[Touch Diamond, MDA Compact IV General] low.flying.pigs:
In brief response to other matters arising, that would have been disrespectful to include in the post above:

The initial Windows CE Emulator Images were known to be imperfect at the time, as discussed at the time. They have nonetheless served well until recently when requirements have exceeded them. Hence time consuming and laborious creation of new Emulator Images from scratch better suited to current requirements.

Using external PIE or IE6 does allow external switching between GCC and Help using Task Manager, if the device has Task Manager. Furthermore, similar switching could easily be integrated using internal PIE or IE6, and the user remains within the GCC application. This would not require Task Manager. External does not therefore particularly have a switching advantage, in fact it can be argued it has serious switching disadvantages. Graph could probably be implemented differently also.

Using the aforementioed Emulator Images it can be confirmed 4.12beta20 Readme.htm opens correctly in external Pocket Internet Explorer and external Internet Explorer 6 when either are on device, and when not Readme.txt opens correctly internally.

Regardless of whether internal or external, the implementation of Readme is dramatically improved, and at least now should be available on all devices.

Internal Readme.rtf progress to date will be abandoned unless continuation is specifically requested.

This serves as an example of generally why options should be provided. It is inherently also how to handle all wishes.

Generally, if it was convincing enough to implement a change or a feature, it should be convincing enough whilst implementing to make that optional for users that either do not require it, or wish it forced upon them.

If the above is unconvincing, and GCC will absolutely not be adapted accordingly without further effort of the user, then I apologise to that user as they will have to post again as it is unclear what more I can readily do for them.

If we never hear from them again, it is not necessarily because they are satisfied. It is just as likely because having already made all the effort that should be necessary, that was nonetheless insufficient. Potentially they have no idea what more they could possibly provide as no clues are given as to what would convince. Furthermore, they were potentially insulted having had the post in which they were addressed previously dismissed out of hand as obsolete.

Consider GCC does not lack users but lacks active participants. Consider the effect upon any other user considering participation. This has all been exhaustively documented previously.

Myself, and others like me, do what we do not because it is easy but because it is hard.

Apart from a love of regular mountain biking and cycling generally, the technical challenges provide the motivation. The objections without cogent reason and other nonsense provide the demotivation and detraction from time more productively spent. Attempts to frustrate have little effect upon those that were making the efforts. However, the effect is drastic upon general users when those efforts are either no longer made at all, or just no longer publicly shared for the benefit of all.

Cursory examination of ReleaseNotes.txt shows from 4.9 onwards extensive progress was made. Cursory examination of the forum shows where that extensive progress largely originated. If I retired today, I could do so taking the view my work here was done.

Consider for a moment a fraction of what is available has been submitted. Consider for a moment where GCC would be now without the nonsense. Whilst many good natured people will work on literally thankless tasks, they will not do so in return for what can be perceived as disrespect and abuse.

People can only speculate, and have, as to what drives the other type of individual. That speculation, in light of overwhelming and compelling evidence, is unlikely to be far off target, and furthermore, it has been stated rarely if ever do such individuals actually change.

There is a general principle in software engineering that where a feature conflicts with another, the conflict is either resolved, or safeguard implemented so the circumstance in which conflict occured can no longer. Removal of features is a last resort. Furthermore the feature is not redundant. There is no other comparable simplistic feature by which to simply display only the map. Usage of Recall is neither simplistic or comparable.

Further information to be added.

low.flying.pigs