Let me begin with a quote in Dutch, then translate it to English and finally tell what is wrong with it.

Windows CE is zeker de afgelopen tijd zeer populair geworden omdat smartphones/PDA's een hoge vlucht hebben genomen. Ook navigatietoestellen zijn sterk in opmars. Voor smartphones zijn diverse besturingsystemen maar Windows CE is ronduit de populairste.

Microsoft hanteert de naam Windows CE inmiddels niet meer - het product heet sinds 2003 Windows Mobile. In versie 5 is de stabiliteit belangrijk verbeterd, en door het .NET Compact framework (een variant van het .NET Framework voor Windows Mobile) is er nu ook een markt opengelegd voor .NET-programmatuur voor handheld computers en smartphones

© http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_CE

Translated into English, this Dutch Wikipedia entry about Windows CE contains the following:

Windows CE has become very popular, especially in the recent history because Smartphones and PDA’s became very popular. Navigation devices are getting popular as well. Different operating systems are available for Smartpones, but Windows CE is by far the most popular. Microsoft is not using the name Windows CE anymore – Since 2003 the product is called Windows Mobile. In version 5 stability of the product has improved dramatically, and because of the availability of the .NET Compact Framework (a version of the .NET Framework for Windows Mobile), the market has opened for .NET software to be used on handheld computers and Smartphones.

This translation into English is almost literal. It is incredible how many errors can be found in only 89 words. For starters, Windows CE is an operating system, Windows Mobile is not. Windows Mobile is a platform, containing a specific build of the Windows CE operating system, with more functionality added to it, especially around the user interface. Also, inside Windows Mobile a number of applications are bundled that are not part of the Windows CE operating system. Completely wrong is the assumption that Microsoft changed the name of Windows CE into Windows Mobile. These are simply two different things as I just tried to explain. Windows CE is alive and kicking. Well, to be honest, it is true that Microsoft changed the name of Windows CE, but not into Windows Mobile! The latest version of Windows CE is called Windows Embedded CE 6.0 R2. This version was released in November 2007. This version, together with Windows Embedded CE 6.0 has some major changes compared to previous versions of the operating system. For instance, Windows Embedded CE 6.0 can run 32000 processes in parallel where Windows CE 5.0 only could run 32 processes at the same time. Also, the amount of virtual memory per process has changed from 32KB (some folks might argue this is in fact 64KB) in Windows Mobile 5.0 to 1GB (and again, some folks might argue this is in fact 2GB) in Windows Embedded CE 6.0 (R2). Another thing that is wrong in our little 89 word snippet is the statement around opening the market for .NET Software to be used on devices. This implies that any managed application can run on a Windows Mobile device, which is simply not true. The .NET Compact Framework is an amazing subset of the full .NET Framework, both currently in version 3.5. The .NET Compact Framework team did a great job, providing around 40% of the functionality of the full .NET Framework (my personal estimate, this figure could be slightly larger or smaller) in less than 10% of the footprint. Also, the statement in the original Dutch text implies that any full .NET Framework application can run on a Windows Mobile device, but again, this is wrong. Only C# and Visual Basic.NET applications are supported, managed C++ applications are not supported.

Just comparing Windows Mobile versus Windows CE Operating versions, let us for once and forever clarify the mystery:

So as you can see, Windows Mobile 6X devices still make use of the underlying Windows CE 5.x operating system. For Embedded developers that might wonder about the version numbers of the Windows CE operating system. These are all 'small' derivatives of Windows CE 5.0 (probably you have those as well if you have installed the latest QFE’s)

Moving back to my original topic then.  Let me make myself clear that I am not mad about articles being published in an online encyclopedia like Wikipedia. The only thing I wonder is what the quality of the information is worth. This little entry about Windows CE is completely wrong. I hope the other information in the Dutch version of Wikipedia is reliable but also in other language versions, because I definitely do believe in an online encyclopedia. However, I think there is a responsibility for content writers, even if they are volunteers. A whole community assumes that the information on Wikipedia is reliable. I think this brings a lot of responsibility to everybody contributing to Wikipedia. Right now I am hesitant to believe the information in other articles I am reading. Please proof me that I am totally wrong.

Maarten Struys