Two questions about Windows Mobile 5.0

When I recently used Visual Studio. NET 2003 to develop the smart device project, I found that Windows Mobile 5.0 has two problems. The PDA is HP ipaq 2190.

First problem: when cabwiz.exe is used to generate the cab installation package, the INF configuration file can only contain ANSI characters, but cannot contain Chinese or other Unicode characters. Otherwise, the Chinese section after installation, such as shortcut and deleteProgram"Program names in the list will be garbled. The same installation package is no problem in the Pocket PC 2003 operating system, and the Chinese part can be displayed normally. What is more intolerable is. NET 2003 cabwiz.exe can also use the INF configuration file containing Chinese characters to generate the cab installation package. cabwiz.exe included in VS 2005 cannot use such INF configuration file at all, if the INF file contains Chinese characters, the system prompts that the cab installation package cannot be generated during execution. In this case, we cannot create a cab installation package with Chinese characters, which is normally used under Windows Mobile 5.0. We can only use the English shortcut in WM 5.0 unless it is created manually. I wonder why Microsoft is regressing?

The second problem: Microsoft's WM 5.0 and the ActiveSync 4. the communication mode between X is greatly changed. The current mode is that when the PDA is connected to the PC, the PDA with WM 5.0 is installed as the DHCP server, on the PC, a virtual network card named Windows Mobile-based device is created, and then the PC is used as the DHCP client to accept the IP address assigned by the PDA. In this way, a virtual network is established for communication. I don't know what advantages Microsoft has in this design, but I think there are two disadvantages compared to the communication mechanism of Windows Mobile 2003. One is that the PC must rely on the DHCP client service. On many computers that use a fixed IP address, users change the service to manual startup to reduce resource usage. This problem is not mentioned in the ActiveSync 4.0 document, so these users cannot synchronize when establishing a connection for the first time. The virtual network card has been trying to obtain the network address, I am a victim. For details, refer to my previous post. This problem troubles me to add one night in the afternoon. The second is that the IP address allocated by the virtual network card is 169. 254. * the IP address of the network segment. In the previous method, PDA used 192. 168. * In my personal opinion, the interception rate of the common firewall on the front address is significantly higher than that of the latter. The most obvious experience is that when wm5.0 PDA is used for synchronization and access to the LAN, there is a higher chance of network connection problems than before.

I hope you can explain why Microsoft has made these changes in wm5.0? What are your considerations?