text:
Talk:Pocket PC

Definition
(Q) Help me out: is "Pocket PC" the genre or type of handheld, and Windows CE the operationg system, or what? (A)Pocket PC is a PDA specification developed by Microsoft; it is also a Microsoft trademark. If a device is referred to as a Pocket PC, that simply indicates that it has been certified by microsoft as meeting certain hardware and software standards. Part of the specification is the standard software package that is installed on the device, called "Windows Mobile for Pocket PC." This software package runs on top of the Windows CE OS.

Yo, dude! I thought my ViewSonic Pocket PC was running Windows CE 2002. I am on drugs, or what? -- Surfer Dude Your ViewSonic Pocket PC is running Windows CE, but it is also loaded with additional software specified by Microsoft. This software, in conjunction with the Windows CE OS, forms the Pocket PC system. "PocketPC" is just a fork of sorts from Windows CE. So any Windows CE code can be easily ported to PocketPC with just the correct SDK installed in your DE.

You know, that phrase sounds weird to me, like "Windows XP is a set of software that runs ontop of Windows operationg system", IMHO it's not, the operating system is defined by basic software packages too, not just the kernel or whatever it has to handle executions of those software. Gnomz007 00:00, 28 Nov 2004 (UTC)

HP is not a manufacturer of Pocket PC's. In fact most popular brands just put their own brands on devices made by Taiwanese and Korean Companies. The biggest manufacturer (ODM) of Pocket PC devices is HTC (of Taiwan), also from Taiwan is Compal and Eten, LG and Samsung makes their own pocket pc's as well.

Pocket Pc is for MIPS,SH3,ARM,XSCALE. But Pocket Pc 2002 works only with ARM. Later, MS changed the name Pocket Pc 2003 to be Windows Mobile 2003.

Update needed
The article currently says  A $100–$200 model is rumored to be released within 2004 or early 2005.. Please can someone with the necessary knowledge, update it? Thank you. Andy Mabbett 13:44, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

Merger on Palm-Size PC and Palmtop
Again I say no. Palm-Size PC's are a different breed of decice as are Palmtops. To suggest a merge is like suggesting Mac should be dropped in with the IBM PC. Especially as Pocket PC's came 3 years AFTER Palm-Size PC and almost a decade after Palmtop. C:Amie 01:15, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

 * If they are going to remain separate, then there needs to be a way to sort all of this out. History of Microsoft Embedded Software or List of commercial embedded systems running Microsoft OS or something along those lines. You shouldn't have to explain on a talk page that Palmtops were before Palm-size PC's were before Pocket PC's. What are they called today? Where do H/PC's fit in to all of this? Why do some Pocket PC's run Windows CE, while others run Windows Mobile?

 * I understand that the history of Windows embedded systems is a mess (hell, nowadays even Palm runs Windows Mobile), but the purpose of Wikipedia is to provide a clearer understanding of all of this. I'm still trying to figure out ways to make things clearer (which resulted in the Windows CE Timeline). McNeight 04:42, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Requesting - Application development for Mobile development
If anyone working on this page can fill out the Pocket PC columns on Mobile development, that would be a huge help - someone added the column, but didn't know any details. Thanks! 24.7.66.15 20:18, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Please do not remove contributions
You are more than welcome to add your own details on your own product (which you decided to remove) but do not remove others contributions. Timeshift 06:14, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Best Handheld
Guys, can you tell me what's the best handheld for value. The handheld needs t have WiFi though.  Demonblade    (talk)   06:21, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Disputed
Firstly the last paragraph recently added is POV in parts, second there is no evidence I am aware of to suggest that the market has "abandoned" them, as most people are still purchasing GPS add-ons which allows for best positioning and view to pick up satellites better, and the choice of GPS add-on also allows for choice of GPS specs instead of being stuck with the often sub-standard sensitivity of built-in GPS devices. Timeshift 04:57, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Market Trends
Those are mostly irrelevant details, the matter is that the market trends are clear by now. On the GPS details you are mentioning, I would say that because of their high sensitivity, for example the SiRF Star III based GPS receivers are designed to work very well inside of a car. There is a list of dissadavantages of GPS add-ons; neither Garmin, Brunton nor Magellan GPS devices are usually sold in pieces.

Market Trends are showing decline in demand for pure pocket PC devices. I can provide evidence for that, if you do not know much about. I can also provide evidence that converged devices have better demand than pure pocket PC's.

At least five recently launched devices from different brands have an integrated GPS. On the other side, it's important to notice that Toshiba and Viewsonic have abandoned the pocket PC market. Sony has abandoned the palm compatible market too. Palm and HP have clearly their focus on communicators. So does HTC, the manufacturer of the Dell X51v.

HP and Dell still sell pure pocket PC devices, but their "new" devices, are basically renamed last year products with little more ROM and Microsoft Windows Mobile 5 OS. There is very small difference between the Dell X50 and X51 series. And it's exactly the same with the HP iPAQ hx2000 series devices. The VGA 4" TFT hx4700 model was abandoned. Something that one could call new on the pure pocket pc market could be perhaps the Acer n300, and only because it combines entry level price with an VGA 3.7" TFT screen.

 * Please provide evidence that the market has abandoned PocketPC devices with external GPS devices as opposed to PocketPCs with in-built GPS. Also please ensure you sign your talk contributions with four tildes so the following occurs: Timeshift 10:26, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Evidence #1: Can be seen the demand for Pocket PC's, excluding Smartphones  "Q2 2006 saw the worldwide handheld devices market experience its tenth consecutive quarter of YTY decline" Source: IDC

Evidence #2: Gives an general idea of the demand for GPS integrated devices  YTY Rise by 96% Source: IDC

 * Maybe it's my eyes this late at night but I cannot see any evidence to show that market demand for PocketPC with non-integrated GPS is in decline in comparison to PocketPC with integrated GPS. Timeshift 12:45, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

The evidence #2 gives an general idea, it's not irrefutable, but with that information it's very raisonable to assume that my POV was correct. There are various conclusions that serve as circumstantial evidences:

- Some of the brands listed on the table inside the link "Evidence #2", sell GPS devices based on pocket PC's. - The typical customer looking for a GPS solution does not have preference for a Pocket PC and GPS add-on combination, but for an integrated product. - There are various new and anounced pocket PC devices with integrated GPS. Since it's safe to assume that the companies that sell Pocket PC's make market research, that would be Evidence #3.

 * As you are unable to show that PocketPC with non integrated GPS sales are in decline in comparison to PocketPC with integrated GPS, I am removing your incorrect claims and will request a block to be put on you if you continue to revert your incorrect contribution without providing evidence to the contrary. Timeshift 13:39, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Evidence 4: Interpetation of the IDC Analyst  "The inclusion of Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, and GPS have kept handheld devices relevant, particularly for core users." Source: IDC

 * Nothing there refers to GPS on it's own. The x51v has BT and Wi-Fi. On top of the fact it does not refer to GPS on it's own, it does not say or even infer that the non-integrated GPS PocketPC market is declining in comparison to the integreated GPS PocketPC market. Timeshift 13:51, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

I have more than proved that you are wrong
Why are you vandalizing my contributions? I have proved that you are wrong, and found sound backup for anything I said. I didn't touch the crazy things you have composed.

 * Nowhere does it show that the non-integrated GPS PocketPC market is declining in comparison to the integreated GPS PocketPC market. Nowhere. You cannot point me to any quote which shows this to be the case. Timeshift 14:09, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

 * And by all means, please tell me ONE crazy thing I have composed, and why that is the case. Put simply, you cannot :-) Timeshift 14:10, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Don't lie, the circumstantial evidence I provided was more than enough. And let me quote you: "...a GPS that can be based on the Windows Mobile Phone Edition." How old are you?

 * Circumstantial evidence? HAHA. Yeah right. I'll repeat again. Nowhere does it show that the non-integrated GPS PocketPC market is declining in comparison to the integreated GPS PocketPC market. Nowhere. And again, please tell me ONE crazy thing I have composed, and why that is the case. Put simply, you cannot. It is obvious you are trying to discredit me from that accusation and also stooping so low as to ask me my age in pre-empting that I am a child. (btw look at your contribution - shocking spelling and grammar) I am not, perhaps you care to look at my contributions, especially election articles. I will continue reverting and will also see about getting a block put on you for your continual POV and incorrect assertion reverts. Timeshift 14:29, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

You have been defeated in the argumentation, you have no any credibility.

 * Saying it doesn't make it true. I'll repeat again. Nowhere does it show that the non-integrated GPS PocketPC market is declining in comparison to the integreated GPS PocketPC market. Nowhere. Reverting due to continual POV and incorrect assertion reverts. Timeshift 15:10, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Why is this conflictive "person" allowed to act that way?
I wanted to write some things, but the simpleton started to bother with his wide array of pretexts, all without a reason. And it's not the first time that happens. He's not even able to follow his own rules.
 * And I have let you keep most of the things you have written, apart from the following - I'll repeat again. Nowhere does it show that the non-integrated GPS PocketPC market is declining in comparison to the integreated GPS PocketPC market. Nowhere. Reverting due to continual POV and incorrect assertion reverts. Timeshift 15:50, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

He/she already asked for evidence and I provided some from IDC. There is no need for any idiotic repeating.
 * Yet you continue to be unable to provide a quote where it shows that the non-integrated GPS PocketPC market is declining in comparison to the integreated GPS PocketPC market. Providing a link is not sufficient. Provide a link, with a quote to back up your incorrect assertions. You have consistently been unable to do this and only serves to degrade your position. Timeshift 16:12, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

He/she is pushing the things to an absurd, good explanation has already been given, however he/she has poor intellectual capability, combined with bad attitude. I'm wondering who can I complain in Wikipedia about this? I quoted the opinion of an professional consultant from IDC, which is coincident with mine. He/she insists that I'm wrong and gives no any proves about his/shes crazy POV's.
 * Yet you continue to be unable to provide a quote where it shows that the non-integrated GPS PocketPC market is declining in comparison to the integreated GPS PocketPC market. Providing a link is not sufficient. Provide a link, with a quote to back up your incorrect assertions. You have consistently been unable to do this and only serves to degrade your position. Timeshift 04:05, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

He/she is telling those non true things with the intention, I guess, to frustrate, discouraging to participate. I provided 4 evidences, for what he/she questioned with bad intentions. I provided back up for my opinion, that took me time and effort to collect, which he/she doesn't respect as I respected his/her questionings, and asks once and again to keep giving him/her data that he/she ignores. IDC is an well known market research firm, the credibility is out of question. I can undestand his/shes "LOVE" for some specific product, however while writing articles of an encyclopedia, I think that one has to be objective, have some knowledge and criterium. I mean, how can the Axim pictures be everywhere? That product was very late to the pocket PC market. Something so categoric as "the most powerfull consumer-market product" simply can't be said about the X51v. There are many other products with similar characteristics, and better in some aspects. The Axim is tremendously behind iPAQ in sells, that without considering iPAQ communicators (which are on a sharp rise). I have nothing against any company, but that article is misleading. He/she doesn't allow anything he/she wrote to be touched, he/she invites to write, and later vandalizes the articles. That is an totally unacceptable behavior, something should be done about.--Igor Sotelo 09:54, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

 * circumstantial evidence does not equal evidence. See WP:Reliable sources. HighInBC 17:46, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

More than one does, your sentence is an oxymoron. Please provide evidence that the Dell Axim X51v, is "the most powerfull consumer-market product".--Igor Sotelo 18:15, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
 * The X51v has a 624mhz processor and 16mb of dedicated video memory via an Intel 2700G accellerator. Do the devices you mention come with dedicated graphics, placing less demand on the CPU therefore freeing it up for other tasks? Look at the benchmarks. I will keep reverting, and I am a dedicated wikipedian, so your struggle is futile. BTW I am yet to find one person agreeing with your position. Timeshift 18:18, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

As market figures and software support show, that specification is not of much importance. The Qtek 9000, FS Loox N560 and the HP iPAQ hx2790, to name a few are as good if not better than the Dell. Does the X51v has the largest TFT screen of any PPC? No. Better microprocessor speed than some other devices? No. Has it any telephony features or broadband capabilities? No. Does it has an integrated GPS? No. Does it has the largest battery capacity? No. Advanced security? No. Fastest Wi-Fi? No. Perhaps, the fastest BT? No. Integrated keyboard? No. USB host capability? No. Is the X51v the lightest and smallest device? No. Most RAM? No. Most ROM? No.

There are many opinions, it depends on the source of the information. --Igor Sotelo 18:35, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

 * I didn't say most advanced. I said most powerful - in terms of raw power. None of what you mentioned contributes to raw power. I am sick of having to explain myself, so from now on unless anyone brings up anything useful, I will not continue this discussion here and will continue to revert. Timeshift 18:40, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Has the X51v the fastest ROM? No. Is the X51v the fastest PPC? No, the QVGA PPC's run faster than the VGA devices. You have not much idea what are you talking about. However, since you a fanatic, you are causing trouble. Can this be considered as evidence: "I am yet to find one person agreeing with your position". You may see soon how silly is your POV.--Igor Sotelo 18:47, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

 * POV is not allowed in articles. POV is allowed in discussion. If you cannot even follow wikipedia convention, then I suggest you learn. Timeshift 18:53, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Some fanatism can be noted, since you don't mind about evidences in other more questionable issues. What you have composed is not a fact, as you think, but you are sick of giving explanations (you didn't have given much, btw) and you don't mind. You asked for evidence and I provided them. Therefore, it's clear that you are the one that can't follow the rules. If I understand correctly, you think differently about the integrated GPS issue, because so far you have failed to "find one person agreeing with my position".--Igor Sotelo 19:24, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

So is Pocket PC like a computer but small and portable?
If so will the Motorola MPx300 be a good one? Willie512 23:03, 6 September 2006 (UTC)willie512

 * Yes, the Pocket PC has a powerfull hardware and an very capable multitasking operating system. I didn't tested personally the Motorola MPx (MPx300), however reading it's specifications, it's somewhat limited by having only 32 MB of RAM. Other than that, it's specifications are typical of other communicators based on the Windows Mobile Phone Edition.

Hello. An opinion was requested on the WP:3O page.
Hello. I am responding to a request on the Third Opinion page, which asked that a third opinion be given on the dispute between Igor Sotelo and Timeshift.

Having read the article, compared the two versions of the article, and read the discussion here; I think I see the problem.

Igor Sotelo says that sales of Pocket PCs without integrated GPS technology are declining in relation to sales of Pocket PCs with GPS technology. Timeshift says this is a point of view, and asks for sources. Igor Sotelo cites as sources a couple of charts, and an article about handheld devices having declining sales. Igor Sotelo then asks how Timeshift can maintain their position in the face of this circumstantial evidence.

Note that I bolded the word circumstantial. Igor Sotelo admits that this evidence is circumstantial.

Looking at Igor Sotelo's contribution history I see Igor Sotelo is rather new to Wikipedia. This seems to be the only article Igor has contributed to.

Igor, you seem to have the general idea of Wikipedia down, but I wonder if you have read and understood all of the many (often confusing) policies Wikipedia has? If not, that's fine. It takes time to read and learn to understand all the silly little rules, and the spirit and intention of Wikipedia is that anyone can and should just jump in and edit any article they desire.

Anyway, I think it would really help in this situation, if Igor would read and understand the No original research policy. Specifically this part: Editors often make the mistake of thinking that if A is published by a reliable source, and B is published by a reliable source, then A and B can be joined together in an article in order to advance position C. However, this would be an example of a new synthesis of published material serving to advance a position, and as such it would constitute original research. "A and B, therefore C" is acceptable only if a reliable source has published this argument in relation to the topic of the article. (emphasis mine)

In other words, cirucmstantial evidence is not enough for wikipedia; no matter how strong or convincing that circumstantial evidence may be. You need to find someone who has actually published something saying "Sales of non-GPS integrated Pocket PCs have declined in relation to sales of GPS inegrated ones". A pain, I know, especially when anyone can look at the circumstantial evidence you provided and reach that conclusion on their own, but as with all rules there is a good reason for this rule.

While we're talking about rules, may I also remind Timeshift of WP:Civil, WP:Bite and, of course WP:3RR. ~ ONUnicorn (Talk / Contribs) 20:02, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Hello ONUunicorn,
 * re-post of the Evidence 4: Interpetation of the IDC Consultant
 *
 * "The inclusion of Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, and GPS have kept handheld devices relevant, particularly for core users."
 * Source: IDC
 * Evidence 5: Another 2005 Market Report
 * This was in 2005, in 2006 the advantage is clear for GPS integraded PDAs.
 * "In the meantime PDAs and other devices, known in marketing terms as 'unconnected handhelds', declined worldwide, although there was some growth in the EU, driven by the demand for PDAs with integrated GPS navigation. In the second quarter of 2005 almost half the number of PDAs sold had GPS included."
 *
 * Source: Canalys and JISC
 * I think that the Dell Axim X51v is a fine Pocket PC device, but I doubt the comments the other poster has made about that product would sustain the same legal rigour applied to my contributions.
 * I use wikipedia often, it's one of the best web sites on the Internet. I'm sure, I would have contributed more, however the discussion was time consuming.
 * --Igor Sotelo 21:39, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I think that the Dell Axim X51v is a fine Pocket PC device, but I doubt the comments the other poster has made about that product would sustain the same legal rigour applied to my contributions.
 * I use wikipedia often, it's one of the best web sites on the Internet. I'm sure, I would have contributed more, however the discussion was time consuming.
 * --Igor Sotelo 21:39, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
 * --Igor Sotelo 21:39, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
 * --Igor Sotelo 21:39, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

 * I still fail to see the evidence where it shows that integrated GPS devices increasingly sell over non-integrated. As the x51v comes with bluetooth and wi-fi, two out of the three, your circumstantial evidence is not valid. Two wikipedians have said this now. Nobody is agreeing with you Igor. Timeshift 23:44, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I wont, like him/her, speak for another wikipedians. Neither will pretend to suggest others what to think. The referece he/she says to be ignored doesn't say OR, it says AND. Also, most Pocket PC's already have BT and Wi-Fi. "Two of three" is not the same. Both quoted references say what I had put, with another words. Different people write differently. It's not a C conclusion from A and B references. Those are A/B/C statements, all telling the same with different words.--Igor Sotelo 00:27, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

 * The two people who have commented say your references are not sufficient. Accept it. Timeshift 01:32, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

 * Here goes another one. Evidence #6: Gartner Market Analysis Q1 2006
 *
 * "Mio Technology has taken the lead in PDAs with integrated GPS capabilities and is faring especially well"
 * "The bulk of Dell's sales were its flagship model X51v"
 * 1Q05- 1Q06 Growth (%) Mio Technology +81.2
 * 1Q05- 1Q06 Growth (%) Dell -34.0
 * Source: Gartnet Report transcribed by Palm Infocenter.
 * Gartner defines the PDA's somewhat different than IDS. Gartner is well known independent market research company.
 * --Igor Sotelo 00:27, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
 * --Igor Sotelo 00:27, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

 * You still don't understand the concept of circumstantial evidence do you? Timeshift 01:44, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

 * My sources ware: Gartner, IDC and Canalys.--Igor Sotelo 03:08, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

 * Cir-cum-stan-tial evidence. Three people including me have said your sources are not valid. Nobody has said otherwise. Please follow wikipedia convention. Timeshift 03:18, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

 * Not all the evidence I provided was circumstantial, a term you one would think by your reaction that you have heard from me, some is quite direct. You are un-able to under-stand. And my sources are: Gartner, IDC and Canalys.--Igor Sotelo 03:08, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

 * Cir-cum-stan-tial evidence. Three people including me have said your sources are not valid. Nobody has said otherwise. Please follow wikipedia convention. Timeshift 03:32, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

 * HighInBC said: "circumstantial evidence does not equal evidence", he never said that my sources are not valid. You are concluding something that the poster never said explicitly.
 * ONUunicorn said: "Igor Sotelo admits that this evidence is circumstantial", I never said that all the evidence I provided is so, some of it is actually direct. This poster misses to comment on the quote I provided, that more or less says what he wished me to find to prove my point.
 * I repeated that quote, and added another very similar based on a report from a different market research organization. Note that the example of the second wikipedian, that back up's you, doesn't apply, since more or less the two quotes and the part of my statement, that you choosed for bothering, say the same with different words.
 * No figuring out, no conclusions. Direct.
 * And I found additional information (Evidence #6) to fully support my point.
 * --Igor Sotelo 04:16, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

 * Circumstantial evidence does not equal evidence. How much more simple do they need to get for you? Timeshift 04:14, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

 * Not all circumstantial, some is direct, how much simple do you need to be told?--Igor Sotelo 04:17, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

 * If you were correct then people would side with you and not with me. I am in the right. Timeshift 04:36, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

 * Gartner, IDC and Canalys organizations are the real experts in Marketing Research of PDA's with integrated GPS. Take note that if I ware really wrong and you right, those companies would be reporting that discret graphics with 3D accelerators and the X51v are on the rise and top selling items. And there would be 5/6 new PPC with discrete graphics anouncements. They would be also saying that the separate GPS receiver and PPC combination are top selling items. And we would agree. Off course, none of that is the case.--Igor Sotelo 04:55, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

 * You don't understand what circumstantial evidence is do you? Wikipedians are not agreeing with you. How much simpler must I make it? Timeshift 05:14, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

 * Unlike Gartner, IDC and Canalis, those wikipedians and you are not "for real" in Market Research of PDA's with integrated GPS. HighInBC actually doesn't seem sure what evidence is. And I told you that not all evidence I provided is circumstantial, some is direct. Do you know what direct evidence is?--Igor Sotelo 05:19, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

 * Wikipedians have reviewed the evidence, and it is not valid. Wikipedians know what is and isn't allowed as a source, and this is not. How many more times does it need to be explained. Timeshift 05:27, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

 * They centered all their attention around the term "circumstantial" (I guess, conveniently suggested by your astute worded third opinion requests), not really reading too much about the provided information. Besides, I found two additional dumb-proof arguments. As I said, the knowledge on the subject, objectiveness and criterium are very important. None was present.--Igor Sotelo 05:56, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

 * If you were in the right wikipedians would agree with you. They do not. Timeshift 06:12, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

 * Not necessarily. Should that statement be true, Wikipedia would have the same relevance of the Britannica. And that's not the case. For me, it's easy to see why.--Igor Sotelo 06:17, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

 * And that relates, how? Timeshift 06:21, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

 * Directly.
 * FYI, criminals get convicted based on circumstantial evidence "for a very good reason".
 * --Igor Sotelo 07:57, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

 * FYI this is wikipedia, not a court. Timeshift 08:13, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

 * You are missing the point. I'm pointing to the fact that the attack for using circumstantial evidence was fake too.--201.240.254.170 08:34, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

 * It is not wrong when IT IS WIKIPEDIA RULES! You have seriously lost all credibility and would be in your best interests not to dig further than the gigantic hole you have already dug for yourself. Timeshift 14:28, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

 * Couldn't care less about what YOU have to say, since those rules ignore basic principles, and alowed someone notoriously wrong like you, to make all the edits and put false "information" in the article. Your point of view, quotes of whatever, simply fail to reflect the state of things in the market, and have no any connection with reality. As far I'm concerned, those rules ARE worth NOTHING as is worth your opinion here or in the article.--201.240.254.170 17:44, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

 * And there we have it. Direct admission that Igor does not care to follow a) Wikipedia rules, and b) common opinion as has been expressed by others in this discussion. This discussion warrants to further input. Reverts will continue within wikipedia rules. Timeshift 17:54, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

 * As usual, he/she is missing the point. I no longer have interest to participate in Wikipedia, because that organization has lost most of it's credibility with me and I feel that I dont wont to interact with persons that I don't consider to have good intellectual level. Off course, that decision will allow me to not follow those rules, without making any offense. As he/she may have noticed, I'm not correcting my article anymore.
 * He/she knows well that the first of those opinions is an oxymoron and a false statement. Yet he/she continues to quote it as back up for the crank pocket PC theories.
 * The "third opinion" was:
 * (1) suggested by his/her request to concentrate on the unjustifiedly, by him/her, maligned term "circumstantial evidence", rather than the analysis of provided information, which wasn't all circumstantial,
 * (2) concentrated on the fact I was new to wikipedia, that this was my only (and my last, off course) participation, and that I was low on Wikipedia (which I never said, but I'm now),
 * (3) requested a comment that I already provided (clearly that person didn't read my evidence #4), neither did he bothered to respond the additional comments,
 * (4) quoting me in something I didn't explicitly said,
 * (5) a bad definition of the problem, missing the idea,
 * (6) giving a bad example, and
 * (7) linking to "new theory" text, when actually he/she IS presenting a new theory that has no relation with market trends or reality.
 * --201.240.254.170 19:13, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

 * Now you're just trying to bait - and good work, because you got me to reply yet again. Firstly, I didn't concentrate on your newness to wikipedia, I said that, as part of the debate, you obviously are unaware of how wikipedia works and discussed things such as circumstantial evidence. There are plenty of new people every day to wikipedia, and as long as they learn the rules, all is good. You provided to evidence to show that PocketPC with integrated GPS was increasingly selling more than non-integrated. All you could find was circumstantial evidence; an example being one of your sources was generalising on integration such as bluetooth and wireless, which the x51v has, so is a moot point. You could not find direct proof, and that has been backed up by two other wikipedians. How much more of a case closed do you need? Timeshift 19:14, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

 * I have no idea what are you talking about in your first sentence. For new wikipedians: what I know for sure, is that as long as they write what he/she exactly wants (btw, he/she is promoting a product), there are no problems; the "rules" are extremely relative and there are double standards. I could have found additional information to support my point, but that was futile since he/she's in a really great hurry to close the issue, and will never admit the error.
 * For he/she: You have ripped me off with the two others "wikipedians" in the GPS integration issue, there are various of those links and proves. Sorry, but that shouldn't and can't be an issue. Even Dell will ship GPS integrated PDA devices or communicators, otherwise they will most likely retire from the Pocket PC market. The IDC quote that you want to discredit has reference to BT, Wi-Fi AND (directly to) GPS integration, and it's a backup from an IDC consultant, nothing less, not a backup from wikipedians that show little knowledge on the subject, lack of objectiveness and extremely poor criterium. For God, one of them seems to miss what evidence is.--201.240.254.170 19:24, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

 * Wikipedians always get it right. :-) Timeshift 19:40, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

 * Don't make me laugh.

Ok, after I originally posted my 3rd opinion, Igor came up with this: Evidence 5: Another 2005 Market Report
 * This was in 2005, in 2006 the advantage is clear for GPS integraded PDAs.
 * "In the meantime PDAs and other devices, known in marketing terms as 'unconnected handhelds', declined worldwide, although there was some growth in the EU, driven by the demand for PDAs with integrated GPS navigation. In the second quarter of 2005 almost half the number of PDAs sold had GPS included."
 *
 * Source: Canalys and JISC

Which, as a direct quote, is not circumstantial evidence, and meets WP rules. Timeshift seems to have completely ignored this new piece of information. As far as I'm concerned, this new information, which specifically states that sales are declining except for models with GPS, meets WP criteria and should be included. This is what Timeshift asked for all along, and now that Igor has provided it I'm uncertian why there is still a problem, but judging from the continued heated discussion here, I take it there is. Why? ~ ONUnicorn (Talk / Contribs) 19:49, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Firstly, a PDA is not a PocketPC. A PDA is a personal digital assistant. A PDA can be a palm, a PocketPC, a blackberry, pretty much any device that holds information electronically in a small form factor. Google define:pda

 * Secondly, unconnected handhelds, as I have already said, is a sweeping generalisation that refers to more than GPS - such as wi-fi and bluetooth.

 * Thirdly, the quote says that whilst PDAs sales (which again is not just PocketPC, and also mentioned unconnected, ie: refers to lack of BT and wi-fi) declined worldwide, there was PDA with integrated GPS growth in the EU. It does not state what Igor claims - he has taken selective quotes and made sweeping and incorrect generalisations. Timeshift 20:11, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

 * For me it's quite clear, since long time ago, that those are not raisonable doubts.
 * Canalys defines communicated device as "converged smart mobile devices". Wireless, in that conetext, obviously means integrated mobile phone capabilities, they are not talking about Bluetooth or Wi-Fi.
 * --201.240.254.170 22:10, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Please make some sense in your replies when trying to justify your unjustifyable position. Decided to start adding your nonsense to the article again eh? I mean, just as one example out of many, you conveniently happen to miss the point that a PDA does not mean a PocketPC. If you want to try and win me over, please debate logically, in a sensical way that is easy to understand, and actually debate the points I raise, rather than answer a question different to the one I asked. Timeshift 16:08, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
 * You missed what "unconnected" means in the article, therefore you missed the idea in your points.
 * What would be the object of bringing you more information, which I could, when you are not able to understand it?
 * What would be the object of additional explanations for you, when what you do is confuse?
 * This discussion is way too complicated for you; respectfully, you should give up and concede the defeat.
 * "LOVE" for a product, is not a rational feeling.
 * You can't force people to enter your, weak, logic.
 * It would be better for you to search the definition of unreasonable.
 * What's your real name?
 * --201.240.254.170 01:46, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Asking for a real name is not appropriate. ONUnicorn 14:40, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Neither would his/hers, various reckless deceiving, efforts be appropriate.--Igor Sotelo 02:05, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
 * If I was deceiving then other wikipedians would say so. Unfortunately they do not. I have constantly disproven your circumstantial evidence, to which so far you have been able to come up with anything to prove that POCKETPCs with NON-INTEGRATED GPS (but integrated wi-fi/bluetooth) are DECLINING in sales WORLDWIDE comparated to INTEGRATED GPS. Not PDAs, not non-integrated bundling wi-fi/bluetooth/gps in terms of general integration, not in the EU. You have no basis to show that POCKETPCs with NON-INTEGRATED GPS are DECLINING in sales, let alone worldwide. Until you can come up with this evidence i'm afraid you will continue to find no backers for your side of the argument, and until such stage as you do, your unsourced additions warrant reverting. Timeshift 02:28, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
 * 1) If I accept to give him/her another explanation, it wouldn't be the first time he/she ignores it.
 * 2) This wouldn't be the first untrue thing he/she has posted here or in the article.
 * 3) It wouldn't be either the first time he/she misses to correctly perceive the support of other wikipedians, which he/she claims to have.
 * 4) Nor it woud be the first time he/she wasn't able and willing to understand the written information I provided to fully support my point.
 * 5) What he/she does, I already said it before.
 * 6) The third opinion seems to have said it was enough for Wikipedia.
 * --Igor Sotelo 03:41, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

 * I see you fail to respond to my last post - just goes to prove that I am in the right. Check and mate :-) Timeshift 07:45, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

 * It's quite indicative to notice how good he/she sees and how lax are his/hers own standards over circumstantial evidence, when he/she pretends to "prove he/she's in his right".
 * I would accept to discuss that issue, or others, with other wikipedian.
 * --201.240.254.170 22:13, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
 * But the onus is on you to prove your point. I don't need the high standard of proof - you're the one making incorrect and outlandish claims that POCKETPCs with NON-INTEGRATED GPS (but integrated wi-fi/bluetooth) are DECLINING in sales WORLDWIDE comparated to INTEGRATED GPS. Not PDAs, not non-integrated bundling wi-fi/bluetooth/gps in terms of general integration, not in the EU. You have no basis to show that POCKETPCs with NON-INTEGRATED GPS are DECLINING in sales, let alone worldwide. General claims that do not state what you are saying are not valid sources. That is the bottom line. No wikipedians have agreed with you. ONUnicorn at first thought ONE piece of your evidence proved your point, but when I told him why it wasn't valid as per above, he said "Obviously he thought he had correct information, he needed you to tell him why his information was incorrect". There is a reason why nobody else has come on to this discussion page and agreed with your point. BECAUSE YOU HAVE NO POINT! How much longer is this going to go on? Timeshift 23:52, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

 * Off course, what he/she says is false.
 * Unfortunately, once again I'm forced to respond to his/hers, let's call it, for keeping harmony, argumentation; and this time to say that his/hers interpretations have missed the idea on the information I have provided to fully support my point.
 * To discuss further details, there would be no problem from my side, however I would prefer this discussion to be done under reasonable terms, something that, under the risk of being unjust, would say wont be possible with him/her.
 * --201.240.254.170 02:27, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

 * I'm opening a content Request for Comment. I don't think this is getting anywhere, and think additional eyes would be beneficial.

Request for Comment:Decline in sales
This is a disagreement over which of the two versions represented in this diff should be in the article.

User:Igor Sotelo, sometimes editing as IP 201.240.254.170 wants the article to say that "the market tendencies have already shifted, from classic pocket PC devices like the X51v, to Smartphones, newer Pocket PC's that integrate GPS or are based on the Windows Mobile Phone Edition." He has provided various bits of evidence for his assertion. At first these seemed like Original Research, but subsequent references seemed stronger. He claims he can provide more research if needed, but fears it will be ignored and discounted.

User:Timeshift9 wants the article to say, "Some Pocket PC's integrate a GPS that can be based on the Windows Mobile Phone Edition," effectively eliminating all reference to market tendancies and sales. He asks Igor Sotelo to provide references for his assertions, and has refuted most of those references as original research. More recently however, he has questioned the usefulness of a reference by saying that a PDA and a Pocket PC are not the same thing, and a reference saying PDA sales have declined cannot be applied to Pocket PCs.

References supplied by Igor Sotelo and refutations supplied by Timeshift
1. "Can be seen the demand for Pocket PC's, excluding Smartphones Global handhelds market in Q2 2006 "Q2 2006 saw the worldwide handheld devices market experience its tenth consecutive quarter of YTY decline" Source: IDC" 2. "Gives an general idea of the demand for GPS integrated devices Portable GPS navigation market statistics YTY Rise by 96% Source: IDC"
 * Refutation: "I cannot see any evidence to show that market demand for PocketPC with non-integrated GPS is in decline in comparison to PocketPC with integrated GPS."

3. "Interpetation of the IDC Analyst [Worldwide Handheld Market Experiences Tenth Quarter of Year-Over-Year Decline, According to IDC] "The inclusion of Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, and GPS have kept handheld devices relevant, particularly for core users." Source: IDC"
 * Refutation: "Nothing there refers to GPS on it's own ... it does not say or even infer that the non-integrated GPS PocketPC market is declining in comparison to the integreated GPS PocketPC market."

4. "Another 2005 Market Report - This was in 2005, in 2006 the advantage is clear for GPS integraded PDAs. "In the meantime PDAs and other devices, known in marketing terms as 'unconnected handhelds', declined worldwide, although there was some growth in the EU, driven by the demand for PDAs with integrated GPS navigation. In the second quarter of 2005 almost half the number of PDAs sold had GPS included." Mobile and PDA Technologies: Looking Around the Corner Source: Canalys and JISC"
 * Refutation: "A PDA is not a PocketPC. A PDA is a personal digital assistant. A PDA can be a palm, a PocketPC, a blackberry, pretty much any device that holds information electronically in a small form factor. Secondly, unconnected handhelds, as I have already said, is a sweeping generalisation that refers to more than GPS - such as wi-fi and bluetooth. Thirdly, the quote says that whilst PDAs sales (which again is not just PocketPC, and also mentioned unconnected, ie: refers to lack of BT and wi-fi) declined worldwide, there was PDA with integrated GPS growth in the EU. It does not state what Igor claims - he has taken selective quotes and made sweeping and incorrect generalisations."

5. :Gartner Market Analysis Q1 2006 Gartner PDA Report for Q1 2006 "Mio Technology has taken the lead in PDAs with integrated GPS capabilities and is faring especially well" "The bulk of Dell's sales were its flagship model X51v" 1Q05- 1Q06 Growth (%) Mio Technology +81.2 1Q05- 1Q06 Growth (%) Dell -34.0 Source: Gartnet Report transcribed by Palm Infocenter. Gartner defines the PDA's somewhat different than IDS. Gartner is well known independent market research company.
 * Refutation: You still don't understand the concept of circumstantial evidence do you?

Additional issues
Here are some excerpts from conversations not on this talk page:

"What would change if I provide, let's say another 5-6 links to support my point? It's not complicate to find additional evidence. It can be done with google. And it's only part true that PDA's are not Pocket PC's, because the majority are. I already found onther quote from IDC researcher that refers to only GPS (without mentioning BT and Wireless) and it's from the same person." (Igor Sotelo - excerpt from e-mail conversation with ONUnicorn)

"Note that he was reverting my edits after only minutes. When I first published the information, I was quite surprised, because it took him less than 2 minutes to put a discuss icon and start a bothering discussion on the pocket PC talk page. After I posted the "evidence" he asked for, it took him an extremely short time to say no and "reaccomodate" the article. And in his reaccomodation he deleted the reference I had put about smartphones and communicators too." (Igor Sotelo - excerpt from e-mail conversation with ONUnicorn)

"...a Pocket PC is a type of PDA. As common sense, market research or legal issues wouldn't follow the same logic of a programmer, where equal means that the comparative has to be 100% accurate. Not a single piece of information that he has provided would sustain the same rigour he has applied to the part of the sentence I have put." (Igor Sotelo - excerpt from e-mail conversation with ONUnicorn)

"We have exhausted all forms of communication as far as I can see. I have repeated myself many times and find myself getting nowhere. I am at a loss for what else to say to him. I can barely get an understandable response out of him as it is." (Timeshift - from ONUnicorn's talk page)

RFC Responses
86.135.232.131's edits to the article are excellent and IMHO resolves any further dispute. Timeshift 20:15, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

pocket pc's
what are some advantages of it?

new site
i found great site.. www.pocketpc-world.com and it has around 10 000.. if some1 can add it...

why did you remove our link?
Hello, why did you remove link to Handster.com? It is independent Pocket PC software portal, while you keep links to resellers of other portals? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Victor sh (talk • contribs) 13:09, 28 December 2006 (UTC).
 * I know this is old, but I just wanted to respond as to why I believe this link was removed for future reference. Those who are unclear about this should read Wikipedia's guide to external links.  The number one problem with this site is that it falls under the category: "Links to sites that primarily exist to sell products or services." Brianreading 18:54, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Spamlinks
Hi, to me it seems that the vast majority of the links are just spamlinks (no encyclopedic value, too much advertising, blogs, forums ...). I did a cleanup following Spam Matteo 14:29, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Not a Microsoft trademark
"Pocket PC" is not a Microsoft trademark — whatever the existing reference (Pocket Presence AB) claims, Microsoft's own trademark list does not list it (nor anything with "pocket" or "pc"). I'm removing that reference, but does anyone know who (if anyone) does have the trademark? -- Perey 02:06, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

 * Pocket PC may not be owned by Microsoft, but it's unofficially theirs. --Ben414 18:08, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
 * The use of the term "trademark" is not regulated in the US; anybody can call something their "trademark". It may not be an officially registered trademark, however. —  Wen li  (reply here) 03:12, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Pocket PC is a registered trademark held by the publishers of the former Pocket PC magazine, now named Smartphone & Pocket PC magazine. I love these gadgets. TimidGuy (talk) 11:21, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Obsolescence coming?
I have a PPC, and do check out the stores here in Milwaukee for them. I dunno if it's 'cuz we're we're smaller, but I don't see them in stores lately. Palm, yes, PPC, no. I was in Chicago recently, and don't think I saw any there either. --Ben414 18:08, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Versions Section
I renamed the "Versions" section to "Operating System Versions" to make more sense. This section specifically talks about operating system versions officially released by Microsoft, and not about versions of Pocket PC hardware. It should be noted that this article should be mainly about the hardware device, and not the operating system, as we already have a Windows Mobile article that is suited to fill that role better. Therefore, I put a link to the Windows Mobile article as the main article for this section as well. Brianreading 18:18, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

File:Modern_Pocket_PC.png
This file belongs to HTC and can be found here http://www.htc.com/www/product/tytnii/overview.html If the person who uploaded this file truly does have any authorization to do so he or she should provide some sort of proof.Everett3 (talk) 20:25, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Header: "Many" vs. "Some"
I edited a sentence in the main header which read (referring to the Pocket PC): "...It has many of the capabilities of modern desktop PCs." In the place of "Many" I have inserted "Some." So, it now reads "It has some of the capabilities of a modern desktop PC." Anyone who has ever used a Pocket PC knows that a Desktop PC and a Pocket PC are not the same thing, and the two do not share "Many" of the same features. For instance, no PocketPC I've ever seen has a mouse cursor (never mind having a mouse) unless you add one on with third-party software, and that's just one example. I could go on and on. In short, a Pocket PC simply does not have "Many" of the same features that a desktop PC does; That much should be obvious to anyone who's ever used one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Allthenamesarealreadytaken (talk • contribs) 00:15, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Should this article be merged with Windows Mobile?
Should this article be merged with Windows Mobile? If not, my suggestion would be to move all the old Pocket PC information out of the Windows Mobile article, and into this one, and replace it with a link that says something like "For earlier versions of the OS, see Pocket PC". So either define a split, and have separate information in each article, or delete this one.-- Lester  07:28, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

 * Thanks for the suggestions. Both are good. Maybe do the latter. Windows Mobile has gone so far beyond Pocket PC and now has such a different identity, that it seems like all the Pocket PC info could be moved from that article into this one, per WP:SUMMARY. TimidGuy (talk) 09:50, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Re-order the OS section
Why do we have the newest models written first at the top and the latter ones at the bottom? That makes no chronological sense. The reader is introduced to the newest model and then mysteriously goes backwards in time. It doesn't conform to how other articles are written. 68.42.250.113 (talk) 02:13, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Pocket PC. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20030207200032/http://microsoft.com:80/mobile/buyersguide/educateme/default.asp to http://www.microsoft.com/mobile/buyersguide/educateme/default.asp

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 19:48, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

linux and other names
other names: hand-held PC, mini PC

There are a number of those PPC's that have NATIVE linux support so the description (where it says "is a kind of personal digital assistant (PDA) that runs the Windows Mobile operating system." ) does not stand in this day and age. I believe this aarticle needs overhaul. 89.201.184.159 (talk) 00:17, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

v UMPC
This article needs a v Ultra-mobile PC section. I means size is approx. the same. Are PPC a subset of UMPC or is the other way around. (It's obviously just a marketing stunt). 89.201.184.159 (talk) 00:49, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

title: Talk:Pocket PC


text:
Chinese Rites controversy

The Chinese Rites controversy was a dispute among Catholic missionaries over the religiosity of Confucianism and Chinese rituals during the 17th and 18th centuries. The debate discussed whether Chinese ritual practices of ancestor veneration and other formal rites qualified as religious, and thus incompatible with Catholic belief. The Jesuits argued that these Chinese rites were secular rituals that were compatible with Christianity, within certain limits, and should thus be tolerated. The Dominicans and Franciscans, however, disagreed and reported the issue to Rome.

Rome's Sacred Congregation for the Propagation of the Faith sided with the Dominicans in 1645 by condemning the Chinese rites based on their brief. However, the same congregation sided with the Jesuits in 1656, thereby lifting the ban. It was one of the many disputes between the Jesuits and the Dominicans in China and elsewhere in Asia, including Japan and India. The conflict between the Jesuits and their opponents took on a historical dimension, with the former insisting that Europeans and the Chinese had a shared history, which was taken to legitimise the Jesuit "accommodation" of Chinese rites and names for the Christian God.

The controversy embroiled many European universities; the Kangxi Emperor and several popes, including Clement XI and Clement XIV, considered the case; the offices of the Holy See also intervened. Near the end of the 17th century, many Dominicans and Franciscans had shifted their positions in agreeing with the Jesuits' opinion, but Rome disagreed. Clement XI banned the rites in 1704. In 1742, Benedict XIV reaffirmed the ban and forbade debate.

In 1939, after two centuries, the Holy See re-assessed the issue. Pius XII issued a decree on 8 December 1939, authorizing Chinese Catholics to observe the ancestral rites and participate in Confucius-honoring ceremonies. The general principle of sometimes admitting native traditions even into the liturgy of the church, provided that such traditions harmonize with the true and authentic spirit of the liturgy, was proclaimed by the Second Vatican Council (1962–65).

Early adaptation to local customs
Unlike the American landmass, which had been conquered by military force by Spain and Portugal, European missionaries encountered in Asia united, literate societies that were as yet untouched by European influence or national endeavor.

Alessandro Valignano, Visitor of the Society of Jesus in Asia, was one of the first Jesuits to argue, in the case of Japan, for an adaptation of Christian customs to the societies of Asia, through his Résolutions and Cérémonial.

Matteo Ricci's policy of accommodation
In China, Matteo Ricci reused the Cérémonial and adapted it to the Chinese context. At one point the Jesuits even started to wear the gown of Buddhist monks, before adopting the more prestigious silk gown of Chinese literati. In particular, Matteo Ricci's Christian views on Confucianism and Chinese rituals, often called the "", were followed by Jesuit missionaries in China and Korea.

In a decree signed on 23 March 1656, Pope Alexander VII accepted practices "favorable to Chinese customs", reinforcing 1615 decrees which accepted the usage of the Chinese language in liturgy, a notable exception to the contemporary Latin Catholic discipline which had generally forbidden the use of local languages.

In the 1659 instructions given by the Sacred Congregation for the Propagation of the Faith (known as the Propaganda Fidei) to new missionaries to Asia, provisions were clearly made to the effect that adapting to local customs and respecting the habits of the countries to be evangelized was paramount:

"Do not act with zeal, do not put forward any arguments to convince these peoples to change their rites, their customs or their usages, except if they are evidently contrary to the religion [i.e., Catholic Christianity] and morality. What would be more absurd than to bring France, Spain, Italy or any other European country to the Chinese? Do not bring to them our countries, but instead bring to them the Faith, a Faith that does not reject or hurt the rites, nor the usages of any people, provided that these are not distasteful, but that instead keeps and protects them."

Reception in China
The Jesuit order was successful in penetrating China and serving at the Imperial court. They impressed the Chinese with their knowledge of European astronomy and mechanics, and in fact ran the Imperial Observatory. The Kangxi Emperor was at first friendly to the Jesuit Missionaries working in China. Their accurate methods allowed him to successfully predict eclipses, one of his ritual duties. He was grateful for the services they provided to him, in the areas of astronomy, diplomacy and artillery manufacture. Jesuit translators Jean-François Gerbillon and Thomas Pereira took part in the negotiations of the Treaty of Nerchinsk in 1689, where they assisted with translation. The Jesuits made an important contribution to the Empire's military, with the diffusion of European artillery technology, and they directed the castings of cannons of various calibers. The Kangxi Emperor also retained several Jesuits in his court as scientists and artists. By the end of the seventeenth century, the Jesuits had made many converts. They in turn were impressed by the knowledge and intelligence of the Han Chinese Confucian scholar elite, and adapted to their ancient Chinese intellectual lifestyle.

In 1692, Kangxi issued an edict of toleration of Christianity ( or ).

"The Europeans are very quiet; they do not excite any disturbances in the provinces, they do no harm to anyone, they commit no crimes, and their doctrine has nothing in common with that of the false sects in the empire, nor has it any tendency to excite sedition ... We decide therefore that all temples dedicated to the Lord of heaven, in whatever place they may be found, ought to be preserved, and that it may be permitted to all who wish to worship this God to enter these temples, offer him incense, and perform the ceremonies practiced according to ancient custom by the Christians. Therefore let no one henceforth offer them any opposition."

This edict enabled Christianity to be perceived by the state with "positive neutrality" and acceptable in the eyes of Confucian orthodoxy.

Controversy

The Jesuits gradually developed and adopted a policy of accommodation on the issue of Chinese rites. The Chinese scholar elite were attached to Confucianism, and while Buddhism and Daoism were in decline and losing patronage, Confucianism was arguably at its golden age during this period of Chinese history; even the rich urban class of merchants pursued it. Despite this, all three provided the framework of both state and home life. Both Confucian and Taoist practices involved veneration of one's ancestors.

Besides the Jesuits, other religious orders such as the Dominicans, Franciscans, and Augustinians started missionary work in China during the 17th century, often coming from the Spanish colony of the Philippines. Contrary to the Jesuits, they refused any adaptation to local customs and wished to apply in China the same tabula rasa principle they had applied in other places, and were horrified by the practices of the Jesuits.

They ignited a heated controversy and brought it to Rome. They raised three main points of contention:
 * Determination of the Chinese word for "God", which was generally accepted as 天主 Tiānzhǔ (Lord of Heaven), while Jesuits were willing to allow Chinese Christians to use 天 Tiān (Heaven) or 上帝 Shàngdì (Lord Above / Supreme Emperor)
 * Prohibition of Christians from participating in the seasonal rites for Confucius.
 * Prohibition of Christians from using of tablets with the forbidden inscription "site of the soul", and from following the Chinese rites for the ancestor worship.

In Rome, the Jesuits tried to argue that these "Chinese Rites" were civic rituals, rather than religious, and that converts should be allowed to continue to participate. They maintained that Chinese folk religion and offerings to the Emperor and departed ancestors were civil in nature and therefore not incompatible with Catholicism, while their opponents argued that these kinds of worship were an expression of native religion and thus incompatible with Catholic beliefs.

Pope Clement XI's decree
Pope Clement XI condemned the Chinese rites and Confucian rituals, and outlawed any further discussion in 1704, with the anti-rites decree Cum Deus optimus of 20 November 1704. It forbade the use of "Tian" and "Shangdi", while approving "Tianzhu" ('Lord of Heaven').

In 1705, Clement sent a legate to the Kangxi Emperor to communicate the interdiction of Chinese rites. The mission, led by Charles-Thomas Maillard De Tournon, communicated the prohibition of Chinese rites in January 1707, but as a result was banished to Macao.

Clement issued the bull Ex illa die on 19 March 1715, which officially condemned the Chinese rites:

"Pope Clement XI wishes to make the following facts permanently known to all the people in the world ...

I. The West calls Deus [God] the creator of Heaven, Earth, and everything in the universe. Since the word Deus does not sound right in the Chinese language, the Westerners in China and Chinese converts to Catholicism have used the term 'Heavenly Lord' (Tiānzhǔ) for many years. From now on such terms as 'Heaven' [Tiān] and 'Shàngdì' should not be used: Deus should be addressed as the Lord of Heaven, Earth, and everything in the universe. The tablet that bears the Chinese words 'Reverence for Heaven' should not be allowed to hang inside a Catholic church and should be immediately taken down if already there.

II. The spring and autumn worship of Confucius, together with the worship of ancestors, is not allowed among Catholic converts. It is not allowed even though the converts appear in the ritual as bystanders, because to be a bystander in this ritual is as pagan as to participate in it actively.

III. Chinese officials and successful candidates in the metropolitan, provincial, or prefectural examinations, if they have been converted to Roman Catholicism, are not allowed to worship in Confucian temples on the first and fifteenth days of each month. The same prohibition is applicable to all the Chinese Catholics who, as officials, have recently arrived at their posts or who, as students, have recently passed the metropolitan, provincial, or prefectural examinations.

IV. No Chinese Catholics are allowed to worship ancestors in their familial temples.

V. Whether at home, in the cemetery, or during the time of a funeral, a Chinese Catholic is not allowed to perform the ritual of ancestor worship. He is not allowed to do so even if he is in company with non-Christians. Such a ritual is heathen in nature regardless of the circumstances.

Despite the above decisions, I have made it clear that other Chinese customs and traditions that can in no way be interpreted as heathen in nature should be allowed to continue among Chinese converts. The way the Chinese manage their households or govern their country should by no means be interfered with. As to exactly what customs should or should not be allowed to continue, the papal legate in China will make the necessary decisions. In the absence of the papal legate, the responsibility of making such decisions should rest with the head of the China mission and the Bishop of China. In short, customs and traditions that are not contradictory to Roman Catholicism will be allowed, while those that are clearly contradictory to it will not be tolerated under any circumstances."

Clement's decree was reiterated by Benedict XIV in the 1742 bull Ex quo singulari. Benedict demanded that missionaries in China take an oath forbidding them to discuss the issue again.

Imperial ban and papal suppression
In the early 18th century, Rome's challenge to the Chinese Rites led to the expulsion of Catholic missionaries from China. In July 1706, the Papal Legate Charles-Thomas Maillard De Tournon angered the Kangxi Emperor, who issued an order that all missionaries, in order to obtain an imperial permit to stay in China, would have to declare that they would follow the rules of Matteo Ricci.

In 1721, the Kangxi Emperor disagreed with Clement's decree and banned Christian missions in China. In the Decree of Kangxi, he stated, "Reading this proclamation, I have concluded that the Westerners are petty indeed. It is impossible to reason with them because they do not understand larger issues as we understand them in China. There is not a single Westerner versed in Chinese works, and their remarks are often incredible and ridiculous. To judge from this proclamation, their religion is no different from other small, bigoted sects of Buddhism or Taoism. I have never seen a document which contains so much nonsense. From now on, Westerners should not be allowed to preach in China, to avoid further trouble."

Chinese converts were also involved in the controversy through letters of protest, books, pamphlets, etc. The Controversy debate was most intense between a group of Christian literati and a Catholic bishop (named Charles Maigrot de Crissey) in Fujian province, with the Chinese group of converts supporting the Jesuits and the bishop supported by less accommodating Iberian mendicants (Dominicans and Franciscans).

In 1724 the Yongzheng Emperor ((r. 1722 – 1735)) proscribed the Heavenly Lord sect (the name given to Catholicism during that period). Persecution steadily increased during the reign of the Yongzheng Emperor. While the Yongzheng Emperor appreciated and admired the Jesuit Giuseppe Castiglione's artwork and western technologies, he also reinforced anti-Christian policies in 1737.

Pope Pius XII's decision
The Rites controversy continued to hamper Church efforts to gain converts in China. In 1939, a few weeks after his election to the papacy, Pope Pius XII ordered the Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples to relax certain aspects of Clement XI's and Benedict XIV's decrees. After the Apostolic Vicars had received guarantees from the Manchukuo Government that confirmed the mere "civil" characteristics of the so-called "Chinese rites", the Holy See released, on 8 December 1939, a new decree, known as Plane Compertum, stating: "It is abundantly clear that in the regions of the Orient some ceremonies, although they may have been involved with pagan rites in ancient times, have—with the changes in customs and thinking over the course of centuries—retained merely the civil significance of piety towards the ancestors or of love of the fatherland or of courtesy towards one's neighbors." Overall, Plane Compertum asserted:
 * Catholics are permitted to be present at ceremonies in honor of Confucius in Confucian temples or in schools;
 * Erection of an image of Confucius or tablet with his name on is permitted in Catholic schools.
 * Catholic magistrates and students are permitted to passively attend public ceremonies which have the appearance of superstition.
 * It is licit and unobjectionable for head inclinations and other manifestations of civil observance before the deceased or their images.
 * The oath on the Chinese rites, which was prescribed by Benedict XIV, is not fully in accord with recent regulations and is superfluous.

According to Pope Pius XII's biographer, Jan Olav Smit, this meant that Chinese customs were no longer considered superstitious, but were an honourable way of esteeming one's relatives and therefore permitted by Catholic Christians. Confucianism was also thus recognized as a philosophy and an integral part of Chinese culture rather than as a heathen religion in conflict with Catholicism. Shortly afterwards, in 1943, the Government of China established diplomatic relations with the Vatican. The Papal decree changed the ecclesiastical situation in China in an almost revolutionary way.

As the Church began to flourish, Pius XII established a local ecclesiastical hierarchy, and, on 18 February 1946, named Thomas Tien Ken-sin, who was from 18 July 1939 Apostolic Vicar of Qingdao, as the first Chinese national in the Sacred College of Cardinals and later that year – on 10 May 1946 – appointed him to the Archdiocese of Beijing.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Chinese Rites controversy


text:
Antoine-François de Fourcroy

Antoine François Fourcroy (15 June 1755 – 16 December 1809) was a French chemist and a contemporary of Antoine Lavoisier. Fourcroy collaborated with Lavoisier, Guyton de Morveau, and Claude Berthollet on the Méthode de nomenclature chimique, a work that helped standardize chemical nomenclature.

Early life
Fourcroy was born in Paris, the son of an apothecary in the household of the Duke of Orléans. On the advice of the anatomist Félix Vicq-d'Azyr (1748–1794) he took up medical studies, and after many difficulties caused by lack of means he finally obtained his doctor's diploma in 1780. He taught chemistry from (1783–1787) at the Veterinary School of Alfort. Fourcroy's attention was turned specifically to chemistry by J. B. M. Bucquet (1746–1780), the professor of chemistry at the Medical School of Paris. In 1784 Fourcroy was chosen to succeed P. J. Macquer (1718–1784) as lecturer in chemistry at the college of the Jardin du Roi, where his lectures attained great popularity.

Chemical Work
Fourcroy was one of the earliest converts to the views of Lavoisier, which he helped to make widely known by his own voluminous writings. The Royal Society's Catalogue of Scientific Papers enumerates fifty-nine memoirs by Fourcroy alone, and fifty-eight written with others, mostly Louis Nicolas Vauquelin. Fourcroy's 1785 publication, Entomologia Parisiensis, sive, Catalogus insectorum quae in agro Parisiensi reperiuntur ..., co-written with Étienne Louis Geoffroy, was a major contribution to systematic entomology.

Later with Louis Nicolas Vauquelin, he identified a metal in a platinum residue they called ‘ptène’.This name ‘ptene’ or ‘ptène’ was reported as an early synonym for osmium.

Biological and Neurochemical Work
Fourcroy's views and studies grew from Bucquet. Fourcroy was a critic of earlier use of chemistry in medicine and saw great importance in studying the chemical materials of plants and animals, particularly for medical use. The majority of this work was done alongside Vauquelin, who became Fourcroy's assistant in 1784. During this period of work with Vauquelin, Fourcroy founded his own journal: La Médecine éclairée par les sciences physiques, ou Journal des découvertes relatives aux differentes parties de l'art de guérir, which detailed his investigations of chemistry and body materials. Fourcroy was convinced that "the successes of chemistry would one day change the face of medicine and result in beneficial revolution."

Although Fourcroy's name appears on a large number of chemical and also physiological and pathological memoirs, he was as much a teacher and an organizer as an original investigator. Beginning in 1791, Fourcroy would go on to publish three memoirs compounding his series of biological experiments, most of which had to do with the chemistry of the human brain. In his first, he described the conditions of the brains of the cadavers that he studied. In his second, he would recount his continuing chemical experimentation on the fatty matter in the brain, now known as lipids, as well as the inorganic components present. By using newer methods than the alchemical tradition that had proceeded him, such as extraction and qualitative analysis, Fourcroy concluded that the brain was composed of fatty acids in combination with bases along with recording some physical properties of the substance. His third memoir was a continuation of the separations and extractions he performed on brain matter and addition to his growing compendium of the brain's chemical constituents. One of the most fruitful results of this work was the rediscovery of phosphorus in the brain, reintroducing the 1719 discovery by Johann Thomas Hensing.

Fourcroy also had a prominent role in developing law that would affect medical education in France. Fourcroy collaborated with physician Francois Chaussier to create a report that would be the basis of the Law of 1794, which integrated medicine and surgery and established health schools that taught both of these fields to all students. Prior to this law, medical education was heterogeneous throughout France, with several different colleges and universities operating under varying standards. The law pushed by Fourcroy unified the French medical education system under centralized authority, and led to the issuing of national licensing years later.

Work in Laboratory and Medical Clinic Procedure
While observing the 18th century clinics of Fourcroy’s time, he observed several problems. Fourcroy noticed that physicians got accustomed to seeing the diseases of an individual patient but failed in considering a large number of cases comparatively. There was also practical problems with this idea, as physician’s individual practices were insufficient in accommodating for large numbers of people with large varieties of issues. To deal with this Fourcroy proposed a program in 1791 to establish more effective clinical laboratories. Along with proposing these hospitals, and the idea that they should be staffed by young physicians well versed in modern sciences, Fourcroy wanted to include material obtained in post-mortem examinations in analysis of humans and how they are affected by disease. This idea was important in linking clinical observations to post-mortem findings, allowing development of new medicine. Although many reform proposals of the time were ignored, Fourcroy had a degree of success because of his political positions. Ultimately, Fourcroy was able to set up a teaching laboratory at the Ecole de Sante in Paris, beginning the development of modern clinical laboratories.

Social Contributions
Outside the scope of his varied scientific work, Fourcroy was involved in the events taking place during the French Revolution, beginning his participation in 1793, where he strived to make positive impacts to French education. By the end of that year, after holding several positions in the National Convention, he was elected as the president of the Jacobin party, taking a seat on the Committee of Public Safety in the process, which he held for about ten months. He would subsequently hold other high ranking positions and directorships in educational institutes and museums during the revolutionary regime and Napoleon's government as well. As an important counselor to Bonaparte, Fourcroy was appointed Minister of Public Instruction in 1802, responsible for education in France at all levels, which he held until his death in December 1809.

"The Chemical Revolution"
Fourcroy was not the first to publish the phrase "Chemical revolution," even Bucquet described new developments in pneumatic chemistry in 1778 as a "great revolution in chemistry." However, it was Fourcroy that began to better describe the term by lengthening the time scale and broadening the map of nations that were contributing to the Chemical revolution in his written works. It was Fourcroy who had initially noted the division that chemistry had undergone from natural history, concluding that the two studies no longer shared objectives nor methods. While natural historians of his era merely described and preserved that which they studied, as Fourcroy believed, it was chemists who now sought to uncover the most fundamental structures of the natural world by experimental analysis. In his publications, Fourcroy referred to many other contemporary chemists as well as those from other nations, proposing that the extensive chemical reform being done was a collaborative effort.

Awards and honors
In 1801, Fourcroy was elected a foreign member of the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences.

On 16 December 1809, the very day on which he died in Paris, Fourcroy was created a count of the French empire. He is buried in the Père-Lachaise Cemetery in Paris.

Antoine-François de Fourcroy's 1787 publication entitled Méthode de Nomenclature Chimique, published with colleagues Antoine Lavoisier, Claude Louis Berthollet, and Louis Bernard Guyton de Morveau, was honored by a Citation for Chemical Breakthrough Award from the Division of History of Chemistry of the American Chemical Society, presented at the Académie des Sciences (Paris) in 2015. It is believed that Cape Fourcroy, at the western tip of Bathurst Island, Northern Territory, Australia, is named after Fourcroy. The cape was named during Baudin's expedition to Australia, and it is known that Baudin had a copy of one of Fourcroy's texts with him on the Géographe.

Controversy
By his conduct as a member of the Convention, Fourcroy has been accused of contributing to Lavoisier's death. Baron Cuvier, in his Eloge historique of Fourcroy, repelled such charges. According to the Encyclopædia Britannica Eleventh Edition: although active, though secret, participation cannot be proved against Fourcroy, "he can scarcely be acquitted of time-serving indifference." See the works in the Bibliography below for other opinions.

Modern References
In 2014, PBS released a three episode documentary series about the search for the basic chemical elements, highlighting seven historical scientists in particular. In episode one of The Mystery of Matter: Search for the Elements, "Out of Thin Air," Fourcroy's character is played by Yan Tual as he assists Lavoisier in his discovery of oxygen.

title: Antoine-François de Fourcroy


text:
Ian Hunter

Ian Hunter may refer to:

 * Ian Hunter (actor) (1900–1975), South African-born British actor
 * Ian Hunter (admiral) (1939–2022), New Zealand naval officer
 * Ian Hunter (artist) (1939–2017), British artist and dean of Saint Martin's School of Art
 * Ian Hunter (curator) (1947–2023), Northern Irish artist and art curator
 * Ian Hunter (cricketer) (born 1979), British cricketer
 * Ian Hunter (impresario) (1919–2003), British classical music and talent promoter
 * Ian Hunter (politician) (born 1960), South Australian Labor Party politician
 * Ian Hunter (rugby union) (born 1969), English rugby player and media marketer
 * Ian Hunter (Scottish footballer) (fl. 1960s), Scottish footballer (Falkirk)
 * Ian Hunter (singer) (born 1939), English singer-songwriter, former frontman of Mott the Hoople
 * Ian Hunter (album), his debut 1975 solo album
 * Ian Hunter (soccer) (born 1961), Australian footballer
 * Ian Hunter (visual effects supervisor), visual effects artist
 * Ian McLellan Hunter (1915–1991), English screenwriter
 * Ian M.L. Hunter (1927–2004), British experimental psychologist

title: Ian Hunter