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

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

tundrwd, this is not just for opera as far as i can understand.

my only doubt is can i register it for each of my hpc2000/cenet hpc's? i reread the first post (of isotherm's) and i'm not sure any more

about the aygshells etc..., you CAN run two of those hacked apps at the same time. very easy to do really. rename the dll calls in one of them.

BrianD, true that's a great thing about open source, my problem is just the disorganization. now, we can't have everything can we

Yes, that's the way it sounded in general "What is a WM2003 compatibility layer worth", but then isotherm says "particularly aimed at getting Opera to run". While that's a worthy first goal - is it the only goal?



It sounded to me from the first that the intent is to register it per machine. So you'd have to purchase it for each and every HPC you own.



Yeah, I know - but it also chews up more memory. Not that I generally have several apps running on an HPC at once anyway, but ....



Not sure what is meant by "disorganization". A lot of "disorganization" has more to do with some open source developers not understanding a proper development cycle. I haven't seen it here, and I'm certainly not speaking of anyone here that I'm aware of (so no assumptions that I'm speaking about anyone here, please), but there are some development arenas where a developer releases 2, 3 or 4 versions of code the same day, in response to a bug someone found 5 minutes after the developer uploaded the "new" version and a user downloaded it and found said bug. These developers don't understand beta testing. Then there's the "just one more thing" approach some use. A release isn't released, because the developer keeps trying to respond to "one more neat idea" and incorporate it into their code. It takes discipline to make sure the code is tested before released, and discipline to make sure you have a schedule, or at least a set of milestones to determine when a project should be released, and before proceeding to the next set of enhancements. Please note the Linux kernel developers. Disciplined and focused on each release.

If by disogranization you mean "fragmentation" (as in Linux, with so many distros available) - well, I can understand that to a point. There is some frustration trying to determine which distro to use - but if you think through it, there are really only a handful of distros which are really appealing. And this could lead to some really useful development as well. isotherm may have one set of priorities in what he/she would like to see working on an HPC, and you may have another, and I may have a third. With distributed development, a better chance of all 3 getting done in a short time, rather than only one thing being achieved over time. This would require an "official" release, with someone being in charge of development, and what goes into each release.

I'm certainly interested, and as I said, don't mind paying for it, but would certainly like to know where this is going. Maybe, in case of isotherm losing interest, and stopping development, the source could be held "in escrow" by HPC Factor itself. That would give a bit more comfort that continued development could occur in that case.

tundrwd, great idea on hpcfactor escrow

about open source... yes i meant all that by disorganization... and other stuff, developers not working well together for free, and the results, bloated software, software that never gets finished, etc. etc. but thats going off topic, see the conversation with BrianD before for example

and yeah well, about me having to register the program for all my current hpc's and for the ones in the future.. no i'm not THAT rich whats more, i'd be frustrated by this, because i wouldn't be easily able to just install and use the software i already paid for, on the new hpc's without registering once more first. actually, adding 10-20$ to the price of every new hpc (there won't be many more, just maintenance if a unit breaks etc) could be possible except that i'd need to add that for all my existing hpc's as well! no not that rich, really, i could spend that money better - all this would be really frustrating. remember the editorial about being the prisoner of the unlock code http://www.hpcfactor.com/qlink/?linkID=109 ?
i'd really prefer just a simple code, like netfront, etc. etc. (lots of software devs do just this)

It'd be an incredible feat in itself. I buy stuff like this even if I don't use it much.

But for those who do use it, think about the cost of the "whole package" as including the device price. Afterall, your HPC's price includes a license of the HPC platform. Adding compatibility to another platform, in this case Windows Mobile 2003, is like upgrading your Windows XP to Vista. Ok maybe to a much lesser degree, but you get the idea

*edit* I particularly like the idea of the Jornada 820 with Opera.

Edited by takwu 2006-10-16 10:54 PM

First of all, I'd be willing to pay if I get a real WM2003 compatibility: this would be a very big improvement...
But I think that such a protection scheme (Device ID) would be a very very bad idea for several reasons :

-first of all, the HPC market is a very small niche market: software pirates are not interested in the HPC platform anymore. You may find hundreds of illegal web sites offering PC Win32 or PocketPC apps, but you will hardly find any equivalent for HPC software. So, why bother ? The HPC community is a small community anyway and I think that the vast majority of us really want to support the platform and would never encourage piracy.

-HPC devices are generally second-hand, old devices: many of them will probably need serious repairs or even need to be replaced. If I buy something (application, Ebook, whatever...), I want to be able to install it on any new device without asking the developer . Not to mention the fact that many small software companies or independent developers tend to disappear very quickly... So, I'd prefer to pay 20 $ for a decent (device-independent) protection, than 10$ with such a Device ID-protection.

So please, don't do that.


Edited by Geared2003 2006-10-17 2:18 AM

I totally share your point of view, geared2003, this deviceID thing is scary and I would never pay for a brided and overprotected software.

My answer in the poll (willing to pay 10$) is assuming that I get a product that allows me to install every wm2003 application without trouble.
And I'd prefer to get it for free if possible. But I can pay for an excellent software if necessary.

Hey, I've got an idea to keep everyone satisfied.

Let's assume that isotherm charges money for his work. How much could that be? I don't believe that more than a 1000 people will ever use it, regardless if it's free or not. So, let's say that for 20$, maybe 10 persons would buy it. For 10$, maybe 20. For 5$ I'd say about 50$ - regardless of case, isotherm won't make much money (although I have to say that 200$ is kinda interesting ;-) ).

I wonder if we could make isotherm work community-ware one. I mean: we, as a community, would pay isotherm some cash (I propose 100$) for releasing the hacks to the HPC:Factor to be dowloaded for free.

Now, I know that 100$ may be hard to get, but - as much as I don't want to pay for just ONE copy, for ONE machine, ANY cash - I'm willing to spend some for the good of community.

This way, isotherm gets some hard cash, and we - HPC users and lovers - get a nice compatibility layer maybe not "for free", but free enough for everyone of us. Whaddya say?

hmm...

I like the idea in principle, but what does the cash actually get us? If it's going to be community based, it would need to be open and ultimately handed over to the community. From the sounds of it, Isotherm doesn't want to do that yet.

There's been great suggestions here, however can we make sure that Isotherm gets the responses he wants? I really just want to see this progressed...

I've been sitting back and listening to the various proposals and have come to several conclusions.

1. A software author is entitled to ask whatever compensation he asks for his work. The potential buyer then has the right to either buy it or not.

2. Those who create great software and then give it away in the interest of the public domain are indeed a special breed. Those who design based on voluntary contribution deserve something beyond a simple "thank you."

3. Build a better mousetrap, and people will buy it. Getting a better web browser for the 720 will sell, especially if it handles the newer secure sites. Expand that to include MIPS machines as well, and there is a great potential market.

4. Those who don't want to buy, will still pirate it from their buddies.

I really don't understand all the ins and outs of the PPC2003 layers and such, and I wouldn't buy the software if it only allowed me to run Opera, since I am satisfied with the IE 6.0 I have on my 900C. But if it would allow me to runs something else....well that would be another story entirely.

Rich

The name of this poll is:
"What is a WM2003 compatibility layer worth to0 you?"

My monetary evaluation of $20.00 is based on that question, not on an Opera compatibility layer. So I agree with previous poster who thinks that an Opera only hack is not worth anything (at least not to me). Isotherm indicated the limitations of other existing layers, as though his layer would not be so limited. So Isotherm, I retract my $20.00 evaluation if this "WM2003 compatibility layer" is really only an "Opera compatibility layer". If it is truly a WM2003 layer though, I stand by my offer. A real compatibility layer would open up a world of more recent software to us. So, it is my hope that I did not misunderstand what was being offered.

I completely agree. However, this poll is really not going to get isotherm much of anything. At this point, I feel we're being asked "how much would you pay for that pig in the poke"? Since we haven't really seen it, can't run it for ourselves to test it - I have no idea what it's worth to me.



Yes, that's one of my points. If it only runs Opera, it's value is limited by that. If it runs virtually any WM2003 app - that's another story. Then we have to determine how much I want to run that app and scroll dialog boxes around to see what's there - unless this aygshell handles a lot of that.

My point still is - I don't think anyone can answer the question presented in this thread until we have more information on which to base our answers.

tundrwd, i CAN confirm it is not just opera!
the new winsock2 and aygshell and coredll are able to run a lot more wm2003 software that we could only dream about so far. for one, isotherm tried two wm2003+ only irc clients, both requiring winsock2 and a better aygshell and coredll than the ones available so far for hpc2000. neither would start until now on hpc2000, let alone connect. now they do start and do connect to irc servers!
this is just an example i'm interested in (up to date irc clients), i'm sure there'll be a lot more apps. what about a nice multiclient IM software.. IM+ or agile? they did start earlier but without a good aygshell they are quite crap. they (at least agile, i tried that one on the 900c) work much better on cenet 4.2 where you have a nice aygshell in ROM - which most of the time won't work on older hpc's, not even cenet 4.1. and this new aygshell is going to be better than the cenet 4.2 one.

so people please give more support / vote

and i still hope i can get the pack registered for all my hpcs...

Edited by cmonex 2006-10-17 6:26 PM

That is very good news!



Again, I'm VERY interested, but until I know more, I'm not sure how to vote. Maybe a list of compatible programs, with any issues that aren't (or can't be) resolved?

I'm still wanting to know if this can be tried for a week or 15 days before needing to register, etc., so anyone interested can try it out to see if, or how well, it works for their favorite software before buying.

Hmm, well, I'd buy this compatiblity layer just for Opera, as I'd love it for my future MP900(c)..