. They are the ones who assembled the device and they are the ones who are responsible for giving you a usable product. Yes, they are counting on Microsoft to provide much of the superstructure and it's as likely as not that MS has a bug that is causing your problem, but the OEM is still where you should go to push for a solution. In this example, the people in this group are your local car club. We didn't build the car, didn't build the engine, and may not even own the same exact model as you do, although we all have cars with the same power plant, or a variation, as you. When your car stalls, since you know that taking it to the dealer mechanic may take a while and may or may not be covered by the warranty, you ask here. Cussing out us does nothing to get your car fixed; it just leaves you plenty of elbow room at club meetings. Paul T. > Paul, > [quoted text clipped - 176 lines] >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Tim |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.