Poll: What is a WM2003 compatibility layer worth to you?

As has been mentioned elsewhere on the forum, I've written a set of DLL's providing limited compatibility with WM2003, particularly aimed at getting Opera to run. If you don't know what Opera Mobile is or looks like, see here:
Screenshot of Opera on HPC2000

This relates most directly to those running HPC2000 ARM (e.g. Jornada 72x, Mobilepro 900), and also possibly those using Jornada 820 or Sig III. As I find other applications that also are working, it could become useful to MIPS users, etc.

As has also been mentioned, if I were to polish this up and release it, it wouldn't be free. This may be surprising to many due to precedent or other reasons, however please consider a few of my considerations in making this move:

• Currently available layers are mostly limited to the PocketPC menubar and miscellaneous functions; there are multiple versions which may need to be tried; and there is no automated process to get an application working.


• In contrast to currently available solutions, this endeavor includes in addition to aygshell: upgraded functionality for coredll; and a completely new ws2, which is required for many internet applications. This is like trying to write pieces of CE .NET 4.2 - using only CE 3.0 building blocks - with no knowledge of the internal workings of the code. As such this takes considerable time and effort to investigate, implement, and test.


• My past experiences with making software freely available indicate that charging a fee, even if only a nominal one, improves the experience for the end-user by providing more focused and higher quality results.


• Most importantly, many of the newer commercial programs require that the device have a Device ID in order to restrict distribution of registered versions of the program. It is necessary for each user of the compatibility layer to have a device ID that will be assigned to them, and that these files not be seen as free or freely distributable. It is not the intent of this project to provide a mechanism for easing the already-rampant piracy of CE programs, and no such usage would be tolerated.

I realize that not everyone will want to pay for such a program, or will have varying limits on what they will pay, and therefore I have initiated this poll to ascertain whether further effort is justified.

Thank you for your consideration!

I'd like to say that I'd pay more than 20$ USD, if I could use Opera on the MP900, with HPC2000.. I'd like to use a browser I'm familiar with on my regular computers and gladly like to see it on HPC2000... I appreciate your efforts and I would like to thank you..

i'll consider paying more than 20 if this includes a ws2 for sig3 too

This sounds and looks fantastic - seriously, congratulations on getting it so complete!

Whatever you do, please don't just let this die: if you don't take it any further, please open it up so that others may continue the work. Saying that, I really hope that you do take this to its conclusion which would be absolutely fantastic!

Regarding payment, I would advise that you release a time-limited version to show people exactly how useful it is, then have registration for a small fee. Make it $10 or so and everyone in the community would buy it once they realised what it could do: I think opera is your best bet to demonstrate this, as everyone talks about a new browser, and you can give/sell the community this dream.

Again, whatever you do, please don't just let it die because you've lost enthusiasm or are disappointed with the response. I, along with everyone else, am looking forward to this!

I'm an open-source enthusiast. Donation-ware at most.

I think the main reason that killed HPCs was that they were too expensive. The cost of software is an important one.

It's a choice - either you want to make money, or you want as many people as possible to use your software. I think that you won't make much money from distributing your pack - most of HPC users bought it because they're cheaper than laptop and they don't want to pay more for it. From the other side, many people can enjoy your submission for the community, and I believe in karma flow

I am willing to pay $20.00 for a complete compatibility layer. I also would love to see a completely free version, however, since I do not have the programming skills to do this, and Microsoft is not going to do it, the only alternative is someone else doing it. I like being paid for my work, and feel it is only fair if others are also paid for their work, (provided they request payment). If a programmer wants to program for free, that's fine too, but many software efforts that started out free, have completely disappeared once the programmer's life got busy due to having to earn a living.

I'm not saying that open-source is bad or wrong, (I love Linux) but there are some limiting gaps in Linux because of legality of such things as de-css, or other instances where royalties have to be paid to patent holders in order to make things works legally, or places where non-disclosure agreements are involved. The "little guy" who fills these gaps may have to pay such royalties, licensing fees, registration fees, etc in order to make legal software.

nice discussion
i forgot to ask, will the software be installable on more than one hpc with one registration? wouldnt want to buy it several times

Whatever you need, PR, redistribution etc, we're here for you. Happy coding!

I agree completely with Chiark, please do not get disheartened if you get a slow response, that is simply the nature of this community sometimes.

I agree completely with stasheck.
Make it free or even better open and the community will be grateful to you for the next centuries...
Which is muuuuch more important than getting some cash.

You have done a very good job, as is apparent from your screenshot, how could you throw away if the response is low???

i think it is not a slow response.... especially compared to dosbox port..
already 18 votes, within 10 hours

as far as we can see, most users are willing to pay, which shows it is a really needed piece of software.

should it be free...? yes that would be nice and yes opensource would be the best as then it can be improved further (BUT ... hopefully in a not too disorganized way ) , however if paying is the only way we can get such an important software (i.e. as in this case, developer is not willing to spend time for it for free), then i will do so as long as i have enough money i voted for 20$, and as i said i'm willing to pay a little bit more if it, especially winsock2, is good for sig3 / other cenet machines too, not just hpc2000. many programs require winsock2 today, and the cenet 4.1 winsock2 isn't fully compatible, sometimes works sometimes not of course hpc2000 completely lacks it but it is really sad cenet 4.1 is not fully compatible either, only 4.2 is.

again about opensource, i generally don't like the results of opensource (sorry BrianD ), but in this special case it would help a lot. for example, neither of the hou ming (22-24k) + dic (famous 16.5k) aygshells are perfect, and soemtimes one piece of software will start only with one of them but would work better with the other, if it would start with it none of these is opensource.. which might've helped eliminate that.
however if this is a commercial software it should / probably will be better than the above mentioned aygshells altogether

of course all the above assumes this compatibility layer won't be a half finished job, like every other dll until now.. if that is the case it'd better be free or very cheap certainly not worth 20$+ in that case.

Edited by cmonex 2006-10-16 9:53 AM

This is a tough one to answer.

1. Since it's aimed at Opera, and none of us on our current devices can run Opera (else why would we need the patch?) - how can we determine it's worth without some kind of trial, etc.? If Opera is extremely slow, or really requires more than 32MB to run efficiently - then it's use is limited. I saw no mention of a trial for x days, etc. And for those who have already run it - I have no doubt of your experience that it's "faster", but fast is a relative thing. I'd like to see it for myself, side-by-side with another browser - then determine what it's worth to me.

2. Since I have to buy Opera Mobile 8.6 as well (the mobile version isn't free from what I can determine), then it's a double price hit for one package, or is this patch able to run other WM2003 software as well?

3. The current frustration with the current state of patches is simply a hit-and-miss, trial and error form of experimentation (which aygshell is needed? And oh, can't run two of those hacked apps at the same time, if they use different dummy DLLs).

So - are you saying that the patch you propose is an "end all" patch mechanism for this approach? It will work with "most" WM2003 software - or is the only thrust Opera?

4. What is the future committment of fixing bugs, and an attempt to get other PPC/WM2003 apps running with these patched DLLs?

I think these questions need some serious answers before asking how much anyone is willing to pay. All of these (and probably a few more) need answers to determine a price.

I have no objection to paying for software - but I had shelves full of the stuff that didn't work, was abandoned, etc., which prompted my shift to freeware and public domain software. If something is useful, and continues to be useful, it has value - if not - it isn't worth that much.

Also - I'd keep in mind the shrinking user base of handhelds. They aren't manufactured anymore (at least not for the general public), and the number of actual hardware devices is finite and dwindles each day through attrition. Charge too much - and fewer will buy it - charge less, and you may make more "on the whole" and have a larger user base. I've always had a philosophy, that if possible (due to costs, etc.), I'd make a million dollars easier selling a million items for $1 each, than selling one item for a million dollars.

If the cost is $5, I'd take a shot at it, even if it only worked for one app. For $20, my expecations go up, and my reluctance to purchase grows without substantiated value.

Problems posting - deleted content of double post.

Anyone else having repeated timeouts and problems getting to hpcfactor?

Edited by tundrwd 2006-10-16 10:26 AM

We have discussed about open source/free (as in beer!) software several times. It is nice to have different opinions, otherwise the world would be so boring!

However what you write hits the point: open source/free software allows to improve a package, step by step, even if the original developer has lost interest in his/her work. It allows to "look farther away by standing on the shoulders of the giants", as it was said several centuries ago.

Closed source software is only in the developer's hands. A waste of resources in my opinion. YMMV

We have discussed about open source/free (as in beer!) software several times. It is nice to have different opinions, otherwise the world would be so boring!

However what you write hits the point: open source/free software allows to improve a package, step by step, even if the original developer has lost interest in his/her work. It allows to "look farther away by standing on the shoulders of the giants", as it was said several centuries ago.

Closed source software is only in the developer's hands. A waste of resources in my opinion. YMMV

We have discussed about open source/free (as in beer!) software several times. It is nice to have different opinions, otherwise the world would be so boring!

However what you write hits the point: open source/free software allows to improve a package, step by step, even if the original developer has lost interest in his/her work. It allows to "look farther away by standing on the shoulders of the giants", as it was said several centuries ago.

Closed source software is only in the developer's hands. A waste of resources in my opinion. YMMV