MC70: March 2008 Maint. Rel. - VQM options

For the next Maintenance Release we are going to include the Voice Quality Manager (VQM) v2.5 CAB file in the Application partition of the MC9090/9094.  The last several MC909x releases have included an Application partition in the image.

We could do the same for the MC7090/7094, however this would mean including a new Application partition in the Update Loader package.  Previous updates on Support Central did not include an Application partition and as such did not erase any data on the App partition when an update was performed.  A customer updating their terminal with a package containing a new App partition would then erase everything currently in their Application partition (unless they edited out the Application partition from the pkgs.lst file).  Alternatively, we could just have a separate single download of the VQM CAB file on the same page as the OS update.

I am looking for feedback on whether anyone would be concerned with including the Application partition in the new MC70 OS update.
Kevin Lollock
Most partners and customers

Most partners and customers that I deal with would prefer a separate, single download .cab file for installation of VQM. There are many instances where they've gotten in the habit of applying OS updates without risking the integrity of the Application partition. A sudden change like that may put many of them into a tailspin. Also, there are many instances within the install base where VQM does not come into play at all and would not be a requirement of their application.

My vote - single cab file install.

Regards,
Kevin Lollock
Vote: 
Vote up!
Vote down!

Points: 1

You voted ‘up’


Thomas Cassar
Thanks Kevin.  That is

Thanks Kevin.  That is exactly the feedback I am looking for, so for everyone else keep it coming.
Vote: 
Vote up!
Vote down!

Points: 0

You voted ‘up’


Don Khan
Tom,          I suggest that

Tom,
         I suggest that the "Application" folder NOT be included in the OS update.  Deliver the VQM via a separate CAB file.

Most deployments have incorporated some component of their environment within the Application, thus, this has to be preserved.  The one downfall is that of, any previous updates delivered via the Application folder, unless removed prior to performing the OS update, may overwrite critical updates with earlier versions of the respective files.  One would have to ensure that these "fixes" are removed from the Application folder, or from the client's install process!
Vote: 
Vote up!
Vote down!

Points: 1

You voted ‘up’


Anthony Ambler
Tom, I would say leave this

Tom,

I would say leave this as a seperate cab file to install. Most of my customers don't even use the voice capabilities on these units and are just using GPRS. They are often looking for as much extra memory as possible and would just want to remove the cab file.

Tony
Vote: 
Vote up!
Vote down!

Points: 1

You voted ‘up’


Harold Reeves
Tom, If we can provide the

Tom,

If we can provide the ability to create a custom \Application folder as we did with TCM in the past- then it would be OK to  make this a part of the update. 

If we do not have the ability to customize \Application, then we need to leave it alone and manage through addition and subtraction of CAB files as you have planned.

$0.02
Vote: 
Vote up!
Vote down!

Points: 0

You voted ‘up’


Gene Niles
I vote for a download. Also

I vote for a download. Also if this is only on WM OS's why not look into a ROM update packge. Just have reserved spot in the ROM for it to live (just like fusion) if it is going to be standard then this should be no problem.

Also, if we introduce a new partition, it's only a matter of time before people do not put the right partition table on and mismatch the older partition set with the newer ones. CAB downloads are much better.
Vote: 
Vote up!
Vote down!

Points: 0

You voted ‘up’


Anonymous (not verified)
I vote for a cab file. We

I vote for a cab file. We should avoid releasing the application folder, and most customers will not need this feature.
Vote: 
Vote up!
Vote down!

Points: 0

You voted ‘up’


Juan Luis Navarro
I also agree with a separate

I also agree with a separate cab for VQM.
Juanlu.
Vote: 
Vote up!
Vote down!

Points: 0

You voted ‘up’


Juan-Antonio Ma...
Individual cab file is more

Individual cab file is more modular, hence more flexible. So I vote this.

By the way, is it possible to use VQM to redirect audio on MC70 to the front speaker, as audiocontrol does (setting to Receiver)?
Vote: 
Vote up!
Vote down!

Points: 0

You voted ‘up’


William Goddard
My partners have always

My partners have always preferred the Individual cab file route. That would get my vote.
Vote: 
Vote up!
Vote down!

Points: 0

You voted ‘up’


Richard Nedwich
Yes, VQM does allow for audio

Yes, VQM does allow for audio routing to/from front and rear speakers.
Vote: 
Vote up!
Vote down!

Points: 0

You voted ‘up’


Juan-Antonio Ma...
Thanks Richard. Is there a

Thanks Richard.
Is there a manual on how to do this?
I have browsed all of the "known" relevant registry settings and found nothing about
Vote: 
Vote up!
Vote down!

Points: 0

You voted ‘up’


Alarico De Zotti
I prefer the cab option.

I prefer the cab option.


THX

Alarico
Vote: 
Vote up!
Vote down!

Points: 0

You voted ‘up’


Log in to post comments