Epocdigest V1 # 379

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tips for Posting to the Digest and how to unsubscribe

at the end of the Digest

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Epoc Digest Mon, 10 Nov 2003 Volume 01 : Number 379

************************************************************************

Sent to: 782 subscribers

In today's Epoc Digest 09 messages:

==============================

- Saving Extras bar settings

- Re: EPOC DIGEST V1 # 321 (5)

- Re: Symbian OS 7 netBook Pro

- Re: netBook Pro Symbian

- Re: Netbook Ethernet cards - netBook Pro Symbian - Etc.

- Re: MSN Messenger

- Re: MSN Messenger for Epoc

- re: Martin on Psion OS

- Re:Psiwin for Windows XP

*++++++++++&

Date: 7 Nov 2003 18:32:08 +0100

From: ian chapple

Subject: Saving Extras bar settings

Martin,

>> I'm not 100% sure (i.e. I haven't checked this) but I imagine that the 4 silk screen buttons being remembered works in the same way as the position on apps. on the Extras bar. I.e. if you set their position by just tapping on the side bar of the 'User applications' or 'Extras' bar to bring up the 'Application settings' then the settings aren't remembered after a soft reset. If however you do it by going through the Control Panel and then selecting 'Applications' then they will be... <<

Good call, I just tried it and it seems to work. I didn't even have to allocate the keys through the control panel, as I'd already done it; presumably pressing OK causes the settings to be saved in a more permanent manner.

Cheers, Ian.

*++++++++++&

Date: 8 Nov 2003 02:59:25 +0100

From: Moshe Nahir

Subject: Re: EPOC DIGEST V1 # 321 (5)

What could make the netBook better? USB, even longer battery life, give itthe option of running on standard AA-batteries, and maybe widen/heighten thescreen to fill more of the lid-space (and give it 800x600 resolution?).

You could also throw in CD-quality stereo-audio capabilities and a mini-jackplug to make the audio more useful, although audio doesn't really matter forme - I'm getting a separate neuros audio computer for my music needs...

Lars J

*++++++++++&

Date: 8 Nov 2003 23:44:31 +0100

From: Rolf Brunsting

Subject: Re: Symbian OS 7 netBook Pro

Dear Chris,

Sorry for the late response to your message.

<< ... software is not NECESSARILY going to be a problem. Especially if OPL was ported (which I think is always assumed). Quite likely, OPL programs written for ER6/7 phones would work immediately on the Symbian Netbook Pro >>

I'm afraid that Martin and yourself are making a mistake here by talking about how easy it will be to port an application that's running on a Symbian OS 6/7 smartphone to a Symbian OS 7 netBook Pro. What you, both, forget is that the starting point for most of us isn't a Symbian OS 6/7 smartphone but a Symbian OS 5 Psion. We're therefore interested in what's going to happen with the Symbian OS 5 applications we're currently using. After all, we've spent quite some time getting to know these applications and have stored a sizeable amount of data in their file formats. Translate our experience and data into money and they represent a much bigger sum than the combined purchase price of our applications, Psion hardware, CF cards and peripherals. We've therefore a very strong interest in our Symbian OS *5* applications being ported to the netBook Pro rather than the smartphone applications Martin and you keep talking about.

<< If it would be so few numbers sold, why would Psion sell the device in the first place? >>

Psion Teklogix is selling the netBook Pro in a market Itamar and myself don't belong to. We're car buyers, so to speak, while Psion Teklogix is selling trucks. How many 'trucks' Psion Teklogix expects to sell, or how many it will actually sell, has no effect on us.

<< If we get into the "chicken & egg" dilema, we'll never have a new Netbook OR software for it! >>

Well ... as Joe Bloggs, a general consumer who owns a Psion Series 5mx, I couldn't care less. When the people behind the Symbian OS 7 netBook Pro see me, Joe Bloggs, as their customer they will have to respond to my interests and concerns. So, stop talking about differences in OPL versions, GUI toolkits, smartphones and developers keen to buy one of those Symbian OS 7 netBooks Pro. When the market for the Symbian OS 7 netBook Pro is developers ... fine. I'll go to Dixons and buy me a Palm Tungsten T3, accepting the pain of switching from Series 5mx to Tungsten T3. But I'll be safe in the knowledge that Palm won't disappear overnight, will develop its hardware and software further and has a good range of third-party software.

<< I don't understand why you *seem* to have such a "vendetta" against a Symbian Netbook Pro. You remind me of someone else who was VERY negative about the chances of it. Can't we just "live and let live"? >>

What I wrote while wearing my Joe Bloggs cloth cap is a bit over the top, of course. Still, Joe raises the point that what's said about the Symbian OS 7 netBook Pro has been rather technical and developer orientated lately. What you write about the differences between the OPL implementations for Symbian OS 5 and Symbian OS 7, for example, could be correct, for all I know. I'm quite sure, however, that it doesn't answer some of the questions Itamar is wrestling with. Let's take one of Itamar's questions - Route and Street Planner. Two applications he's using quite regularly and has come to rely on for his daily activities. Now, does your remark about OPL differences mean that Route and Street Planner will become available for the Symbian OS 7 netBook Pro? I know that it's a very awkward question only Palmtop BV can answer. Still, the availability of Route and Street Planner is one of the points Itamar is judging the whole Symbian OS 7 netBook Pro project on. And the more 'developer talk' he gets in response to his comments the more convinced he will be that the Symbian OS 7 netBook Pro will be a failure. And I can't blame him for that.

What's more, I don't think that your "live and let live" is the solution. Itamar wouldn't have taken part in this discussion the way he has when he wouldn't be interested at all in the Symbian OS 7 netBook Pro. He's one of the potential customers for it. And even though the Symbian OS 7 netBook Pro isn't on the market yet, the marketing of it has already begun. What's being said about the Symbian OS 7 netBook Pro on the Digest plays an important part by making people ready for taking out their wallets and buying one the moment it comes on the market. Cutting off the discussion, even when it's on a "live and let live" basis, isn't such a good idea because it leaves Itamar's concerns unanswered. And concerns unanswered means losing a potential customer.

Kind Regards,

Rolf Brunsting - Darp - Netherlands

*++++++++++&

Date: 8 Nov 2003 23:44:53 +0100

From: Rolf Brunsting

Subject: Re: netBook Pro Symbian

Dear Itamar,

Sorry for the late response to your message.

<< You wrote "I think it is quite likely that a lot of the EPOC program authors who have moved to Symbian would be very keen on porting their EPOC programs (if not already done) to Symbian". That will depend entirely on whether the machine will be in general sales or only a special order >>

Don't forget that people are already developing applications for a number of Symbian OS 6 and Symbian OS 7 devices that *are* for sale in the high street. When the Symbian OS 7 netBook Pro can tap into this software pool the netBook Pro itself doesn't necessarily have to be sold via high street retailers.

I'm inclined to agree with you that having the Symbian OS 7 netBook Pro on display and for sale at (say) Dixons is a more ideal situation. More people will see it and have it demonstrated to them. This increases the chance of the Symbian OS 7 netBook Pro being sold in higher numbers. Trouble is, that it isn't that easy to get your products into a shop like Dixons. A Symbian OS 7 netBook Pro will fight for a shelf space that could also be filled by (say) a Toshiba laptop. And Dixons will need about two units per shop (one demonstrator plus one in stores) plus an x-number of units per distribution centre. Dixons will therefore have a hard look at the sales projections and the per-unit profit it will make. Their buyers will be tough negotiators who are going to demand purchase and payment conditions the people behind the Symbian OS 7 netBook Pro may not be able to meet. Which leaves the smaller on-line retailers (Expansys, Widget, Clove Technology, Exportech) who tend to be more sympathetic towards a product like the Symbian OS 7 netBook Pro and are better geared for products that sell in relative low numbers. They can take the risk of putting the Symbian OS 7 netBook Pro in their on-line sales catalogue and have a small number of them on stock.

<< If it will not be readily available with few numbers sold it will not be worth their while to do so. Also, if it will not be a platform for further development with a future, why should they ? >>

Which is an argument against developing software for any new (mobile) computer. We know with hindsight that the Palm Pilot had a future and a quite flourishing one at that. People who developed the first third-party applications for the Palm Pilot didn't know that. They saw a new device that was sufficiently interesting to start developing for. Had the Palm Pilot failed their software would have gone down with it.

It's clear that anybody who's going to develop software for the Symbian OS 7 netBook Pro is taking a risk, irrespective of whether it's going to be sold via high-street or on-line retailers. What the people behind the Symbian OS 7 netBook Pro need to do is to develop good relations with the Symbian developer community. They need to present their business plan to them in order to show that the Symbian OS 7 netBook Pro isn't some wild idea. And as they want to tap into the existing market for Symbian OS 6/7 they'll have to demonstrate that it's fairly easy to port applications to the Symbian OS 7 netBook Pro. Could be that they need one or two sample applications, complete with source code and explanations, demonstrating how such a port can be done. And when they want to have a number of software titles available when Symbian OS 7 netBook Pro is launched they'll have to give a few pre-production models on loan to a number of key developers.

Besides, talking about further development is rather premature as we're dealing with a product that's not even on the market yet. Getting the venture up and running and bringing the Symbian OS 7 netBook Pro to market is the *only* thing that counts at the moment. And its hardware and software platforms are broad enough in scope to keep third-party developers busy for quite some time. Doesn't mean that a next generation device isn't on the agenda. However, it's well down a long list of much more pressing items. Having a talk about a next generation device is currently something for an after work chat while enjoying a good pint at the pub.

<< And do we all have to pay again for the upgrade or not ? >>

Expect it to follow the general rule for software pricing:

- First time purchase : Full price

- Point update (2.3 to 2.4) : Free

- Major update (2.x to 3.x) : Upgrade fee

We've been lucky that major updates have been free as well for the vast majority of Psion software titles.

<< If not, what incentive would these authors have to do it ? >>

Have a look at the third-party software titles on your Series 7 and you'll find that most of them were created by privateers. People who develop software as a hobby and fund their hobby by selling their applications, When they find the Symbian OS 7 netBook Pro an interesting device they're going to develop for it.

Commercial operations, like Palmtop BV, will have a cold and clinical look at the Symbian OS 7 netBook Pro as the money for wages and the rent needs to come out of the profits of their software sales. Which makes it doubtful whether they can afford to develop for the Symbian OS 7 netBook Pro only. Which is the reason why the people behind the venture want to tap into the software market for such devices as the Nokia 9210 Communicator and the SonyEricsson P800. That's much more of a mass market, making an application like Route Planner for the Nokia 9210 Communicator a profitable venture. One that pays for (say) 80% of the development of Route Planner for the Symbian OS 7 netBook Pro. The 80% being the Nokia 9210 software code Palmtop BV can move to the Symbian OS 7 netBook Pro unaltered. Which leaves 20% of the software code that needs to be modified or rewritten. When Palmtop BV can sell the resulting application at the same price as Route Planner for the Communicator there's a good chance they're going to port Route Planner. They get 100% of the price for 20% of the work. Ample compensation for a software title that won't sell in the same numbers as the one for the 9210 Communicator.

Kind Regards,

Rolf Brunsting - Darp - Netherlands

*++++++++++&

Date: 8 Nov 2003 23:45:12 +0100

From: Rolf Brunsting

Subject: Re: Netbook Ethernet cards - netBook Pro Symbian - Etc.

Arent,

Concerning : Netbook Ethernet cards

<< These cards will not work because of hardware compatibility issues between the HPC Pro hardware platform and the 3C5**-based cards >>

Please *read* the subject title and the message itself. The request is for information on Ethernet cards for the Psion-Teklogix netBook, not a Windows CE H/PC.

<< What will happen to Symbian in the future now that Nokia is the only member with a substantial involvement? >>

That Nokia is the only one is a misnomer given the recent launches of Symbian OS based devices by a number of manufacturers. Besides, Nokia's purchase of the bulk of Motorola's share in Symbian required the approval by the other partners as Symbian is a limited company. That the purchase went through demonstrates that the partners didn't object to a Nokia share of 32%. Why question Nokia's position when Psion, Samsung, Matsushita, SonyEricsson and Siemens have no objections?

As for the future, when Symbian Ltd. was founded by Psion, Nokia and Ericsson the three 'founding fathers' already indicated that Symbian would be listed on the stock exchange when it would be able to stand on its own feet. We're getting close to that point as the sale of Symbian OS based devices gives Symbian a substantial income in the form of license fees. That we are close is also indicated by Symbian starting to publish detailed financial reports. It doesn't have to do that as it's a limited company and has only to report to its shareholders, the Symbian partners. Such reports are mandatory for a public company listed on the stock exchange. All signs are that Symbian is publishing these reports in order to prepare the financial market for an imminent flotation. The moment Symbian is floated the shareholdings of the Symbian partners will be diluted by the influx of external investors. Some partners may even sell the bulk of their shares as their investments have had the desired effect, bringing Symbian where they wanted it to be.

<< Also there's the writing on the wall in the form of an decreased emphasis on C++ and an increased one on J2ME and Nokia's own environment , wich raises the question if developers are willing to support an API that may either be completely missing or changed beyond all recognition in future releases >>

You're picking one single aspect, focus on it to the exclusion of everything else and extrapolate it into the extreme. What we get is flawed logic. What you write is equivalent to the argument "We use an umbrella when it rains" therefore "It doesn't rain when I'm not carrying an umbrella".

Sure, there's an increased interest in J2ME and the use of Java as development language for mobile devices. What it doesn't imply, however, is a decreased interest in C++. Neither Java nor C++ is the be all that ends all as both development languages have their strengths and weaknesses. C++ is, for example, the language of choice for high-performance applications. Think of such interactive games as EIDOS' Tomb Raider for the Nokia N-Gage. It's not that you can't develop and interactive game on the basis of the J2ME specification. Practical situation is that you're going to fight against some of its limitations and have to make compromises you'd rather not make. While Java/J2ME will be the development language of choice when you can use its specific strengths to maximum advantage. And there will be a number of areas in which it's an even choice between J2ME and C++ as neither of them offer specific advantages in these areas. The choice will then be made on the basis of such things as personal preference, previous development experience and/or the re-use of existing code.

What people therefore mean when they're talking about a rise on J2ME development is that the ratio of J2ME versus C++ applications is going to change. Which isn't that surprising as J2ME is relatively new and has yet to reach full potential. What these people aren't talking about is the demise of C++ as they know very well that C++ is here to stay. Something that's overshadowed by a familiar aspect of the (mobile) computer world - overselling what you're interested in. There are people who promote J2ME as if it's Dr. Doxy's Potion to cure all illnesses.

By the way, when Euan Mee wrote about the sales figures of Symbian OS based devices you asked the question:

[Quote]

But how many of these are full-blown ,open -i.e non-embedded , capable of running native applications - models like Nokia's 7650/3650/N-Gage or Ericsson's P 800/900 ? If you substract embedded sales ,then this figure could drop well below a million

[Unquote]

Which is a very odd question as the native applications you refer to are C++ applications. As you've been hammering on the rise of J2ME and demise of C++ the ability of the above phones to run native applications isn't that important. It's a relic of the past, soon to disappear. What we see, however, is that you use the ability to run native applications as *the* key aspect to downplay Euan's figures. Sorry, guy, you can't have it both ways. When you're 100% convinced that J2ME is the future you're going to have to judge these phones on their ability to run J2ME applications (which they can).

Concerning : Exciting times ahead

<< Yup , the N-gage as well as the 6600 have more RAM than the current Communicator and can be used both as serious replacements for even a high-end PDA >>

You don't have to make an in-depth study of the Nokia 6600 or the N-Gage to see that they're not going to fulfil the role of high-end PDA. Unless your minimum specifications for a high-end PDA are rather pedestrian. True high-end PDAs have an integrated WiFi wireless network adapter. A feature both 6600 and N-Gage aren't equipped with. Their 176 by 208 pixel displays are small compared to the typical 240 by 320 PDA displays. And I can go on by mentioning a number of other aspects in which the 6600 or N-Gage don't score well in the high-end PDA stakes. You can use an N-Gage or 6600 as a PDA all right. No doubt about that. But when you really want to have a high-end PDA you need to look elsewhere.

<< Yes , I do understand your qualms but the software compatibility issue will also raise its head with Symbian >>

Which makes it a non-issue as you're going to change software anyway. When Kevin's 'souped up Revo' will run PalmOS he's going to change software. When it's running Symbian OS 7 he's going to change software. And when your 'J2ME with everything' comes true he's going to change software as well.

<< IMHO , POS could do a much better job by improving the s3mx ( more RAM , onboard user-accessible flash , Bluetooth , OBEX , better keyboard , touchscreen perhaps ?) This could be the perfect smartphone companion , it could hold copies of the smartphone's addressbook ,calendar and possibly even the Memo application. Email could be be composed on it , uploaded off-line to the phone and stored there until sending >>

First time I read this I thought it was a misposted entry for the Joke Of The Month competition. Looks that you're serious, though, which doesn't make the suggestion any less hilarious.

The good Lord has given you brains, Arent - use them - THINK! There are a good number of PDAs on the market, with and without keyboard, that allow you to do what you describe. Up to date devices built with the latest hardware and running modern 32-bit operating systems and applications. PDAs that come with such features as Bluetooth and IrOBEX as standard. And you want Pinnock Organiser Services to revive an out of production 1991 vintage 16-bit PDA that's based on late 80's technology. What's more, to create this new Series 3mx as a companion to a smartphone. A mobile device that was developed with the specific aim to integrate PDA and mobile phone so that you don't have to carry two devices. It doesn't make ANY sense to develop such a Series 3mx. It's a complete waste of time, money and effort.

When having safety copies of your contacts list, diary and notes is the issue it's much better to write a backup tool that copies them to the type of memory card the smartphone uses. Multimedia Card in case of a Nokia 6600, Memory Stick Duo in case of a SonyEricsson P800, etc. And when the keyboard of the smartphone in question isn't really suitable for entering large volumes of text and/or data you develop a folding full-size keyboard for them. A keyboard highly similar to the ones for Palm, Compaq and other PDAs that can be linked to the smartphone in the form of click-on, infrared or Bluetooth.

Concerning : POS possible color Revo

<< Personally, I think that a rigorous update of the s3mx is the more promising route , with the 5mx they will sooner rather than later run into both Intellectual Property as well as software compatibility issues >>

You've mentioned this (Microsoft) intellectual property issue more than once in your messages. What you haven't mentioned is what the intellectual property consists of, despite frequent requests. Now, I perfectly understand that asking the question can be much easier than answering it. Still, one of the rules of debating is that the person who makes the statement needs to prove the validity of the statement when asked to do so. As the EPOC Digest isn't a debating chamber you don't have to supply the validity immediately. You can take your time, perform some additional checks, do some extra background research, and supply the validity at a later date. Nor is it mandatory that you come up with a detailed list of each and every intellectual property issue. One or two you judge to be important will do. Months have passed now and we're still none the wiser. Which leads me to the conclusion that what you write about (Microsoft) intellectual property is either

1) a figment of your own imagination,

2) based on sheer ignorance,

or,

3) pure disinformation.

Now that we're at it I can just as well add my comments to the message you wrote in EPOC Digest no. 377 in answer to a question by Itamar.

Concerning : S3MX update

<< Battery consumption : All Symbian32 phones are quite heavy on batteries if you are going to use the organiser functions intensively >>

When battery consumption would be one of the top 5 purchase criteria none of the current crop of PDAs and smartphones would stand any chance of commercial success. Fact is that they do sell, indicating that a range of other features take precedence. A time on batteries of 6 to 10 hours is acceptable when the PDA/smartphone is equipped with features the consumer consider to be must-have features. Going against this trend by offering a time on batteries of (say) 40 hours at the expense of such 'must-haves' is commercial suicide.

<< There is only one version of Symbian16 (a.k.a SIBO a.k.a Epoc 16 0but now there are at least 3 different releases (ER 5.1 , ER 6 and ER 7 , not to count embedded versions ) two menu-driven (Series 60 and Series 80) - and three different graphical user interfaces ( Eikon, UIQ and Series 90 ) of Symbian32 , with probably more to follow so the development environment is extremely stable >>

There are three main comments I'd like to make.

ONE - When you pick the Series 3mx as a basis for your new device you automatically pick SIBO as your software platform. That there are other mobile operating systems (like PalmOS, Windows Mobile, Symbian OS and Mobile Linux) is irrelevant.

TWO - You've written quite a lot about PDAs and smartphones on the EPOC Digest. The minimum Digest subscribers who aren't well versed in all things PDA/Smartphone expect from such a prolific author is that he knows the difference between a carrot and a cabbage, so to speak. The above section from your message proves otherwise.

A) The operating system of the (16-bit) Series 3 models was called EPOC. When the 32-bit Series 5 was introduced it's operating system was called EPOC as well. Giving rise to the distiction between EPOC16 of the Series 3 models and EPOC32 of the Series 5. The rights to the EPOC name were subsequently transferred to the newly established Symbian Ltd. Result was that the old EPOC/EPOC16 was given the same name as that of the Series 3 hardware platform, SIBO, and it's ownership was transferred to Psion Industrial (now Psion-Teklogix). In other words, there is no such thing as Symbian16.

B) Symbian Ltd. decided to replace the EPOC name by Symbian OS and to get rid of the word 'release' from the sixth release/version onwards. What was known as EPOC Release 5 was named Symbian OS 5 retrospectively. As development predates launch, the term EPOC Release 6/7 has been; used inside Symbian Ltd. and the Symbian development community. All Symbian based smartphones, however, are described as running Symbian OS 6 or 7, with one single exception (the Ericsson R380). Officially, EPOC Releases 6 and 7 don't exist.

C) Given (a) and (b) above, the operating systems supplied by Symbian Ltd. are 32-bit operating systems. Talking about Symbian32 is equivalent to talking about a black crow. Crows are black and Symbian OS is 32-bit.

D) There is no such thing as EPOC Release 5.1 / Symbian OS 5.1. It's simply called Symbian OS 5 and has version numbers (for my Series 7 it's Symbian OS 5 version 1.05). The only one that has a point release number is Symbian OS 6 - the Nokia 9210 uses 6.0 and the Nokia 7650 uses 6.1.

E) You stubbornly refuse to accept what has explained to you more than once - the way you apply the term 'embedded' goes against a long established convention of the software industry. SIBO, Symbian OS, PalmOS and Windows Mobile are all embedded operating systems. Whether they're stored in masked ROM, protected RAM, NOVRAM, EEPROM or FLASH doesn't make any difference. Nor does that fact that you can install additional applications make any difference.

F) When a device manufacturer decides to make a selection out of the total number of software modules that are part of (say) Symbian OS 6 it is still using Symbian OS 6. The selection doesn't establish a new Symbian OS version.

G) Both the Nokia Series 60 and Series 80 platforms are graphical user interfaces. The famous menu system of Nokia's phones, familiar to quite a number of Digest subscribers, is now called Series 40.

THREE - The fact that SIBO is a stable platform is because it's as dead as a doornail. The whole mobile device industry has moved to 32-bit systems. No new features will therefore be added to it and the bugs that are still in SIBO will remain till Kingdom comes. What you want to do with the Series 3mx is therefore a kind of Dr. Frankenstein operation by patching bits of dead IT flesh together.

<< Symbian32 is a high-profile target (can I say sitting duck ?) for litigation by MicroSoft about intellectual property issues while Symbian16 is almost forgotten and unlike Symbian32 unlikely to affect MS's bottom line >>

We're once more at the, yet unexplained, issue of Microsoft intellectual property. Please note that repeating the same statement over and over again doesn't make it true. You have to prove the validity of the statements itself. As long as you're not supplying the background information in support of your statement it's equivalent to a statement like "The moon is made of green cheese". And the more you repeat your statement on IP issues the less trustworthy our messages become. Seven basic errors in one paragraph on SIBO and Symbian OS (see above) underlines how sloppy you are when it comes to simple facts. And, given the nature of your messages, you can be accused of being a so-called 'Troll' intent on disrupting the EPOC Digest.

Rolf Brunsting - Darp - Netherlands

*++++++++++&

Date: 8 Nov 2003 23:45:34 +0100

From: Rolf Brunsting

Subject: Re: MSN Messenger

Dear Kim,

<< However, I have received free upgrades to quite a few of my other Epoc software and expect the same to happen with MS Messenger for Epoc or a refund for the $ 15 I paid less than six months ago >>

We've been lucky that many EPOC developers didn't charge for upgrades because software development is more a hobby than a business to them. Some applications have been developed to such an extent that version 1.00 is but a pale shadow of the current version. Determine a unit price on the basis of total development costs and the current version has a price that's much higher than than that of version 1.00. Still, many an EPOC developer has charged a single price for whatever the version and supplied free upgrade after free upgrade. That's not a sustainable business model as you have to find new, first time, buyers for each upgraded version as they have to pay for the development of an upgrade your existing user base gets for free. I therefore think that each software developer has the freedom to define his/her own upgrade policy.

As for Ruksun, we don't know the exact nature of the changes Microsoft made to its MSN Messenger service. Nor do we know what these changes mean for Ruksun's MSN Messenger client. We therefore have to reckon with the possibility that Ruksun has to make substantial changes, even to rewrite significant sections of the Messenger client code. An amount of work that's not covered by the US$15.= you paid. What's more, it's work that has been forced upon them rather than self-initiated work to improve the application.

Let's therefore wait till Ruksun has investigated the situation and knows what it has to do. And when Ruksun feels that the amount of work justifies an upgrade fee we'll have to see what the fee is. You can then decide whether continued use of Microsoft's MSN Messenger service is worth the upgrade fee.

Kind Regards,

Rolf Brunsting - Darp - Netherlands

*++++++++++&

Date: 8 Nov 2003 23:45:43 +0100

From: Rolf Brunsting

Subject: Re: MSN Messenger for Epoc

Dear Itamar,

<< Well, that is part and parcel of the problem we face with EPOC v.5. The authors will not update their software anymore and sooner or later various programs that connect to the outside world will stop functioning (web, emailing, MSN messenger, etc.). I don't think you will get an upgrade anymore >>

Come on, guy!! Ruksun is investigating what Microsoft has changed in its MSN Messenger service and what it means to its EPOC Messenger client. And you're already talking about Ruksun not supplying an upgrade because "authors will not update their software anymore". Have the common courtesy to wait till Ruksun has finished its investigations and come to a conclusion. And when Ruksun has to decide not to upgrade there's the real possibility that it's not for lack of will but for insurmountable technical difficulties.

<< Did they promiss any upgrades or service when you bought the program or not ? >>

Ruksun has no control over what Microsoft does with its MSN Messenger service. Any promise Ruksun made regarding upgrades is therefore limited to what it can do. In case the changes Microsoft made are based on Windows XP operating system services there's a real chance Ruksun won't be able to modify its EPOC software to suit. Leaving Ruksun the only option to stop development and to withdraw its application.

Kind Regards,

Rolf Brunsting - Darp - Netherlands

*++++++++++&

Date: 9 Nov 2003 14:05:50 +0100

From: Scott Lloyd

Subject: re: Martin on Psion OS

Hello My Friends!

Just wanting to add to Martin's' comments in the last digest. Embedded systems, of course....you have no choice! We use

embedded systems on every spacecraft mission we fly. Our mass budgets are so small we have to embed the code into

hardware. My point? pda's are allot like small spacecraft instruments that have to perform allot of things, if fact they are worse because on the user end the device has to look and act like a desktop computer. I am trying to understand how a

embedded piece of code in hardware, be it epoc,palm,etc has anything to do with making microsoft tense other than usual

business competition issues that have nothing to do with copywrite issues or IP problems. The previous OS's mentioned are

pre-existing, have been for a long time and stand on their own. Please understand Im not debating anyone, just trying to

understand some of the apparent business issues I read in the digest. The Epoc OS used in Psion computers is rock solid

always as been and will always out-perform windows on a fundamental basis, does it need to be enhanced? To compete,

heck yes!.........as my VP would say..."make it so!"

God bless

your friend in Texas

scott lloy

*++++++++++&

Date: 10 Nov 2003 10:17:02 +0100

From: David Warren

Subject: Re:Psiwin for Windows XP

Hello All,

This is my first post to the group so hope ive got it right?

After buying a laptop and upgrading to XP and Psiwin 2.3.3 I had the problems of the link dropping after about a minute into a backup.

I tried various baud rates and tinkerings without success.

Now, my laptop has an infrared port as well as a com port, and I thought I had heard somewhere that they both shared the same settings.

So I went into the Device manager for a look. No conflicts reported and they were using different settings?

Anyhow, I disabled the Infrared port and hey presto its works a treat. Been using it now for a few months without a blip.