Windows CE 2.12 in Virtual PC :)

Hello,

I recently played around with the trial copy of the Windows CE 2.12 Platform Builder I got (nine discs in total) and noticed the default video driver is the S3 Trio64 one rather than the FLAT video driver used in CE 3.0 and HPC 2000.
As we could only get 320x200 in 256 colors in HPC 2000, I gave this a try to see if I achieved better results.

I did I built a MaxAll CEPC image with the default video driver, copied this to a prepared VHD and fired it up like this:

loadcepc /L:800x600x16 NK.bin

(Omitting the /L switch only gave me a garbled picture)

See attached screenshots. Only 640x480 (in 16 colors according to Virtual PC), but still better than what CE 3.0 gives us.

Hope this is useful/interesting to someone.



Edited by Nevermore 2010-04-30 2:58 PM
















Attachments
----------------
ce212.jpg (38KB - 4 downloads)
ce212n1.jpg (51KB - 1 downloads)
ce212n2.jpg (82KB - 2 downloads)
ce212n3.jpg (32KB - 1 downloads)
ce212n4.jpg (31KB - 1 downloads)
ce212n5.jpg (50KB - 2 downloads)

I wonder if we can get the trio 3 driver from 2.12 working under 3.0. I'm not sure how significant the differences are; but there are a lot of kernel protection changes in 3.0.

Now this is getting interesting and a bit weird.

I built a CE 3.00 core image using the FLAT driver (there's no S3 Trio driver, just an S3 Virge one which didn't work in VPC2007) and can get 1024x768 in 16-bit colors in VMware Fusion 3 as well. The driver also works in Virtual PC 2007. I was under the impression the FLAT driver didn't work correctly (neither in Virtual PC nor VMware) and thus restricted HPC 2000 to 320x200. I assumed this to be true for CE 3.00 as well since HPC 2000 is based on it. I was wrong.

(Of course my CE 2.12 image with the S3 Trio driver doesn't work in VMware, it is made for Virtual PC.)



Trying HPC 2000 next.

Update: Tried the HPC 2000 images from the SDK and the one available here in the support section. No luck getting those to work. But they are using the FLAT driver as well, just like my CE 3.00 "core" images. So do they use different FLAT drivers? How else can it be explained that one works and the other doesn't?

C:Amie, I believe this partially answers your question CE 3.00 is working.





Edited by Nevermore 2010-04-30 4:01 PM






Attachments
----------------
Bildschirmfoto 2010-04-30 um 15.58.26.png (41KB - 0 downloads)

Then after try HPC.Net 4.2

Your work is wonderful!

Why, what's wrong with .net?

Unfortunately I don't have the Platform Builder for CE.NET so can't build my own images of it. I only have it for 2.12 and 3.00.

I didn't really do much work, I am just playing around Have two Intermec 6651s on the way to me (one HPC pro, the other HPC 2000) so you could say I use this to get used to Windows CE in a large resolution

You know that my original work on this from when VPC was first release can be downloaded in the support section, right?
There are VHD images for HPC2000, CE .net and CE 5.

If you would like, I can publish yours in there with them.

Yes, of course I do, that's what inspired me to try this. I'd like to get HPC 2000 working as nicely in VMware as CE 3.00, as far as graphics are concerned.

Hope you don't think I'm not giving you credit for the images you created, of course I do.

As for publishing my images - no problems with that but I'm a bit afraid this might be illegal.

C:Amie, a question if you don't mind... What did you use to create the HPC 2000 image? As I said, my copy of PB 3.0 only allows creating core CE images, with most of the Handheld PC components missing. Is there a special edition of Platform Builder for HPC 2000 as well then?

How would I get my images to you so you can publish them? Also, would just the images (i.e. the NK.BIN files) be enough or would you like a complete, bootable VHD? In the latter case would you be okay with me using your VHD image for HPC 2000 as a base, since replacing the OS image and editing Autoexec.bat is all one has to do?



Edited by Nevermore 2010-04-30 4:22 PM

No, no. The upper part of the last comment was meant for Nathan PC, sorry. Lack of clarity on my part.

HPC2000 images are created by an addon to platform builder called the OEM Adaption Kit, or OAK; you've probably seen this when hacking around HPC2000 or HPC Pro. That particular one was generated internally by Microsoft in a futile attempt to generate a HPC2000 version of what eventually became the Vistual Studio Windows Mobile Emulation Module.

It's legacy stuff and you can't do much with a precompiled NK.bin (shhh) so if Microsoft have an issue (and they haven't so far) I'll take them down.

If you're happy to do the work, I am more than happy for you to disassemble one of my ones; we have to ensure that we use an open DOS clone, we cannot put anything from MSDOS on there. So perhaps reverse engineering my one would be a good idea.

If you can, please defrag, precompact and compact it. It should then compress fairly well up to the ftp server.

C:Amie, you could call me Nathan, that is my real name, PC is Paulino Campos(my surnames).

But sorry because of my comment, what I meant to say was that the next step on emulation of CE platforms on Virtual PC could be .Net 4.2, now it's clear to understand?

Hello,

I'm having an old device which supports winCE 2.12, but I do not have Platform builder to build an application. Please let me know from where
you got those windows CE 2.12 platform builder discs(nine discs). It will be very helpful if you give that info on how to get discs or from where
to download winCE 2.12 Platform builder.

Regards,
Ravindra

Nathan, yes I follow

Ravindra,
You've just woken up a 7 month old therad to ask a question that has nothing to do with the topic of the thread. Please do not do this.

If you want to get hold of platform builder, you have to buy it. It isn't free.

Wow I didn't realize the Platform builder 2.11 & 2.12 had that BIG of a gulf... I bought 2.11 some time ago, but it was so Spartan it just didn't seem worth all the effort to make anything serious with... Althugh in the last few days I've rekindled my interest in CE, and I have to say it's kind of sad the difference between the two..

To me, in a lot of ways CE 2.12 is closer to 3.0 than it is to 2.11 (just like 2.11 is far closer to 3.0 than it is to 2.0). I say that having poked around with a couple of CE 2.12 devices.

I also have 3.0, but it's just an eval version.. :| Although I find 2.11 easier to deal with, and it's far easier to build stuff for the CEPC ... I've dug up some ATA/IDE driver and managed to get it to work.. CE without a hard disk is borderline useless... It's kind of cool that it works on CE 2.11 and 3.0!