Slashdot Mirror
Windows CE 6 Arrives Complete with Kernel Source
An anonymous reader writes "Microsoft has launched the sixth edition of their embedded OS Windows CE and this time has included the full source. From the article: 'Developers can now access shared source code for the Windows CE kernel -- as well as certain device drivers and application-level components -- directly from within the Windows Embedded CE 6.0 distribution package. To do this, they click on a function in the IDE that installs the shared source, and indicate their acceptance of the associated shared source license.'"
With the Zune being a PocketPC device with a nice facelift, and some propriatary software running... will this help the hardware modding/hacking community to make some very cool other uses for the Zune hardware?
or am I just being optimistic, because I'm gonna buy one anyway?
I assert that my comment is only my opinion, not that of any employer, past, present or future.
Wait... what??
Similes are like metaphors
I'm sure that M$ will be releasing the source code to Vista soon, showing this face of openness is a new corporate stance.
in 3...2... 1...
I'm a fiscal conservative, it's a pity we don't have a political party anymore
Did hell just freeze over? Microsoft releasing their source? Next thing you know, you'll be telling us that SCO went under!
Zhrodague.net - I do projects and stuff too.
What kind of portable or industrial machine is going to need those kinds of capabilities, much less have the onboard hardware to fully utilize 'em?
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!
Damn, I've been interested in Windows CE for ages, and I always wanted to pick the bugger apart, but I never had $3,000 dollars for the platform builder. For those you don't know, 90% percent of Windows CE code (I think its everything expect Windows Media Player and Pocket Internet Explorer) and only charges small royalities (I think it's $6 dollars) per device, and you can do things like port it to a new platform if you wish (assuming you had the required compiler).
I realize this isn't open source persay, but I'm very interested in it, and I wonder why they decided to open the CE kernel up. I also wonder if there is enough code to flash CE 6 onto a CE 5 device (I have a T-Mobile MDA with Windows CE 5, I wonder if I can simply drop the new kernel in there).
This signature was left intentionally blank.
That's good because our stance as their customers had us grabbing our ankles, and our arms were starting to fall asleep.
nt
Remember one thing.. Even if the software is fully open source, it may still not be free.(As in speech)
We do a lot of embedded linux projects - mainly custom boards, done around some sort of ARM chip with standard connectivity - LCD, ethernet, or wireless options.
My company invested a lot of time in implementing and setting up our own toolchain and utilities, support libraries etc around the linux kernel. What we end up with is a redistributable result with no liscencing whatsoever.
Of course, it requires you be able to work to produce a flash image and toolchain. Once that pain is dealt with..and there is pain, a lot of it on a custom board.. then you're free to do whatever you want.
x1000's, people count pennies, and WinCE is not pennies.
..don't panic
Hmmm...
;) Who better than the Open Source community?
This must mean Windows CE has some flaws their developpers can't figure out.
Anyone care to give me a quick summary of what the "shared source" license means in this case? MS has never used particularly liberal licenses.
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
GPS map files can easily exceed the 32 MB limit currently used.
!(I'm sure this will help make Diebold machines much more secure.)
This space for rent. All reasonable inquiries will be entertained at proprietors discretion.
Seriously, I'm sure this may not be under exactly a GPL license but rather a MS derivative. Nevertheless it can prove very useful for a large number of embedded device developers. Heck, I've been more impressed by developing for their late Windows CE operating systems than doing the same for Windows XP. :-P Windows CE 6 seem to be an OS that can truly do a heck of a lot of things for the hardware it's running on, and I'll be damned if it isn't a more impressive craftmanship than Vista...
Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
Microsoft releasing their source?
It won't make a difference unless they let you share the modified source code. Without that, M$ still holds all the cards as the only party able to integrate all improvements. Given their record of improving things, no change is to be expected. Embedded development mindshare will continue to flow to free software.
You can say Hell froze on the day M$ releases code under a real free license. They might, one day, but it's diametrically opposed to Mr. Gate's control freak personality.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
A portable Xbox. Seriously.
probably enforcably illegal too with that DMCA bullshit.
if you steal from one source, that is plagiarism, if you steal from many, well, that's just research.
In my experience that's not the case at all. I'll give you a hint: it's not "flowing" to Microsoft, but it sure as hell not going to Linux either. Would you like to prove me wrong? Go ahead. I've actually worked on that space on and off for five years.
diametrically opposed to Mr. Gate's control freak personality.
That's ridiculous - that statement applies to *anyone* who sells commercial software for a living.
Oh, and that "M$" thing? Very original.
While MS doesn't GPL their code, it is not the tightly held secret that some people seem to think. Many organizations, mostly universities and governments but some companies too, have the Windows source. There are plenty of restrictions on it's use, but you can have a look at it and not have to sign a non-compete or anything.
I hope they'll have a license agreement form like the form they had for their driver DDK a cooupe of years ago. ;-)
:-D)
(No image editor was used to create this image. They just forgot to set the read-only flag for that form.
You get to see it, but you most likely are not allowed to ship modified versions of it.
The Windows Mobile licesnce is very likely more restrictive than the WinCE6 license. That is, while you might get WinCE 6 source, don't expect to get as much source for Windows Mobile. Also, don't expect to ba allowed to ship modified source in a WM device either.
Engineering is the art of compromise.
...mod this up by +Aboot a Thoosand Insightful.
Stick Men
This is kernel source, which will be the same for every CE6 device. The interesting bits would be the drivers and they would be in a devices BSP. I'm pretty sure MS won't be releasing the BSP for the Zune. For that very reason.
Weaselmancer
rediculous.
At this point in time there have been a number of projects from microsoft that have released their sources under some license or another. Some of them have been true open source licenses, and remarkably those have been hosted on sourceforge along with all the other oss stuff. I'll list the few I know about here and maybe others can mention a few.
.NET runtime developed by microsoft. Runs on windows and BSD I believe, and has been ported to linux by third parties. I don't believe it includes the .NET framework, and is more designed as a reference implementation of "how to get .NET working on other platforms" than anything else.o r/
i censing/WindowsCE.mspx
Wix:
A toolset for building installer packages on windows. Supposedly one of the better ones.
license: cpl
http://wix.sourceforge.net/index.html
WTL:
An extension to the ATL. Probably the best toolkit for developing win32 guis in c++ (lightweight and powerful). It's hampered by the fact that documentation for it is scatered around the net (mostly on the code project) and so mostly people usually end up learning about it by reading through the largely uncommented source.
license: cpl (alternately available under a different, maybe equiavent license if downloaded from microsofts site)
http://wtl.sourceforge.net/
Rotor:
A cross platform implementation of the
License: shared source
http://research.microsoft.com/programs/europe/rot
Windows CE:
Mentioned in article. I think they release it under this license for custimization and debuggin purposes.
License: shared source
http://www.microsoft.com/resources/sharedsource/L
Licenses:
So far microsoft seems to use the shared source license and the CPL license.
The shared source license is relatively restrictive, and generally leaves microsoft with most of the power over issues of reditribution and use of source. Shared source seems to be largely used to distribute code for educational, debugging, and customization uses.
The CPL is a full blown open source/free software license that was actually written by IBM and I believe is the license that eclipse is distributed under (only under a different name). Community projects like Wix and WTL are being handled under this license.
My impression from talking to microsoft guys and from working there briefly is that the antipathy felt towards linux and open source is not particularly pervasive in the company. I've met a few people who had negative misconceptions about open source, but whatever the average slashdotter might think microsoft tends to hire smart people who are aware of industry trends and best practices including oss.
I'm pretty sure the source for WinCE has always been included with the platform builder. It's kind of necessary for getting it to run on obscure embedded hardware.
I looked into the CE 6 offer this morning just like any other embedded Developer/Engineer should. This announcement is clearly aimed at the clueless PHBs/Middle Manager types.
_ LICENSE (TM) License Agreement.
1) You need to have a passport account to even download the CE 6 evaluation kit.
2) You need to purchase the Microsoft YOU_NEED_AN_ARMY_OF_LAWYERS_TO_READ_AND_SIGN_THIS
3) From what I understand, when you finally get authorized to see the source, you can only look. You can't touch/modify/customize it for your target device. Thats a separate license aggreement.
4) CE 6 License fees are not listed. Previous versions were from US $3 to $15 depending on volume.
I found no business case or compelling reason for us to switch our product from embedded Linux. I did see where Microsoft stated that our customers would be filled with joy, peace and karma having purchased a Microsoft based product.
Enjoy,
It's just the normal noises in here.
I recently worked in a shop which did development in both WinCE and Linux. The source code has been available for WinCE for quite a while, under NDA.
Truth be told, they had to open the source code. The Linux group consistently delivered features before the WinCE guys. The problem was that anyone hired for WinCE development had a substantial ramp up time, whereas we could hire engineers who already knew Linux.
The open source nature of Linux allowed us to hire engineers already proficient in writing Linux drivers and code. Can't say the same for WinCE. In fact, while I think the shared source license is a step in the right direction, it won't bridge the gap between Linux and WinCE in the embedded sector. Linux is already a dominant player, and the shared source initiative won't put WinCE in the hands of budding engineers. Instead, they'll look at Linux, which is truly free.
A few years ago, when I mentioned that Linux was leaving Windows in the dust in regard to new technologies (like 64 bit computing), I received an interesting reply: "That may be true, but Windows on the desktop already has something Linux doesn't: inertia." Just as Windows gained inertia on the desktop, Linux has now achieved that "inertia" in the embedded world which will make it difficult to dislodge.
This move seems to indicate that Microsoft is becoming aware of how compelling Linux is to embedded developers.
The society for a thought-free internet welcomes you.
So now we just need to sit back and wait for Microsoft to claim that Linux stole their source code but not tell anyone what source was supposedly stolen. Then they'll sue some poor smuck...
than the CE 5 source code snippets you get to see. Some of their IP telephony code was available when I was doing a project, and I tell you: beautiful it was not. You could not even develop on Visual Studio. Can someone tell us if advanced development for CE is now actually possible without killing yourself?
Thanks.
This is great news to developers, but consumers still have to wait for manufacturers to pick up on CE 6, and integrate it into devices. I don't see this happening for quite a while.
Sure, there's Wix and WTL, but what about WTF?
Dog is my co-pilot.
You are tainted for life and your career as a programmer lies in the hands of microsoft.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
so I assume installing the source code involves a click-through EULA which seems to tell you in very obsfucated terms that you are now incapable of working on real open source, having seen the beautiful gems of MS code, you are now poisoned. And son of SCO will seek you out in 10 years with some legal papers.
Windows CE 6.0 has an open source kernel, but there is a catch, Catch-22, which means when you agree to the CE 6.0 Kernel license, you are giving up a lot of your rights to Microsoft plus fees to even look at the CE 6.0 Kernel.
On the other hand, the ReactOS Kernel and entire OS is open source, and I'd much rather see people try to convert ReactOS 0.30 to Windows CE devices and develop drivers for it. No Catch-22 there, but it is free as in speech not as in beer, still it is free to download and look and work with it (not counting the bandwidth costs to download the source code).
I got an old Windows CE 2.0/3.0 iPaq h2215 that would love to get an OS upgrade, it is one of the many Windows CE devices that Gates forgot. It can still be useful. I think there might even be a Linux for it or something if I look hard enough for one. I'd much rather have ReactOS for it, if possible, so it can a Windows like OS and still look like a Windows based PDA rather than a Linux PDA. I am sure they can compile F/OSS Windows programs over to the ReactOS PPC, ARM, MIPS, etc formats and make them work with lower screen resolutions. If anyone knows any alternative OSes for the iPaq h2215 please write me an email or reply to this post.
I doubt Microsoft will allow a Windows CE 6.0 upgrade for it.
ReactOS is as close to a F/OSS version of Windows that we are ever going to get so far, and I think it needs more support. It shares code with the WINE project, so helping ReactOS will help Linux users who want a better WINE program.
Remember, Slashdot does not have a -1 disagree moderation, and no, troll, flamebait, and overrated are not substitutes.
From TFA: The opening up of Windows CE's kernel source code is likely to make Windows CE more attractive as an alternative to Linux in many embedded applications and devices that require substantial customization of the OS, or where source code availability has been mandated by the development team. Additionally, Microsoft touts the terms of its BSD-like shared source license as being preferred by many device and equipment manufacturers that don't want to be compelled to make their OS customizations public and available to their competitors.
On the other hand, following a long to an older article, I read: In terms of impact to Microsoft's Windows CE Shared Source and Shared Platforms initiatives, Windows Embedded product manager Nic Sagez told WindowsForDevices.com that these programs are not migrating to the new licenses any time soon. However, Sagez did not rule out the possibility of a longer term change, based on customer feedback and market requirements.
Back to TFA: For the first time, Microsoft is making 100 percent of the source code of the Windows CE kernel available as part of the Windows Embedded CE 6.0 operating system package, to everyone who gets the OS package.... but nowhere does it explain just which of the many licenses described in the earlier article is actually being used. It seems disingenuous to "touts the terms of its BSD-like shared source license" if the license it's using isn't BSD-like... and, clearly, it's not:
Developers and companies are permitted to use the evaluation version to begin their projects, and need not pay anything to Microsoft until the time limit expires, after which a non-evaluation version is available for $995 -- or when they begin to ship product that requires run-time royalties, Microsoft says.
Run-time royalties? BSD-like license? Please!
This could be a big boon for development of Linux ports to these handheld platforms. The hassles of figuring out how to access certan bits of hardware, could be greatly mitigated through the information in these sources. Of course, great care would have to be taken to avoid contamination and legal issues, but I think it's manageable. I'm a bit concerned that it talks about the kernel and "certain device drivers," though.
Love many, trust a few, do harm to none.
By reading this EULA, You, also known as User, also known as Screwed agree to the following terms and conditions:
...
I. By reading the code contained herein User agrees to give up their First Born Child. If User is also Slashdot poster and will never conceive said Child, the User agrees to remit a pound of flesh from a location of Microsoft's choosing.
II. If User has recently purchased a computer running Linus or OS X, user shall be required to set said computer on fire before reading the code. See Sony Batteries for more details on this.
If User is also Slashdot poster and will never conceive said Child,
That explains why it makes such a great doorstop... :-)
"Not an actor, but he plays one on TV."
and millions of microsoft lawsuits
So this is too brilliant. You get to view the code after you accept the Associated Shared Source License. I don't think they could have come up with a better acronym if they had tried. ASS License.
So why didn't you hold the vendor accountable for the poor quality? You seemed to expect Microsoft to fix its bugs, why didn't you expect the same service from vendor X?
While MS certainly did respond quickly, they always had the option of ignoring you. Fortunately for you, they paid attention to your problem. I'll bet that a lot of other people were also experiencing the same problem.
However, what do you do when you find yourself with a problem that you can't reliably reproduce, or one that the vendor doesn't think is worth the effort to fix?
With the source code, you can always bring in another engineer to work full time on the problem. Without the source code, your schedule is at the vendor's mercy.
The difference is subtle, but important - especially if you have to meet a deadline.
The society for a thought-free internet welcomes you.
Windows CE 6 Arrives Complete with Kernel Source does not mean Windows CE 6 Arrives with Complete Kernel Source read the fine print, portions of every subsystem are unreleased.
I worked on products using CE 4.2 and 5.0, and we had the source then. Most of it's there, just not some deep kernel internals (like the scheduler). The SS license is a bit restrictive, but hey: whatyagonnado.
I think they're lowering the cost for everyone. It turns out that most companies that are making a CE product want the source. MS didn't charge for it (well, the CE licenses were pretty expensive to begin with), and it was just costing everybody lawyer-hours.
-- Hamster
Its written in qbasic, who knew.
If you'd like to hear a very well-spoken argument to explain how unique the GNU/Linux system is in the market for small portable computers, listen to Eben Moglen's talk from the 2006 FSF Associate Member meeting in Cambridge, Massachusetts. This talk was a hit in its own right and a highlight of the day's events. This talk is called "The Hardware Wars and the future of free software". Other talks from the meeting are online as well.
While it's a shame that the entire OS isn't free software, I would love to discover that Microsoft is distributing a free software kernel to its users; the more free software distributors, the merrier.
Digital Citizen
bwarp bwaarp.
No, both WINCE and Linux are fast-enough realtime.
The problem isn't interrupts (that's a hardware problem) the problem is a *real* RTOS must have a maximum time in uninterruptable code.
The more complex the code, the less you know the maximal wait time.
There are patches to make microsecond or less corner-case uninterruptable paths in Linux and the stock 2.4 kernel has 10us maximum wait time for all tested paths (IIRC). 2.6 has the patches in as far as I remember it.
WinCE may well have the same. It doesn't have guaranteed maximum paths, however, so isn't a *real* RTOS.
Microsoft are merely following a bandwagon. They won't jump on it, however, until they can be sure of overpowering the driver.
Back in the 19th century there was much heated debate over whether AC or DC would be better for power distribution. DC had all the big money behind it, but AC had the Laws of Nature behind it. I don't think it's an exaggeration to say that most of what we know today about electronics, would never have been discovered if we were still trying to distribute DC power.
Edison and his cronies were so desperate to protect the money they had already invested in DC that they conducted a huge dirty tricks campaign to persuade the general public that alternating current was more dangerous than direct current. This isn't strictly true. You need to touch both wires to get a shock from DC, and it causes your muscles to contract so you cannot let go of the conductors. You are then at risk of serious burn damage. With AC, if one side of the power supply is earthed -- and it usually is -- you only need to touch one wire, because your body and the Earth act as the plates of a capacitor -- and AC can flow through a capacitor, as it repeatedly charges, discharges and recharges in the opposite polarity. But for the brief moments while the "capacitor" is fully charged, at the crest and the trough of each cycle, no current is flowing; your muscles relax and you can let go. Many stray dogs and cats were killed using AC in a series of rigged demonstrations at Edison's Menlo Park labs, and in spite of Edison's opposition to capital punishment -- nobody's all bad, I suppose -- it was one of his own employees who invented the electric chair. The globally-recognised symbol of "the best justice money can buy" was originally invented to cast Alternating Current in a bad light.
For sure the battle of the currents was a bloody and ugly one, but Mother Nature's favourite won out in the end. You might say that mortals get what they deserve when they argue with deities. The simple facts are that it's easier to change the voltage of AC than DC; and you want as high a voltage as possible on the distribution network, which has unavoidable losses. Losing 10V out of 33 000V isn't as bad as losing 10V out of 230V. You can minimise the voltage drop by using thicker cables, but at some point the amount you're spending on all that extra metal will outweigh the electricity being saved. Oh, and just to rub salt in the wound, it's easier to convert AC to DC than vice versa.
Closed source software is the direct current of the 21st century. As DC shew its limitations with the expansion of the electricity companies, so are the disadvantages of Closed Source going to become apparent as the developing world adopts computers. Closed source is inflexible, forcing people into a partucular mode of working instead of allowing them to work the way they always have done. Now the "wow" factor has worn off, people getting their first computer -- and there are going to be many of them -- won't stand for that. It can't be fixed if it goes wrong -- but field maintenance is a way of life in many parts of the world that haven't fallen for the "buy it, use it, throw it away" line. Someone who's used to stripping down engines isn't going to appreciate not having the source code to their operating system. The culture of dependency fostered by Closed Source is in diametric opposition to everything the West has been trying to tell the third world about becoming self-reliant.
Microsoft aren't stupid. They are proud. Once it becomes clear that the Closed Source is dead in the water and the Open Source model is the only serious way forward, Microsoft will be pretending they invented Open Source.
Je fume. Tu fumes. Nous fûmes!
So is this the beginning of an open-source Microsoft operating system kernel, atop which a new (.NET powered, perhaps?) Window manager will run? Did Wired have it right all along -- except the core will be OpenWinCE instead of Linux?
Hey -- if Apple fanatics are right, then MS will do something to further imitate Mac OS X, and OpenWinCE under Avalon 2.0 (et al) and dropping all backward compatibility makes more sense than Torvalds taking over the kernel team in Redmond.