ANN: OpenNETCF Calendar Controls

[Guest]

Have you ever wanted to integrate a really good calendar control with your
application? Maybe something that actually looks like the Calnedar in
Pocket Outlook? Well now you can.

OpenNETCF Calendar Controls provide a Month View, Week View and Agenda View
similar to what is used in the Pocket Outlook Calendar application. With the
OpenNETCF Calendar Controls you can integrate calendaring functionality
right within your application. The controls are completely customizable
using the Visual Studio 2005 designer and you can also customize the
painting through special events while the controls are being rendered.

http://www.opennetcf.com/controls/calendar

 

[Haggy]

Hi
Looks very nice do you also ship to europe ? Where may I find prices in
Euro ?

 

[Guest]

We "ship" online, so it comes digitally anywhere you have an internet
connection. The price in Euros will fluctuate with the exchange rate.
We'll charge you in USD and your bank will convert that at the time of the
transaction.

-Chris

 

[Haggy]

Thx for info

Is there something like a reseller program planned?

 

[Guest]

Just to make things clear.

I used to develop ce apps using some ever-lacking-documentation controls
from the should-be-good OpennetCf library.

Unfortunately, as the v2.0 was finally released, many controls was removed
from the collection, some others changed properties names or even removed
some properties, and some others were no longer supported and were not free
anymore! (Those guys like making $$ with our feedback)

No way to load the forms in VS2005 to make an update, messing up the whole
apps. And i spoiled time removing them one by one in the source code, and
replacing them by well behaving and designed controls from the Compact
framework.

SO BE CAREFUL!
OpennetCF is not worth the time you spend on it. These guys dont even take
time to write a line to help use their lib.
If you like good controls, you'd better develop them by yourself, this is
not as challenging as it sounds. (and MS CF2 have good basic controls to
start with).

 

[Paul G. Tobey [eMVP]]

Huh? So, what you're saying is that companies that listen to their
customers don't use that feedback to improve their products? You work in
academia, or something?

Certainly, there are issues with porting old applications from one framework
version to another. That's a scenario that is difficult to support without
stepping in front of those who are starting new applications that target
..NET CF 2.0. You want the best possible design for the 2.0 version of the
framework, so, at some points, you're forced to break backward compatibility
or be stuck with things that could be better (or twice the amount of
interfaces to test). Sorry it didn't work out for you, but this isn't a
well-funded organization; it's a group of people who saw some deficiencies
in the framework and pooled their time to fill the holes.

Perhaps, once you've created your own controls, you'll give them away?

Paul T.

 

[Guest]

Just to make things MORE clear.

1. The library was long lacking documentation and samples because it was
free. and all time spent working on it was purely donated. Still it had an
MSDN-style library, and since most .NET code is self documenting, thousands
of people were still able to makle use of it.

2. Any controls that were removed were done so becasue CF 2.0 added them and
we feel that bloat for the sake of redundancy isn't worthwhile.

3. We renamed things to follow some sort of standard and make it a cleaner
library.

4. True SDF 2.0 is now $50. Last I checked that's really, really close to
free when you look at the cost of a project and how long it would take you
to duplicate what it provides. You also get all the source code for that.
Name another library that does that for you. And SDF 1.4 is still free and
readily available.

5. A simple cost-benefit analysis by an elementary school student could
easily deduce that if your time is worth anything, then if you can save even
a few hours of work by leveraging someone else's work, then paying for it is
worthwhile. If this weren't the case, we'd all develop our own OS and all
software to run on it.

6. We do have samples and test harnesses. I'd say that constitutes a few
lines of sample code. We have articels using our libraries. That might be
contrued as a sample.

7. We encourage people to write their own code. We just feel it's a better
use of developer resources to develop their own product that solves their
customer's business problem or provides some interesting feature rather than
work on the underlying guts of things.

8. By all means, shop around. We're not the only CF developers on the
planet. Out libraries aren't the only ones out there. Use what fits your
business and your project. If it's not us, I'm fine with that.

9. As Abe Lincoln once said, "Better to remain silent and be thought a fool
than to speak and be proven one." Thanks for speaking up.