Here's the deal. I've animated + coded a variety of 'screensavers' in Actionscript3/Flash. They make extensive use of the timeline, AS3 code, the TweenLite library, and embedded fonts. That's the limit of my programming knowledge. I've tried, to no avail, to convert my .SWFs into screensaver files using a variety of software, such as InstantStorm. Somehow it never works, the code never executes properly, it's a disaster.
So, I'm wondering if it's possible to make a screensaver that simply contains an embedded browser, and have it point to my .SWF file, hosted on my web-server. Basically, imagine a full-screen website acting as a screensaver.
If this is possible, what is the EASIEST and FASTEST way for me to whip up a solution for both PCs and Macs? Language, etc. I'm hoping something that has a library I can simply draw from to embed the browser view :)
My startup is developing a product to do exactly this, it's called Screensaver Ninja and you can find it at https://Screensaver.Ninja.
You can set many different web pages with different timers. The configuration tool allows you log in and navigate to the page you want to display:
It uses WebKit, on Mac OS X it uses Safari's and on Windows it uses Chrome's and in both cases it has a separate session from any other browser installed on the computer.
Here's a small Windows-only solution:
https://github.com/cwc/web-page-screensaver/releases
You could modify this open-source one for the Mac so that it's hard-coded to your URL:
http://www.liquidx.net/blog/2010/11/13/webviewscreensaver-for-mac/
Modify hasConfigureSheet() to return NO and change the URL in kScreenSaverDefaultURL. And change the name!
Related
I want to add a button to my visual C++ form that will open with a specific browser. So far for links I've been using:
System::Diagnostics::Process::Start("UrlHere")
Which, as standard, opens with whatever your default browser is.
I'm wondering what the process would be to force the URL to open with a specific browser and if it's possible without the use of ShellExecute?
Edit - You are correct, this is C++/CLI. Removed the C++ Tag.
Edit Edit - Apologies if it came across as misleading. Some slight elaboration;
The buttons will launch to application URL's, some of which can only be used in Internet Explorer, others that CAN (and should) be used in Chrome. This is why I need to avoid using the default browser and have different buttons using different browsers when launching URLs
Before answering the 'how', I'd like to ask the question "should you be implementing this?"
By not launching the user's default browser, you are subverting the user's decision.
Perhaps the user prefers a particular interface, and is willing to live with the incorrect renderings that come with it.
Perhaps the user has a browser addon that they really need, such as a screen reader for the blind.
You are requiring additional software installed that the user may or may not want.
Perhaps the user doesn't want Chrome. Perhaps the user prefers FireFox.
You are saying that you know which browser is best, now and forever.
What if the next version of IE makes it work with the sites that are currently Chrome-only? What if the next version of Chrome fixes the sites that are currently IE-only?
What if the site changes so that it works in more browsers?
Do you go back and release a new version of your software that changes the browser for particular sites?
You're trying to solve a problem that may already be fixed.
Both Chrome and Firefox support a addon that will render a tab using the IE engine. It can be set to automatically activate when certain URLs are seen.
Perhaps there is a browser that already works with all your sites, that you don't know about.
Therefore, my recommendation is no, do not do this. The user has decided which browser they want to use, respect that decision and use the default browser.
That said, here's how you would do it: You could use the CreateProcess method, but you're in managed-land, so you might as well use it. Use the Process class to launch the new process for you.
Process^ browserProcess = gcnew Process();
browserProcess->StartInfo->UseShellExecute = false;
browserProcess->StartInfo->FileName = "C:\\Program Files (x86)\\Internet Explorer\\iexplore.exe";
browserProcess->StartInfo->Arguments = "http://www.google.com";
browserProcess->Start();
I want to create a new application (which I will sell) that uses web browser control to automatically post things on the internet etc.
I did some research, and it looks like the primary choice for most people is .NET webbrowser control (via an instance of IE).
I don't want to do this because I want customers that own a Mac and Linux to be able to use my software.
With that said, are there any web browser control classes or toolkits available that can work on all OSes (e.g. something that uses Java?)
Thanks in advance!
UPDATE:
Web browser control is basically the ability for a program to act like a human and open a web browser and go to websites, fill out forms, check email (lol) etc.
Firefox, Chrome, Safari. I think virutally everything but IE works on all the OS's. Not suprising really when you think it's made by microsoft.
Selenium libraries let you create scripts (with a GUI or one of the supported languages [it has got most of the popular ones like Java, Python etc.]) for browser automation on all popular browsers (including chrome, which works on all OSes like mentioned by other answers).
I know that Apple products like the iPad or the iPhone have trouble with flash apps.
What web development tools should I use in order to avoid compatibility issues when creating a website? My only constraint is that the languages must provide for interactivity and animation - such as in jQuery.
HTML, CSS, and PHP are a few that I can think of that will behave on 99% of all internet enabled devices.
What tools & languages are available to use when creating a website intended to be viewed on any device's internet "explorer"?
Should I just stick to HTML, CSS, & PHP? I want a certain level of interactivity so that, for example, a user can hover over images and have pop-ups containing data to appear... or when an object is clicked, an action can happen without a page reload.
Can someone point me in the right direction and help me develop a list of languages that are all-device friendly?
I am familiar with programming in several web-focused languages, I'm just wondering which ones to stay away from. Certain ones will limit the devices that can view the site and besides that constraint, the site needs to be interactive and animated.
HTML, CSS, PHP, JQUERY are truly your best bet for developing for a wide range of devices. If the scope of devices is the main goal I would stay away from using HTML5 and CSS3. You still may run into problems using much jquery with IE7 below. Mobile browsers on the other hand are much more advanced or up to date with standards then desktop browsers. I would suggest creating two versions of your application. One dedicated to running on mobile devices and one for desktop browsers. It is a shame apple wouldn't support flash applications. If all you need is hoovers for interaction you won't even need jquery / but for the other it will be useful.
The "Web" is a name for the concept of having interlinked documents accessible over the internet. Therefore, to have a website you really only need a document able to link to other documents, namely HTML.
HTML is not really a programming language or a tool though, it is a document format.
If you want to make a website you need use HTML to Markup what you're writing. Then you use CSS to format different sections of the document you marked up.
PHP though, is completely separate from this, PHP is for creating dynamic HTML, or any document on the server side.
If you want to achieve a flash-effect on a site you use Javascript to modify the page content (HTML) and appearance (CSS).
If you need to learn HTML/CSS I would highly recommend http://htmldog.com/
As per the question, HTML CSS and Javascript are pretty much the only mobile-browser compatible method for website content as they don't need plugins.
What exactly are you trying to do?
Is it possible to create an operating system that loads a web browser without menu bars, tabs etc. and that is all it loads.
I do not mean like Chrome OS but I mean all it loads is a html page which can be interacted with like an ordinary web page e.g. google.com, youtube.com.
Also, if this is possible, I would prefer it to be a Linux based OS and Webkit based browser.
You might have to roll your own for something like that...my recommendation would be a small linux distribution and then figure out how to run the surf browser, possibly with the tabbed extension, exclusively. When the x environment starts up just execute those programs. You'd honestly never know the difference.
Here is a screenshot of what this all looks like on my computer, running dwm for window management, and surf + tabbed. This browser is controlled via the keyboard, so you'd have to get use to that.
You don't need to create an operating system, you can use Linux.
A simple implementation would be creating an application using Qt Embedded (qws) with a Widget containing a QWebView only (it's WebKit based), that would load a predefined address.
You could spawn that app from the init scripts (rcS for example) in an endless loop (simple bash script, so if the app crashes it gets loaded again)
You can prototype it with a simple hardware like beagleboard.org or friendlyarm.net boards.
I'm tyring to get phonegap up and running on blackberry storm (9530 simulator). I had been testing my webapp from withing BB's built in browser, and it was looking ok, but then it totally bit once I tried to look at the some code from within phonegap, even though I was pointing phonegap to the same url (I hadn't yet gotten to the point of running code locally on the device).
I tried a test case on google and got similiar results. see below. I suspect that I'm missing something basic here. I would have expect both images to be nearly identical.
Browser
http://www.eleganttechnologies.com/outside/ImgDeviceBB9530WebGoogle.jpg
Phonegap
http://www.eleganttechnologies.com/outside/ImgDeviceBB9530PgGoogle.jpg
[Update]
To shed some light on what is happening, I ran the browser and the embedded browser (phonegap) against the W3 mobile web acid test: http://www.w3.org/2008/06/mobile-test/
I definitely notice differences between the two, but I don't yet know the 'why' and the 'how-to-address'.
Acid via built-in browser
(source: eleganttechnologies.com)
BTW - I ran this earlier today and got a couple more green square than just now.
Acid via browser embedded into phonegap
http://www.eleganttechnologies.com/outside/ImgDeviceBb9530PgAcid.jpg
Disclaimer: I don't know anything about phonegap, but have a pretty good theory. By default the embedded browser control on BlackBerry uses an older version of the rendering engine than the BlackBerry browser itself does.
At the BlackBerry developer conference last year, a talk was given about this, and there's an undocumented option to use the newer rendering engine. \
The option ID is 17000 (yes, a magic number, which could change, use at your own risk etc), and should be set to true. Not sure how you'd pass this option through phonegap (I'm not familiar with the toolkit) but using the BlackBerry APIs it's something like:
BrowserContent content;
...
content.getRenderingOptions().setProperty(RenderingOptions.CORE_OPTIONS_GUID, 17000, true);
I don't know the specifics of the browsers you are using, but I do know that most of the big sites will detect your OS + browser combination to decide what HTML to show you.
If Google is seeing a different user agent, you might get a generic mobile version of the HTML instead os the Blackberry specific HTML you get for the built in browser.
If you have access to a web server, try hitting it with both browser setups and see if there is any difference in the log file. That might tell you something interesting.
As we can see in your Acid tests...
One browser (the built-in one) is reporting correctly as a BlackBerry9530, and the other (phonegap) is not presenting the user-agent ["Testing with ."].
In this case, Google is providing you with the default view of their homepage, whereas when you are reporting yourself as a BlackBerry device, you will get the BlackBerry specific rendering.
By the sounds of things, using phonegap is removing the default user-agent (most probably because it's not recognising your device). As phonegap is open-source, the best bet is to get in there, and debug it and find out what happens with the user-agent when the http requests leave the device and track it back from there.
Maybe one browser has capabilities that another one does not?
Hm. By looking at the screenshot I would say that the second page is probably missing some resources. It may be missing some images, scripts and the CSS files, which would explain different l&f. Knowing how Blackberry Browser Field API works, I would guess that the implementation that uses the BrowserField was not done correctly. Just my guess. In addition to that, when the browser field is initialized the caller needs to configure it properly by enabling the appropriate browser features - scripts, styles etc. Again, the API is done in a very weird way, I have gotten myself into this trap once. When setting the options, you cannot just create one mask (like CSS | WML | SCRIPT) and make one call. Options are numeric and, I believe, non-overlapping - but you still need to call the API for setting each option independently.
Also the way asynchronous loading of the resources for BrowserField takes time to understand.
Just my $0.02.