Related
I saw a lot of programs developed for XDA II, and they are for XDA II only. So it must be a SDK documents somewhere, otherwise no-one can write codes specific for XDA II, Am i correct?
If so, could anyone tell me where can I get the XDA II's SDK?
Thanks in advance
SDK is the PocketPC2003 SDK available free from Microsoft.
It really needs embedded Visual C++ 4, also available free from Microsoft.
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsmobile/default.mspx
They'll also send you all the tools on DVD for a small handling fee, as they are huge downloads.
andyclap said:
SDK is the PocketPC2003 SDK available free from Microsoft.
It really needs embedded Visual C++ 4, also available free from Microsoft.
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsmobile/default.mspx
They'll also send you all the tools on DVD for a small handling fee, as they are huge downloads.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sorry, I didn't make myself clear.
I have the generic SDK from MS, what I need is the SDK for XDA II, it should come from XDA II's manufacture.
Thanks
well there are not xda2 stk
but there are a collection of stk's
one of them is ms's
another is the one which the cam program uses
another is the stk of the ati 2d chip
i think ati will give you their sdk if you reg at their site or something
dont think the cam's sdk is something they would let people get their hands on
a xda2 sdk would be like having a dell Latitude sdk
it dont work like that
Rudegar said:
well there are not xda2 stk
but there are a collection of stk's
one of them is ms's
another is the one which the cam program uses
another is the stk of the ati 2d chip
i think ati will give you their sdk if you reg at their site or something
dont think the cam's sdk is something they would let people get their hands on
a xda2 sdk would be like having a dell Latitude sdk
it dont work like that
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks, where is the website for ATI? could you post a link please?
BTW, what I need to do is to develop GSM related applications specific for XDA II, say, timed SMS sending. It is best if I can plug my apps into their build-in apps like SMS (it does not have timed SMS sending options)
Aha you're after the device SDK for the XDAII. You want to know what drivers are supplied and how to use them to control the specific hardware at the lowest level, e.g. ATI graphics, Radio hardware, Camera, Bluetooth, Buttons, comms, etc.
... unfortuantely HTC are an absolutely closed shop. Getting any information out of them is like getting blood out of a stone. A particularly hard and bloodless stone.
This site is really the closest thing we have, although as mentioned above you might have some luck with the specific hardware manufacturers such as ATI (although they are also notoriously unforthcoming). There's also sourceO2, who have similar level of knowledge about supporting low level development on the XDAII as a particularly stupid earthworm.
Usual rant follows... If only the device manufacturers would properly open up their products to developers, they'd see a wealth of applications developed that'd make their hardware a real "must have". They probably think it'd eat into their profits on the next device they produce, which is all they're interested in really.
Incidentally, you can both send SMSs, and use the notification subsystem to schedule an app to run at a particular time via the PPC2003 API. So it'd be fairly simple to knock up a client-side SMS timed sending application wihtout hacking RIL.
Hi, andyclap
Thanks a lot for your informative reply.
I am not actually developing very low level applications. What I planned to do is to develop some value added little programs that could be a plug-in or such a kind.
To make myself clear, I can use an example to explain what I might want to do:
The build-in SMS program does not have the feature the let you send a timed (scheduled) SMS. I am wishing to do is:
insert a menu item into its original context menu (tap-and-hold on SMS message body), you can choose to send at specific time
Anyone have an idea?
build in sms programs are not something which would make it a special xda program
all pocketpcs would be able to use that
that is unless you want to block your application somehow from being used on other pocketpc's then the xda then i suppose you need to access some reg indentifier or something
you want me to give your the link to ati ?
well if you are too lazy to type it then i suppose I must
http://www.ati.com/products/handheld.html
Hmm this may be quite hard to do, as I the messaging system is quite unextensible. It's fine if you want to create a new format from scratch, but extending an existing form handler is, I think, impossible.
Some low level dirty tricks (subclassing windows etc) might work, but would be pretty tricky to do, and very hacky.
I just wish somebody would give the PocketPC team a Symbian SDK, Symbian really got it right when it comes to messaging.
Yes, i can write a new SMS program, but it will need me to deal with Contacts object. I mean, I have to write code for fetching data stored in the build-in contacts database. If I can just plug my function into its contextmenu, I will only need to implement a simple function program (setting date/time, save phone number and message text, create a notification, etc).
Using SetWindowLong can hook into the *****, but this program model is some kind of fragile, very easy to crush the system or the apps itslef, not really stable if not tested thoroughly
Is there anyone who has done this, kind of like recording the phonecall... Though my query is slightly more advanced, I would like to see a Crypto program creating secure phonecalls using WM5...
So we would need to capture the datastream incoming(to decrypt) and outgoing to crypt, this creating a nice safe way to talk to your...friends... Anyone else up for this project?
Or any feedback on the concept?
...and...
i dont think its only me intrested in this so ill send this source code aswell from a company that works from a PC via isdn... This company sells cellphones with encryption...
http://www.cryptophone.de/support/downloads/downloads.html
Dont know if this could help in the initial stage?
Ps.
A similar software does exist (180 dollars per phone + all your details are sent to australian gov) www.securegsm.com
Anyone up for the task?
Re: ...and...
it is impossible to intercept the audio data coming through PPC unless your hardware is specially designed for it and it provides you a specialized API for doing that. All crypting software encrypts calls via doing CSD calls and senging data. There is another program - www.cryptophone.de
this looks like a HTC anyway...
http://www.cryptophone.de/products/CP220/index.html
???
Then how can secureGSM do it in a software made for any WM5?
So theoretically i dont think there is a problem there....
SecureGSM is an end to end app, which I suppose all such apps would have to be.
As such, it almost certainly doesn't need to pick up the phone/modem audio path (which as Mamaich says, seems to be impossible without a particular hardware implementation), but just use the normal microphone and loudspeaker recording/playback functions.
V
AddeBC,
Vijay is right. SecureGSM is working on the same principal as criptophone.
Establish a modem connection between two devices running the same software run a negociation with the network (v.110 is much faster then v.32) start a data connection with the other dude...the stream that the mic receives is encrypted and sent over to the other party there the software decrypts the stream and plays it troughout the speaker.
There were quite a few threads regarding csd connections between phones so could start from there.
The only thing that you're going to miss in this deal is the logistic for selling the software + phone.
Cheers,
Raul
I often thought of adding this as a feature of GSMbeam but I just can't think when I would ever really need it. It would be cool to communicate without the possibility of Big Brother knowing what is said, but what would you say?
To sell this kind of software may also bring you in contact with undesirable groups, criminals or terrorists are propably in need of good voice call encryption.
To do this it will have to have a reletively low quality of sound because of the poor data rate on voice calls. How would one go about encoding the sound to data? Are there any off the shelf open ended codecs for this purpose or would the work need to be done from scratch?
OdeeanRDeathshead said:
......To sell this kind of software may also bring you in contact with undesirable groups, criminals or terrorists are propably in need of good voice call encryption....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
as per SecureGSM FAQ:
http://www.securegsm.com/pages.php?pageid=16#4
Is your software designed to support criminals and terrorists?
Absolutely not! We do not condone any such activities, and take extreme care to ensure that our products are used to prevent, rather than encourage criminal or terrorist behavior.
AddeBC
AddeBC said:
A similar software does exist (180 dollars per phone + all your details are sent to australian gov)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
End User Details are being collected as part of identity verification procedure.
First name, Second Name, living address, phone number and contact email address. I suppose, this is standard practice. We do not support criminals and terrorists and would not sell if in doubt.. At the same time our software does just what is says to do: encrypts phone conversation end to end to the military standards and beyond.
It is buyer's resposibility to provide correct information on the order form.
see this page for details:
http://www.securegsm.com/pages.php?pageid=26
Also, I suppose providing end user information to the Australian Government does not automaticaly lead to the conclusion that SecureGSM is flawed or insecure, has master key, back door or leaving any other way to interfere with contents of SecureGSM encrypted conversation. And no! Big Brother does not know what is said..
Any way, if terrorists or any of the countries listed there want call encryption they would not trust their lives to someone elses software. I am sure they are smart enough to write their own.
As for the laws governing the sale, that just makes me mad. I do not trust John Howard, I think I should have the right to a private conversation without registering it with him. I guess that is the beauty of computers. Computers make the world go round and its the size of your brain that gets results not politics.
Well, for a less.. 'big brother-ish' scenario, I would, personally like to have my line phone to be encrypted, as it is way much easier to have someone bugging your phone line.
However, for a cell/mobile phone, it is relatively difficult for amateur people to bug it, right? What are the chances that someone around you that is interested on your conversations, is capable of intercepting your mobile/cell phone calls.
Raseac Secure Phone - for WM 2003 and WM 2003 SE
This looks worthwhile! Downloads are available from the website for testing.
[Also, as a side note, I have been in touch with Phil Zimmermann, the creator of PGP, and lately of Zfone (crypto SIP phone for XP/Linux/Mac), and he says he realizes the importance of the Pocket PC platform and is considering ways of implementing Zfone for Pocket PC.]
Code:
http://www.raseac.com.br/
Encryption system for end-to-end secure voice communication. It was developed to be used in palmtop computers running Microsoft PocketPC 2003 e 2003SE (Intel).
When installed in a palmtop connected via modem to a telephony system (fixed or mobile), it allows your company and your business a secure means of communication anywhere around the world.
Since Raseac encryption technology was developed for high capacity processors, it allowed for the implementation of state of the art security, featuring:
* Exceptional sound quality;
* 256-bit encryption key;
* Encryption technology based on the Rijndael block cipher (AES);
* CBC, Random IV, Time Stamp, Integrity check by MAC/SHA-256;
* 100% protected against "man in the middle attack";
* No backdoor.
Need for secure phone line; the brazilian site and others
Well, I'd say that common people don't have much to worry about being tapped... Usually, nothing that sensitive is talken EVER over line.
Things begin to change when you are involved with something sensitive, be that legal or not. Most of the guies who work with corps, above management level may have some need from time to time, to be contacted that way by a superior. From director and up, depending on what kind of business the company is into, it IS a must!
People who work with security, government and other agencies may need it. As already said, people who work with barely legal to blatantly criminal stuff are always in need of such trappings. I think terrorists end-up on that class.
Equipment, hard and soft is always expensive and cost prohibitive for most of us.
Paranoid, techno-junkies and just curious people may want it, just to have.
Since I fit two or three of the said categories, I would like to put a program like that on my cell phone...
Just for the sake of having it there!
(mind you! Curious, telecom and management+ position...)
That said, a basic voice scramble-de-scramble program is OK for me!!!
(the more open-source, the better!)
About the brazilian company, they changed the site's name to secvoice. I tried to have a look-see on their specs but they ignored my e-mail and so I've done with it.
Hi,
I asked this question over on another mobile phone forum and a user directed me here, so here goes:
Is it necessary for apps developed for Windows Mobile 5 and 6 (PPC) to be "signed" in any way in order to be installed and run? Similar to the way newer Symbian OS apps must be signed? Or can they just be developed and flat-out installed without any hassle or complication, the same way apps for regular desktop Windows PC's can be?
As a programmer/developer and also a Symbian user, I absolutely HATE the need for signing or certifying anything for it to be able to run. If it's not necessary on a laptop or desktop, it shouldn't be necessary on a phone. I am considering switching over from Symbian to WM6, but ONLY if the platform is completely free of the need for anything resembling certificates and signing.
At the very least, is there the option for the end WM6/5 user to easily change a setting within the OS so as to allow the full installation of non-signed apps? I'd settle for that. With Symbian, both developers and users are completely imprisoned by certificates and cannot do anything without the permission of the OS fascists.
Thanks for any help on this..
on WM5 default, when you try and uninstall something unsigned, you just have to tap the "yes" button to run the application, after that it remembers it for that app.
so basically for my setup (wm5/wm6) i can run anything, signed or unsigned. And there is a fix somewhere to disable the notification warning
hope that helps
and
come to the light side
Pocket PC's for the win
Thanks for your reply.. it's certainly encouraging to hear that WM5/6 is not restricted by the absolute necessity for signed certificates like Symbian is. As a programmer I completely refuse to bother developing software for a platform that handcuffs both developer and end user so mercilessly. If I can write programs in Visual Basic that will comple to an EXE and run hassle-free on any Windows PC, I don't see why I should have any less freedom when writing programs for a mobile device.
SymbianSigned and its locked OS is a deal-breaker for me. In looking through this forum though, it seems that there are in fact some components of WM that absolutely must be signed to be installed? Like skins for example? Are there any other components that fall into that category?
Still hoping to get a defnitive answer on what components of WM require mandatory signing and which ones are totally non-restrictive optional. So far my understanding is that under no circumstances do any applications ever have to be signed in order to be installed and run, no matter what kind of advanced access and functions they involve. Correct? Whereas fully integrated keyboard skins do need to be signed, for some reason. Correct?
Any other categories not covered above that do or don't require signing?
Thanks!
As far as I know the worse case scenario for signing is that you must also install your own cert. All that happens when you do this is again a warning.
As for the merits of the whole signing thing. Although I agree symbian goes too far, I think some kind of signing procedure, that is more robust should be required for windows mobile.
My preferred solution would be to have restricted functions that on install warn the user of exactly what capabilities the SW has, and allows the user to allow or restrict certain capabilities.
Simply an I trust this or that is useless as everyone ends up trusting everything as you have little choice. But given that it is easy to write SW using the RIL functions that completely unknown to the user can call expensive pay lines, download ridiculous amounts of data over gprs, or even send me personal information from your device, some security should definitely be required.
The truth is because of the ability to make expensive phone calls directly to people who will have direct financial benefit, I would argue security for a phone is at least if not more important than on the PC.
my 2 cents
WM5/WM6 editions for touch-screen devices generally come with "relaxed" security which means that third party apps don't have to be signed to execute once somebody answers yes to a first-time warning dialog box. ROM cookers here generally relax this requirement even more by setting a registry value HKLM\Security\Policies\Policies\0000101A to a 1. This disables the first-time warning message also.
However, services and device drivers generally need to be signed because they are executed before these relaxed settings take effect. Application developers generally can work around this too by starting the service/device driver themselves with a little program placed in \windows\startup
WM6/WM5 editions for devices without touch-screens generally have a higher security setting that disallows execution of any application unless it is signed.
hello all and congrats on the new forum
the android in its current state is quite a poor business phone compared to winmo6.1 for a few reasons. can you all chip in in identifying the areas of weakness just to help out developers who want to do something about it
ill start by mentioning the obvious things to me
1. no exchange mail support with search server and html mail(maybe a roadsync port is needed)
2. no mention of vpn support
3. the join domain feature of wm6.1 was kinda useful to some
4. the only platform that can access our eap-tls network in wm5/6.
5. not sure its a big thing, but maybe a basic firewall is needed.
6. an option less integration with gmail (not good for corporations who have security concerns)
7. reader/editor for office 2k7 documents
8. remote desktop (windows, osX, linux)
9. maybe bundling all the buisness features as a single software pack (that does not need to be included with all sold phones if not many people are intrested) this will simplify development and updates.
10. out of box wirless 3g/edge modem or something similar to WiFiRouter.
that's what i can think of for now. feel free to repost this in a more visible android forum
well then don't get it
whats with the hostility. I'm just trying to make android a more attractive platform by highlighting its business shortcomings.
if we can get developers interested in developing these kind of apps early in its life to make it more corporate friendly it would be great.
taking care of business and core features are far more important than cool 'n' pointless apps that the iphone seems to be handling pretty well.
more stuff:
8. remote desktop (windows, osX, linux)
9. maybe bundling all the business features as a single software pack (that does not need to be included with all sold phones if not many people are interested) this will simplify development and updates.
10. out of box wireless 3g/edge modem or something similar to WiFiRouter.
since it's linux I have no doubt that most of your worries will be addressed. I know Linux has a remote desktop app but the question is will the android run non-java apps? Will it have GCC and some libs? Can we download GCC and some libs to our microSDHC cards? Will SSH work? Will the android GUI have X11-like network support? I am not much of a programmer but if the android has gcc and libs I will be doing some compiling of linux apps.
dagentooboy said:
since it's linux I have no doubt that most of your worries will be addressed. I know Linux has a remote desktop app but the question is will the android run non-java apps? Will it have GCC and some libs? Can we download GCC and some libs to our microSDHC cards? Will SSH work? Will the android GUI have X11-like network support? I am not much of a programmer but if the android has gcc and libs I will be doing some compiling of linux apps.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Im about 95% certain that all apps run inside android's java environment. Therefore any existing opensource application would have to be ported over to the specifications of android's java language.
Android as an operating system is just a linux executable binary. Think of it like X server. Android is just a GUI, but as of now everything that runs in that GUI has to be specifically written for android.
It may be possible to run seperate tty sessions... and that could allow you to run some sort of server in the background behind android that you could access from inside of android via a web browser (http://127.0.0.1 aka localhost style)
mburris said:
Im about 95% certain that all apps run inside android's java environment. Therefore any existing opensource application would have to be ported over to the specifications of android's java language.
Android as an operating system is just a linux executable binary. Think of it like X server. Android is just a GUI, but as of now everything that runs in that GUI has to be specifically written for android.
It may be possible to run seperate tty sessions... and that could allow you to run some sort of server in the background behind android that you could access from inside of android via a web browser (http://127.0.0.1 aka localhost style)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yeah... that's what I thought. I was hoping that wasn't the case.... I can dream right? Maybe it will be like the Zaurus all over again and we can write an X11 environment for it.
Nr. 1, the Exchange feature was mentioned at the launch, and the official answer was "we expect developers to provide applications for that". I think that also applies to the VPN part; since it's that open and that linux-ish, there will probably be lots of VPN/VNC/RDP/SSH clients available.
3 and 4, I don't even know what they are. Stuck in a Windows-based environment, with closed specs ? tough luck. That's vendor lock-in, you know.
5 - a firewall ? what for ? Your device won't be permanently connected, and you probably won't have lots of apps listening on your phone. Anyway, a filtering module will probably appear pretty soon. I'd be more worried about installed apps making hidden outgoing connections (apps calling home, or malicious apps), therefore a good app to have would be something similar to LittleSnitch.
6 - Google has service offerings for businesses, so you either choose to use their services, or you don't. If you don't like it, you shouldn't use this phone I guess
7 - the feature will appear for sure, at least the viewer part. Not hoping of a OpenOffice port for Android, though.
This phone actually doesn't look like it was built for business use, though; just take a look at the apps who won the contest, all of them are focused on fun, socializing, location-awareness and stuff that's useful to people, not business users.
Hmm, to follow up on the Office part:
http://www.informationweek.com/news/personal_tech/smartphones/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=210604042
"We expect it to be more for the consumer, not necessarily for enterprises," says Cole Brodman, chief technology and innovation officer at T-Mobile USA.
The 4.6-by-2.1-by-0.6-inch handset, which will go on sale in the United States on Oct. 22, will let users view Word and Excel documents as well as PDFs.
a few points:
a*you didnt coment on 8-10
b*the exchange feature needs licencing from mirosoft. i doubt the development comunity can do that. unless some genius cracks the airsync protocol
c*if you are on gprs/edge/3g then the phone is Always connected to the network. that why we have things like pushmail.
d*eap-tls is the most secure type of wirless access. and it uses certificates on both the server and client. the client normally needs to be part of the domain to be able to accept the certificate
e*almost all corporations are locked down to windows. its very imortant that buisness phones integrates very well with them if it were to be considered a buisness phones
f*dont you agree that having a buisness friendly is important for the sucess of any phone platform?
g* do you think that the lack of stylus or (resistive lcd) will hinder its ability to do remote desktop? the track ball thingy enough?
Most of the above points (1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 9) will most likely be addressed by developers and sysadmins in good time. In the case of Exchange, even if the platform is opensource, it doesn't mean that a 3rd party company can't license the technology to provide a solution. It might not be pretty (at first), but I wouldn't say it's impossible.
5. It depends on what specific vulnerabilities you're concerned about, whether on the app/run level or somewhere in the core Android stack. In general I doubt there's any issue that doesn't already exist on other mobile OSes, and given their respective solutions, the same is possible here. But if you have a specific concern in mind it would help to point it out.
6, 9. Google is certainly pushing its suite of apps and for good reason (because a lot of consumers use them), but given the open nature of the platform nothing is cemented in place. So while the G1 comes setup for use with gmail/gcal/maps/etc, there's nothing that says a sysadmin can't strip and replace. Moreover, the G1 isn't being pushed as an enterprise device in the first place; there's every possibility that carriers could release other handset models later, preloaded with more business-centric software packages (and less Google apps), and are simply holding off during Android's initial launch. If you think about it, Android has a much better chance of having a strong launch on the consumer front than on the enterprise front. Take care of the former first, then the latter has a better chance of long-term success.
8, g. Same as above, but Google is also pushing the cloud which could lessen the need for VNC/RDP/etc. Sysadmins will have their doubts about security in Google's cloud, but there's nothing that says they can't first observe the model and then later implement their own solution.
10. Not as much of an issue with the software as it is with the carrier. T-mobile isn't just launching Android, it's also launching its 3G network. Providing tethering out-of-the-box could seriously cripple the network in its infancy, and that's the last thing the US 3G market needs. Face it, we need good competition to force carriers to pick up the pace, and in time we could see some competing tethering plans between AT&T, T-mobile, et al.
Some thoughts in general:
Businesses may currently be invested in Windows Mobile for their mobile solutions, but the point isn't to take Android and simply turn it into WinMo -- that would be a wasted opportunity. WinMo users are effectively tied to their PC in one way or another (sync, RDP, svn, tether, etc). Android has the chance to push the cloud (among other innovative models), so that users are no longer dependent on existing workflows. The handset would become just a terminal for accessing the cloud, and transition between terminals would be completely transparent (Android on a phone? How about a netbook?). Not that I expect Android to overtake WinMo (or BES et al), but it gives companies more solutions that better fit their individual needs, and helps MS, RIM, etc start evolving the existing systems that are frankly getting dated.
thanks that was quite insightful
i would like to point out that a big portion (probably the biggest) of the android users only bought the G1 phone because of its great value. think about it the unlocked $399 G1 has more features than the $700 touch diamond. most of these people couldn't care less about what google have in mind for the platform. all they want is for their phone to do certain tasks (like exchange email) a lot of the other google-pushed tasks will probably be unused
I think for you personally, the #1 most important feature the G1 >>needs<< to have is spellcheck
fatso485 said:
...hostiliy...hilighting...buisness...intrested..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
t mobile is a poor businesses Carrier
most of the big business i have seen use at&t
once tmobile 3g network become more mature they might get some more of the business market. but until they iron out the wrinkles in there new 3g network don't expect anything from tmobile. i don't think you want something like the iphone bill happening to all you business customers.
this is the first step tmobile has taken towards 3g in the US
i am sure there will be some stumbles.
I'm not 100% sure, but I think the Active Sync protocol needed for Exchange support is free to use from Microsoft. I see a LOT of it in many 3rd party email servers and applications. Many of which are in direct competition with Microsoft. So I think we can assume that Active Sync is very doable on the Android platform. Only needs a developer to do something about it.
Active Sync is my main concern too. Once that's in place, then some way to tether I'm getting me an Android phone quickly.
All the other concerns are too easy to fix either already or very soon, so the 2 problems I mentioned are the only show stoppers for me.
There currently isn't even a foolproof activesync drop-in replacement for Linux desktop distros. There's multisync and synCE, but they're both hard to install, hard to configure, and far from perfect in their implementation. As for getting it working under Android, like everything else, it's probably a wait-and-see situation. Most software for Linux isn't written in Java (which Android prefers/requires?) It'll be interesting to see if a java implementation of activesync software could happen.
does any1 know if the g1 has an on screen keyboard
haitiankid4lyf said:
does any1 know if the g1 has an on screen keyboard
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Currenly, no. The demo and preview vids show that you need to open the hardware keyboard in order to type (except for the phone dialer). But I'm sure SIPs will show up pretty quickly.
fhsieh said:
Currenly, no. The demo and preview vids show that you need to open the hardware keyboard in order to type (except for the phone dialer). But I'm sure SIPs will show up pretty quickly.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, I hope they change that. When I had the Fuze I never liked pulling out the keyboard unless I have to type something long, an email or a long text or whatever. For normal web browsing, entering 1 URL, it's not worth it to slide it open, type and close it again.
my biggest concern is an appointment calender. im so reliant on my appointment calander ion my Kaiser... i wouldnt know what to do without it. Also, a way to sync files would be great. maybe the phone will be integrated with Google Docs? That would be SUPERB! I take notes in my college classes using Office Mobile, but if Android syncs with Google Docs... good lawd.. goodbye to WinMo!
bigdookie said:
my biggest concern is an appointment calender. im so reliant on my appointment calander ion my Kaiser... i wouldnt know what to do without it. Also, a way to sync files would be great. maybe the phone will be integrated with Google Docs? That would be SUPERB! I take notes in my college classes using Office Mobile, but if Android syncs with Google Docs... good lawd.. goodbye to WinMo!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Here's a video showing how well it syncs everything.
Say goodbye, WinMo
I am using a phone that has a Windows 6.5 operating system on it.
I wish to disable all the features on my phone other than GPRS connectivity,Wifi connectivity and Camera features.i.e.I shouldnt be able to make or receive calls,text anyone,play games,or use any other default feature.
Either it must be completely disabled or i should be able to give so kind of password protection to these features.
Please help me at the earliest,i require it for a project completion,and i am not able to figure it out as how this can be done.
Thank You in advance
i dont know whether this is the right place to post as i am a new user,so i am extremely sorry if i have made a mistake.
You should get a SIM card that only supports data access for your project. This will prevent any circuit switched (i.e. voice) features and linked services like SMS. There are also options to activate call barring features for a normal SIM (so you can steer what is allowed or not) - but his is then again part of the SIM card subscription (and can be used on any phone likewise).
There are no default options which could cripple your device in such way as you have asked for.
How to make changes in security policy of Windows Mobile 6.5 Professional?
i was browsing through the net and i found this matter:
4102
Unsigned Applications Policy
SECPOLICY_UNSIGNEDAPPS
This setting indicates whether unsigned applications are allowed to run on Windows Mobile devices. If a signed application does not have a matching root certificate in the Privileged Execution Trust Authorities or the Unprivileged Execution Trust Authorities certificate store, the application is unsigned.
You should always use SECPOLICY_UNSIGNEDCABS together with SECPOLICY_UNSIGNEDAPPS policy. This means that when you block unsigned applications from running, you should also block unsigned cab files from getting installed on the device.
Default value is 1 for Windows Mobile.
The following list shows the possible values:
0 indicates that unsigned applications are not allowed to run on the device.
1 indicates that unsigned applications are allowed to run on the device.
Any value other than 1 is treated as 0.
The required role to modify this policy is SECROLE_MANAGER.
i think this will help me as i can make the applications that i dont need as unsigned applications and then make it 0 which will serve my purpose...but i have no clue how to make these changes in my mobile..
Can u please help me with this???
the solution that is given wont work for me because if anyone changes the sim then the settings i require will change and thus the solution is not full proof. i also dont know i will get any sim dat only offers data transfer.
thank you for the quick reply and i am expecting the same in future too!!
Thanks in advance
Regards,
Sneha
Let me write you this last reply to your query, please do not expect any further from my side.
This forum deals with understanding restrictions and enabling previously hidden or restricted functions mainly - learning from each other's experience.
The subforum you have chosen (chef central) deals with understanding how the Operating System is constructed from packages and how these can be recombined to new (cooked) ROMs.
There is no intention to cripple the existing functions of the operating system itself or to restrict the Radio part of it in any way.
You may think that the snippet you took from a MSDN page delivers something you could use for your purpose (which you have not outlined) without understanding the security concept of Windows Mobile. This is quite complex and often (for simplicity) simply disabled completely on several levels - so no security either for whatever you want to do.
The existing packages of the OS do not have separate components that you could omit to disable your desired functions.
Even if so, these core packages of the OS are usually delivered as modules (another special concept of Windows CE/Mobile) that do not need any security or signing - so they run anyway without restrictions.
So finally good luck with whatever you want to do, but I believe that you cannot achieve this with a crippled Windows Mobile - at least not fool proof.
Hello Sneha,
Welcome to the forums.
Unsigned Applications Policy is totally different then what you are looking for. More info here. When enabled, you will be allowed to install or run unsigned aka untrusted apps.
But the inside apps or features are already signed so you cannot stop them from running by enabling or disabling Unsigned Applications Policy.
The really thing you need is to make a custom ROM, remove all the unnecessary things and flash it to your device(s). That means you should change/modify the built in OS (in a simple word) but you cannot do within the device
However, its not a day, week or even a month task. It takes many months to learn things and then you can finally do it. I'm 99% sure that all of your needs can be fully filled but :
1. Takes many months to learn.
2. You need to get the stock ROM, Modify and flash to the device.
BTW; which device you really have?
Thanks...
Best Regards
Closed environment is something that should be done in bsp: kernel to be precise. Also it is possible via custom certmod.dll.
BUT. Little problems:
1) no bsp sources unless you're OEM
2) no certmod.dll sources.
Please look at the initial request on the restriction of radio features. This is handled in the radio layer and this cannot be cut in pieces. So there are no components to sign/restrict/omit for that query.
Cooking can do a lot, but it does not go inside one component.
Cutting all other things may be feasible - but not for radio relevant parts imho.
tobbbie said:
Please look at the initial request on the restriction of radio features. This is handled in the radio layer and this cannot be cut in pieces. So there are no components to sign/restrict/omit for that query.
Cooking can do a lot, but it does not go inside one component.
Cutting all other things may be feasible - but not for radio relevant parts imho.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Of courses its a lot of work but its possible. Within the OS functions. Radio thing is just for input and output but the way its handled is under OS itself. Am I right or wrong? Think of removing packages depending to what you don't want.
i.e to disable messaging, Remove all things which are related to it. I'm sure you know it.
Though its a plenty of work and have to be expert so not messing around things.
ultrashot is right but if we had the source, every thing would have been different and even easy.
Radio is special and never dealt with in cooking. The Radio lower layers are treated with code in a dedicated partition (GSM) and accessed via an interface Layer (RIL = Radio Interface Layer) from the OS.
On top of that are applications like messaging or MMS - these can be cut.
I see no option to prevent e.g. only speech calls but allow data calls. On RIL level these are just different GSMBCIE elements (look up the relevent 3gpp specs). Of course you could find dirty ways to cut off e.g. the GSM speech codecs, but this would possibly not prevent to set up a call - creating cost but not having success when connected.
Tweaking these parts has not been of anyone's interest and thus "in theory" possible but hardly practically feasible.
How can i make changes on the OS?
Thanx a lot Cracing for the positive advice.I was planning to consult the OEM to make changes in the security policies.
I am working with the Synqe device .My main aim is barcode scanning and sending the data via GPRS or Wifi.and at the same time i want that all others connectivities and applications are to be deactivated.
Moreover i wish to restrict the usage of GPRS strictly for my application.
As u mentioned that i will have to make changes in the OS,will the OEM be able to do that for me or should i consult a good Mobile OS developer?
sneha6689 said:
Thanx a lot Cracing for the positive advice.I was planning to consult the OEM to make changes in the security policies.
I am working with the Synqe device .My main aim is barcode scanning and sending the data via GPRS or Wifi.and at the same time i want that all others connectivities and applications are to be deactivated.
Moreover i wish to restrict the usage of GPRS strictly for my application.
As u mentioned that i will have to make changes in the OS,will the OEM be able to do that for me or should i consult a good Mobile OS developer?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I see
Going with OEM should be better idea. They have the sources to do anything. Its not so easy for 3rd party Mobile OS developers (i.e here ). Need things and takes long enough to R&D and finish the project.
Hope you will find a good solution for your project soon.
Thanks...
Best Regards