[8125, K-JAM, P4300, MDA Vario Software Upgrading] xdadevelopersuser:
Re: issue with this ROM

If you still want to pursue, here are a few additional pieces of information.

The first time I ran it on your 2.17 ROM it only took about 2-3 minutes to sync. After upgrading to your 2.3 w/CF2, I let it attempt to Sync with Money for at least 4 hours. After the first 5 minutes, I was fairly certain that there was a problem. During many of the attempts to Sync on the various 2.x ROMs, I had set the Money Sync setting to None for weeks of data to download.

The Money file is stored on my HDD, and it knew where to look for it. The desktop Money does use Passport to verify the logon. You can skip the logon, and Money will still open. The reason for the Passport logon is to allow Money internet access to the MS servers. You can keep your files locally or on the MS servers. I do not think that Pocket Money was trying to connect to the MS servers, but it is possible.

When I tried to stop the Sync operation, it would say that it was Stopping, but it was still hung. I let it run the Stopping operation for about 4 hours in addition to the 4 hours Synching - total 8 hours. The "Reading device databases" Progress screen was open the entire time.

I could not detect any activity on the WCESMgr or wcescomm Processes using the Windows Task Manager Processes tab. I could only detect activity on the explorer, System Idle Process, and taskmgr threads. Task Manager is set to High for the Update Speed, and I am only displaying the default columns.

Neither WM5 nor Windows XP seemed to slow down or exhibit any negative behaviors. On the device, I could connect to the Internet, and open web pages. I could open Word Mobile. This was while the Sync operation was hung. The device would indicate that the Sync operation was in progress.

The Pocket Money version is 2.05, and the ActiveSync version is 4.1. These have not changed.

If it is a connection problem, it should be on the WM5 side. My guess is that the Sync operation gets started on the XP side. ActiveSync kicks off Pocket Money on the Windows XP side using the files installed by Pocket Money on the HDD. This begins a transfer operation, and the Progress screen is displayed. For some reason, the operation is terminated, and I would guess this is on the WM5 side. The Progress screen and the ActiveSync Sync indicators ("Synchcronizing", green icon, and rotating arrows) are waiting for the Pocket Money process to pass a message that the operation is completed, but because the process terminated, the message is never sent. This is why the Progress screen and ActiveSync indicators do not stop. This is also why the ActiveSync Stopping operation never stops. There is no process to Stop. This would also be the reason that neither WM5 nor XP seem to have any negative behaviors. Instead of being caught in Do loop chewing up CPU cycles and memory, the process died on both.

Assuming this is correct, what caused the process to die? Why was there no error? My answer to the first is that AKU2.x changed something in a WM5 subsystem, and an input or output has changed - property, method, or event. My answer to the second is that the change is subtle, and no error was caught because it was never thrown.

There are a lot of assumptions here, and any one being wrong could cause the entire hypothesis to fall apart. Without debugging tools, source code, test environment, etc., it is difficult to test any of this.

I have never posted to any BB or newsgroup because I can almost always find the answer to a question, and some of the answers are that it is not possible. It requires a lot of digging to first find a BB or newsgroup with knowledgeable people. It then requires mining the site for useful information. I find that the search for the answer to a specific problem will lead to answers/solutions to questions/problems that have not arisen. When they do occur, I already know the answer, and I also might learn that I actually have a problem.

The reason for the same posts over and over is that too many hits are returned from a search. Unless you have changed the "Display results as:" to posts and used booleans, the results will include threads with multiple pages to wade through. It can be frustrating. It is even worse if after 10 pages of posts you only find the terms used in a different context.

One thing that helps to cut down on those posts is a sticky FAQ on a locked thread. A response that points to the FAQ will get most of them to the right place to answer most of their questions. This will lessen the follow-up questions, and this will also decrease the hits a search will produce. The noise-to-signal ratio is cut down significantly.

NOTE: None of the above is meant to excuse the behavior of not researching before posting.

Hang in there, and just ignore noise. You are far more patient than I am.