MULTICHANNEL AND MULTIMODAL USER INTERFACES use java data matrix development tobuild data matrix 2d barcode in java ASP.NET Web Application Framework though related, are not data matrix barcodes for Java the same thing). However, with WCDMA, CDMA2000, and the various other advanced CDMA networks (to be discussed more closely later in this text), BREW provides a robust platform for developing multimodal applications. Though there is currently no true multithreading support for delivery of coordinated simultaneous multimodality, there is no virtual machine in BREW and the application is written in the C language so there is plenty of room for performance optimization.

The higher bandwidth delivered by CDMA networks coupled with the robust programming environment allow us to build coordinated multimodality (not simultaneous coordinated multimodality) with BREW. 3. Microsoft: Like the Java platform, Microsoft has a variety of solutions for the mobile market.

Included are the so-called Stinger platform and Windows CE. These platforms range from the very proprietary smart phones to the more open Windows CE running on PDAs such as the Compaq Pocket PC. The only way of implementing multimodality, at present, with the Microsoft platform on a mobile device is on the higher end hybrid phone PDA devices running Windows CE.

Such devices provide a telephony API as well as a data call API. Even in those cases, there is no support for simultaneous coordinated multimodality because multithreading models (thus far) are cooperative. The data channels provided are not as robust as those provided by BREW and the APIs are not as open or proli c as J2ME CLDC and supporting APIs.

4. Symbian: As we mentioned previously, Symbian and BREW are currently the two most advanced and prevalent mobile development platforms for multimodality. Like BREW, Symbian offers an advanced communication API.

Whereas BREW s APIs are implemented and optimized for communication over a CDMA network, Symbian s communication APIs are designed and optimized for GPRS and similar standards that sit on top of slightly lower layer base communication protocols of CDMA and TDMA. Symbian devices also bene t in being able to use GSM. Symbian is unique in that it offers an extensive set of Java-based functionality with Personal Java in addition to the native C/C++-based API.

In this way, it is far more robust than the other platforms. Currently, there is support for JavaPhone 1.0, the Java Telephony API, and Java APIs for a variety of communication protocols such as UDP, SMS, serial port, and infrared.

In this way, Symbian offers a very robust framework for developing multimodal applications. 5. WAP: The collection of the WTAI agent providing telephony access on mobile devices and WML allows WAP developers to have multiple modes, but it does not guarantee coordination nor does it provide simultaneous access to channels.

WAP 1.x was the rst platform to deliver multimodality in that it enabled developers to access the telephony agent on the phone to make phone calls. The implementation of most of the WTAI functionality was very poor in the initial releases of WAP so it inhibited developers greatly.

However, things have improved with WAP 2.x browser releases. WAP provides a multimodal solution that recognizes the pervasiveness of the phone channel (e.

g., PSTN) as the primary means of delivering voice to the user. By providing access to the telephony channel, the user can interact with the text-based browser, select an.

8.3 Multimodal Content option that causes an ou datamatrix 2d barcode for Java tbound phone call, and, upon termination of the phone call, return to the browser. The unfortunate part is that the user cannot use the browser while the phone call is in session. Hence, not only does WAP fail to deliver coordinated or simultaneous coordinated multimodality, but there are some latencies in switching modalities from the textual mode to the voice mode and back.

What we just looked at were the software platforms, but what about the devices There are typically three key device categories when it comes to multimodality: legacy, transitory, and next generation. 1. Legacy: Most mobile devices built before year 2000 have very little or no support for multimodality.

Such legacy mobile devices are very limited in their processing power and functionality and are built on operating systems and hardware that is outdated and is unable to take full advantage of modern wireless networks. 2. Transitory: These are devices such as WAP phones and some PDAs that allow minimal amount of control over the various channels and modalities.

For example, in WAP 1.x, we can make an outbound phone call and establish a voice channel, but there is no concept of simultaneous multimodality. Most of these devices have been distributed in the marketplace after year 2000.

The limitations on these devices are due to the resources on the device as well as the communications protocols for which they are designed to communicate (WAP, TDMA, etc.). 3.

Next Generation: These devices are built on a hardware architecture that is designed to deliver coordinated and simultaneous access to multiple channels. The fact is that if the hardware platform does not support a feature, the software sitting on top of it cannot build on the nonexisting feature! This is the case with many of the devices today. New devices supporting key hardware technologies such as the Intel PCA architecture, ARM/StrongARM technologies, and other hardware architectures speci cally designed for mobile devices will allow the application developers to design applications that support simultaneous multimodality.

The newer and more advanced mobile operating systems such as Symbian OS 7 and Palm OS 5 will play a major role in this as well. Because most application developers will be writing their applications on top of some mobile operating system, it is crucial that the operating system provide asynchronous I/O and other required mechanisms for providing simultaneous and coordinated multimodality (if supported by the hardware). The user interface is ultimately rendered at the mobile device itself.

Consequently, the mobile device and its network connectivity are typically the two factors that become the biggest barriers in implementing any potential multimodal functionality..
Copyright © . All rights reserved.