New Posts New Posts RSS Feed: PocketPC support
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Calendar   Register Register  Login Login

PocketPC support
 Post Reply Post Reply
Author
  Share Topic Share Topic  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
dynocomp View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie
Avatar

Joined: 14-Jun-2007
Location: United States
Posts: 1 		Post Options Post Options   Quote dynocomp Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: PocketPC support
    Posted: 18-Oct-2007 at 12:44pm

My company uses the Pocket PC extensively for bar code scanning.  We are about to write a line of programs for the Pocket PC.  How can I make use of DevForce for PocketPC development.  Would it be worth it?  Thanks.

DP
Back to Top
Linguinut View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 14-Jun-2007
Location: United States
Posts: 394 		Post Options Post Options   Quote Linguinut Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Oct-2007 at 1:25pm
DevForce does not directly work on PocketPCs.  The necessary remoting functionality is not supported in that environment.  If you have a web server available, one potential workaround is to setup various web services with DevForce on the backend web server.  You could write your mobile apps to interact with the web services.
Back to Top
alex22 View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie


Joined: 06-Nov-2007
Posts: 2 		Post Options Post Options   Quote alex22 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06-Nov-2007 at 7:23pm
have a look
Remoting on Pocket PC
faster than webservices by 10-20 times
Back to Top
davidklitzke View Drop Down
IdeaBlade
IdeaBlade
Avatar

Joined: 14-Jun-2007
Posts: 715 		Post Options Post Options   Quote davidklitzke Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Nov-2007 at 10:49am

We are looking at the Compact Framework remoting issue for one of our our 4.x releases (based on .NET 3.5 and the LINQ to Entities stack) in mid 2008 and were thinking of using WCF for Compact Framework.  We may also look at DotNetRemoting at that same time.

You may be interested in knowing that we already do perform custom serialization in our 3.x product, for performance reasons.  We have looked at the DotNetRemoting fast serialization product, and our initial analysis was that it has too many requirements that we cannot easily meet. ( avoiding public properties only, no interfaces, etc)
Back to Top
alex22 View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie


Joined: 06-Nov-2007
Posts: 2 		Post Options Post Options   Quote alex22 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13-Nov-2007 at 4:58pm

These two statements (avoiding public properties only, no interfaces,) are not correct
Perhaps you are refereeing to the old product FastSerializer

The new product Serialization Studio does not have such limitations.

You can use private members, it is up to you. But if you want these members to serialize 50 times faster than binary formatter, you have to declare them public.

No limitations on the interfaces either.

 

public interface MyInter

{

        int MyInt { get;set;}

}

 

public class Class2 : MyInter

{

   private string PrivString;

   private int _int2;

 

   public int MyInt

   {

            get

            {

                return _int2;

            }

            set

            {

                _int2 = value;

            }

   }

}

 

The class above can be perfectly serialized by the Serialization Studio.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down