|
Posted by Chris De Herrera on August 10, 2008, 10:11 pm
Please log in for more thread options
Hi,
When Microsoft created ActiveSync 4.x, they deciced not reuse the code from
ActiveSync 3.x because of the issues that were reported with those releases.
When they created ActiveSync 4.x, they decided to automate the conflict
resolution as you see now. There is no support in ActiveSync 3.x for
Windows Mobile 5 and 6.x.
As for the "company line", I am a Microsoft Most Valuable Professional
support (mvp.support.microsoft.com). As an MVP, I am totally independent of
Microsoft. I have written extensively about ActiveSync and the issues on
my website Pocket PC FAQ. I am posting here because I am trying to help
others with their issues.
--
Chris De Herrera
http://www.pocketpcfaq.com
http://www.pocketpctalk.com
http://www.tabletpctalk.com
http://www.mobilitytalk.com
> Hi Chris.
>
> Thanks very much for your time and for replying.
>
> Nothing personal in my reply here, but...I don't understand why customers,
> many of whom are complaining loudly on numerous websites (please Google
> search this and you WILL see it exists!) would decide to request a useful
> feature be removed from a product! It behoves me that MS decided to modify
> (read ELIMINATE!) the conflict-resolution choice-button!
>
> I take offence by the comment that "Microsoft has made these decisions
> based
> on their requirements" as well. Who's requirements? Again - Microsoft. Odd
> how the software writers set the product based on THEIR requirements.
>
> Chris, I know you have to write according to the company's "line" but
> really, why remove something that WORKED and leave us, your customers,
> with
> something that leaves us far than annoyed. Once again I urge you to do a
> search to see how wide-spread the anger is about this decision.
>
> I would also request, again, that IF it is not going to be available, what
> are the steps to uninstall this annoying new version of Activesync (which
> has
> caused me many hours of grief not to mention missed appointments and lost
> contact details) and install an older version that HAS this most welcome
> feature??
>
> Repeating myself - I (and many many others) look forward to this conflict
> resolution being resolved - soon.
>
> Regards.
|
|
Posted by Richard on August 11, 2008, 3:17 am
Please log in for more thread options
* * * APOLOGY BELOW - READ THE CONTENT TO SEE IT!! * * * :-)
"Chris De Herrera" wrote:
> Hi,
> When Microsoft created ActiveSync 4.x, they deciced not reuse the code from
> ActiveSync 3.x because of the issues that were reported with those releases.
> When they created ActiveSync 4.x, they decided to automate the conflict
> resolution as you see now. There is no support in ActiveSync 3.x for
> Windows Mobile 5 and 6.x.
(Darn...thanks for the info though!)
>
> As for the "company line", I am a Microsoft Most Valuable Professional
> support (mvp.support.microsoft.com). As an MVP, I am totally independent of
> Microsoft. I have written extensively about ActiveSync and the issues on
> my website Pocket PC FAQ. I am posting here because I am trying to help
> others with their issues.
Chris, my sincere apologies to you and any other MVP. No offence meant if
you were with MS or if you were not. In fact I have a friend who works at
that "Little House That Bill Built" in Seattle (unfortunately in a totally
different department that what >I< need this time!!) and hold no particular
grudge. Apologies for the swipe!
|
|
Posted by juliejennings on September 16, 2008, 1:12 am
Please log in for more thread options
> Hi Chris.
>
> Thanks very much for your time and for replying.
>
> Nothing personal in my reply here, but...I don't understand why customers=
,
> many of whom are complaining loudly on numerous websites (please Google
> search this and you WILL see it exists!) would decide to request a useful
> feature be removed from a product! It behoves me that MS decided to modif=
y
> (read ELIMINATE!) the conflict-resolution choice-button!
>
> I take offence by the comment that "Microsoft has made these decisions ba=
sed
> on their requirements" as well. Who's requirements? Again - Microsoft. Od=
d
> how the software writers set the product based on THEIR requirements.
>
> Chris, I know you have to write according to the company's "line" but
> really, why remove something that WORKED and leave us, your customers, wi=
th
> something that leaves us far than annoyed. Once again I urge you to do a
> search to see how wide-spread the anger is about this decision.
>
> I would also request, again, that IF it is not going to be available, wha=
t
> are the steps to uninstall this annoying new version of Activesync (which=
has
> caused me many hours of grief not to mention missed appointments and lost
> contact details) and install an older version that HAS this most welcome
> feature??
>
> Repeating myself - I (and many many others) look forward to this conflict
> resolution being resolved - soon.
>
> Regards.
Have any of you seen the posting displayed on omgili (which I couldn't
find a way to post on - seems to be a compilation of many posts from
other places) :
http://www.omgili.com/newsgroups/microsoft/public/pocketpc/activesync/6C8FC=
F02-D952-4437-9780-50CE64507C49microsoftcom.html&q=3Dno+internet+access+wit=
h+activesync
- How ridiculous for this to have turned into a back-slapping process
when the MVP's on the listed postings haven't even listened to or
addressed the problem!
Bottom line: people aren't listening to the real problem here!
1 - it isn't a matter of wanting to manually manage a process that is
better handled in an automated fashion
2 - Microsoft's conflict resolution method is simple - if they would
just READ some of the well-documented problems stated by multiple
people, they would see that. Here is one example:
http://www.omgili.com/newsgroups/microsoft/public/pocketpc/activesync/6C8FC=
F02-D952-4437-9780-50CE64507C49microsoftcom.html&q=3Dno+internet+access+wit=
h+activesync
HEY MICROSOFT - are you even listening to your customers?
3 - It is obvious to me that Microsoft doesnt even use their own
product here, because if they did (even someone lower in the foodchain
than Bill), believe you me, this would be fixed.
4 - Bottom line - the automation is great, BUT to delete appointments
and contacts and tasks and other items that people are relying on to
run their busy lives is just not appropriate - it's not a matter of
convenience and/or people trying to do things the old way or with the
old code - it just doesn't function properly - it's actually not
usable in its current state, and many of us will need to suffer
through it, missing appointments, dialing old phone numbers (even
after we have updated the contact record), or not tracking tasks
because they were altered or deleted without our knowledge.
This is not a problem of wanting an old release of the code - it's a
matter of wanting software that works. This doesn't.
Would somebody please please please look into this and let us know if
we are going to have a solution which doesn't delete or alter records
inappropriately?
Let me encourage you to try to duplicate the problem, using any of the
clearly documented cases on the web.
Thank you.
|
|
Posted by juliejennings on September 16, 2008, 1:25 am
Please log in for more thread options
On Sep 15, 10:12=A0pm, juliejenni...@earthlink.net wrote:
> 2 - Microsoft's conflict resolution method is simple - if they would
> just READ some of the well-documented problems stated by multiple
> people, they would see that. Here is one example:http://www.omgili.com/ne=
wsgroups/microsoft/public/pocketpc/activesync...
> HEY MICROSOFT - are you even listening to your customers?
The statement above should have read "...is simple, but it doesn't
work..."
And the weblink with a well-documented example is:
https://forums.microsoft.com/WindowsMobile/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=3D1990442&S=
iteID=3D65
On Microsoft's own website.
PS - does Microsoft use their own software? I am guessing that Bill
and others might have a scenario like this...
Early Morning: get up and check email, etc... on pda running WM6
- see last minute changes to the schedule and update same on pda's
Outlook Calendar
Get to the office: sync with desktop/laptop computer
- get other changes from same
Later on - look at their pda and expect to see the merged/changed
information
- from the changes made earlier on both their pda and their desk/
laptop
Unfortunately, it doesn't work that way, anymore.
We, the customers have been using the devices this way for years.
Now it doesnt work that way.
-We lose records
-We miss appointments.
-We are embarrassed and inconvenienced to ask our contacts for
updates, yet again, and make the changes, hoping that this time
they'll 'stick'
-We cannot rely on our pda to have accurate information any more
-We cannot rely on our computers or pda's to have calendars that are
accurate any more
-We cannot rely on our computers or pda's to have tasksthat are
accurate any more
-We cannot rely on our computers to or pda's have contacts that are
accurate any more
Should we go back to pen and ink?
This isn't a good thing.
Don't the MVP's use these tools?
Am I missing something? If so, please tell me and the many, many
others who are posting and lamenting this serious problem how we can
get around it.
Maybe all of you are using competitor's products, like "Good" or
something? What about those of us who are home or small business users
who dont have enterprise servers and who just want to be able to keep
our lives in order, using the tools that are supposed to do so?
Should we go back to the PALM OS? If this isn't resolved, that's what
I am going to be forced to do, much to my dismay.
Please help.
|
|
Posted by Paul G. Tobey [eMVP] on September 16, 2008, 1:39 pm
Please log in for more thread options
There's not much detail there (it's *not* what I would call, as a software
developer, a well-documented example of the bug). It *sounds* like the
problem description is:
1. I have a synchronized appointment on my calendar, both on the single PC
to which I'm syncing and on my mobile device (exact version of Windows
Mobile and ActiveSync used?) I am not using Exchange syncing at all.
2. I make a very specific sort of change to the calendar appointment on the
mobile device while it is disconnected from the PC, moving the date to a
later date than the original date. Or is it an earlier date still in the
future? Not clear.
3. When the device is synced with the PC, the change made to the appointment
is lost and the original date/time of the appointment is now shown again on
both device and PC, as though the PC copy of the appointment was deemed to
be the correct version and copied over the newer version on the device.
Right?
Paul T.
On Sep 15, 10:12 pm, juliejenni...@earthlink.net wrote:
> 2 - Microsoft's conflict resolution method is simple - if they would
> just READ some of the well-documented problems stated by multiple
> people, they would see that. Here is one
>
example:http://www.omgili.com/newsgroups/microsoft/public/pocketpc/activesync...
> HEY MICROSOFT - are you even listening to your customers?
The statement above should have read "...is simple, but it doesn't
work..."
And the weblink with a well-documented example is:
https://forums.microsoft.com/WindowsMobile/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=1990442&SiteID=65
On Microsoft's own website.
PS - does Microsoft use their own software? I am guessing that Bill
and others might have a scenario like this...
Early Morning: get up and check email, etc... on pda running WM6
- see last minute changes to the schedule and update same on pda's
Outlook Calendar
Get to the office: sync with desktop/laptop computer
- get other changes from same
Later on - look at their pda and expect to see the merged/changed
information
- from the changes made earlier on both their pda and their desk/
laptop
Unfortunately, it doesn't work that way, anymore.
We, the customers have been using the devices this way for years.
Now it doesnt work that way.
-We lose records
-We miss appointments.
-We are embarrassed and inconvenienced to ask our contacts for
updates, yet again, and make the changes, hoping that this time
they'll 'stick'
-We cannot rely on our pda to have accurate information any more
-We cannot rely on our computers or pda's to have calendars that are
accurate any more
-We cannot rely on our computers or pda's to have tasksthat are
accurate any more
-We cannot rely on our computers to or pda's have contacts that are
accurate any more
Should we go back to pen and ink?
This isn't a good thing.
Don't the MVP's use these tools?
Am I missing something? If so, please tell me and the many, many
others who are posting and lamenting this serious problem how we can
get around it.
Maybe all of you are using competitor's products, like "Good" or
something? What about those of us who are home or small business users
who dont have enterprise servers and who just want to be able to keep
our lives in order, using the tools that are supposed to do so?
Should we go back to the PALM OS? If this isn't resolved, that's what
I am going to be forced to do, much to my dismay.
Please help.
|
| Similar Threads | Posted | | Windows Mobile 5.0 does not connect to Windows Mobile Device Centr | July 25, 2007, 8:58 pm |
| Windows Mobile 5 and Windows Mobile 2003SE sync to same PC? | April 11, 2006, 6:03 am |
| Windows Vista - Windows Mobile Device Centre [ Sync. Error ] | March 6, 2007, 12:59 pm |
| windows mobile telephone & Windows Vista business edition | February 15, 2007, 9:10 pm |
| windows mobile 6.1, active sync 4.5, Windows XP - contacts won't s | October 19, 2008, 11:02 pm |
| Selectively Sync Outlook 2003 Contact Subfolders with T-Mobile MDA Windows Mobile 5? | February 21, 2007, 1:51 pm |
| Vista and Mobile Device Center Sync Problem with Windows Mobile 5. | February 23, 2007, 12:45 pm |
| AS 3.8 - windows mobile 2003 - windows 2k Pro Server | February 6, 2006, 5:38 pm |
| Activesync 4.1 & Windows Mobile 5 | January 22, 2006, 11:27 pm |
| Activesync 4.1 and windows mobile 5 | April 9, 2006, 7:47 am |
|
XML Sitemap