No Smart Device Application template?

[Roger Strong]

Hi!
I need to create a VB.NET application for a Pocket PC. I've installed
VB.Net, the .NET Compact Framework and the Microsoft Pocket PC 2003 SDK.

Still, there is no "Smart Device Application" template under New
Project/Visual Basic Projects.

I've tried deinstalling and reinstalling everything - still no template.

What am I doing wrong?

 

[Paul G. Tobey [eMVP]]

You haven't installed the right tools. You must have Visual Studio .NET
2003 Pro or better, not just a single-language product like VB.NET (even if
it's the right version otherwise).

Paul T.

 

[Roger Strong]

You haven't installed the right tools. You must have Visual Studio .NET
2003 Pro or better, not just a single-language product like VB.NET (even if
it's the right version otherwise).

Something is very wrong here then.

There are plenty of programming examples on the M$ site covering just Visual
Basic.NET Pocket PC development. They don't give any hint that the product
"Visual Basic.NET" doesn't actually work with them.

The Microsoft site is full of references where you buy VB.NET (done!),
download and install the .NET Compact Framework (done!), and you're ready to
go:

"Moving from eMbedded Visual Basic to Visual Basic .NET"
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/d...ry/en-us/dnppc2k3/html/fromemb.asp?frame=true

Visual Studio.NET is mentioned on other pages - but it's made clear
elsewhere that VB.NET is a Visual Studio.NET language - it's the Visual
Studio programming environment, with just with the one language.

I can't help but feel misled and ripped off.

 

[Chris Tacke, eMVP]

And you're not the first to complain about this. I think that voicing the
complaint is important to letting Microsoft know the desire for a less
expensive smart device programming option, and it's likely what led to the
next version being offered in lower-end versions of Studio (though still not
the single-language editions).

 

[Roger Strong]

And you're not the first to complain about this. I think that voicing the
complaint is important to letting Microsoft know the desire for a less
expensive smart device programming option, and it's likely what led to the
next version being offered in lower-end versions of Studio (though still not
the single-language editions).

The expense is bad enough, but it's Microsoft's outright dishonesty that
really bothers me.

With so many pages on the Microsoft site dedicated to VB.NET examples for
the Pocket PC, and more pages telling people to upgrade from Embedded VB to
VB.NET, something is wrong when I discover after the fact that the product
"VB.NET" I just purchased won't actually do what these pages show.