NT Lite would be .. nice.. then again just look at NT 4.0 and it's perfect for embedded space, it's so TINY by modern requirements....
What always bothered me about CE is that the x86 cpu is so... second class, I know it was going to be a brave new RISC world, but wow is building x86 exe's outside of Platform Builder such a PITA.... Like in this project I'm hoping to 'borrow' nethack's windows console, and it's taken me all day to get an x86 version.... Then again it could be me too.... Funny how the x86emu wouldnt build on embeded VC 4, but it does on 3.... Oh well. I'm just glad I didn't toss my 2.11 stuff, it's been a lifesaver! On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 2:51 PM, Ian King <[email protected]> wrote: >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Jason Stevens [mailto:[email protected]] >> Sent: Monday, December 20, 2010 9:30 AM >> To: Gregg Levine >> Cc: [email protected]; Ian King >> Subject: Re: [Simh] SIMH on Windows CE >> >> The MS pages really vary wildly in quality, the 'tech' stuff seems to >> miss major details, and the blog stuff seems include major details in >> passing... >> >> Luckily for me this site, hpcfactor (http://www.hpcfactor.com/) has a >> lot of the old VC toolkits for CE.. which has been a massive help. I >> just hate how MS pretends old products never existed... But at the >> same time, I'm kind of liking the setup... I must be weird, I guess. >> > > You think MS is bad? Try HP.... > > I was the test manager for the Windows CE core in the 4.2 and 5.0 days. Even > between those two releases there were breaking changes that typically > required app code changes. No, it wasn't signed packages or anything like > that, just lots of API changes. That was also the early days of the .Net > Compact Framework as it was called, so "managed code" was just coming into > vogue as 5.0 was shipping. > > Since then, they've completely restructured the kernel - essentially "NT > Lite." I have no idea how that impacted product development in the > environment (I left Microsoft in 2008). But it can't be good. :-) > > There was also a lot of confusion and conflict as to the purpose of CE. By > the 5.0 timeframe, the "smart phone" folks thought they were the only > customer and all development should focus on making them happy (even though > they had not a clue just what they wanted or needed). Sad, really: there > were a lot of folks who worked hard to make a good embedded (soft) real-time > OS that was subsequently hacked into a series of geeky toys that existed > primarily to sell more copies of Windows. > _______________________________________________ Simh mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.trailing-edge.com/mailman/listinfo/simh
