I consider to use GTK+ with Broadway backend for development of device control application.
Device is with functionality similar to broadband modem/router (I intentionally selected example which is familiar for all :-) ).
Device should be controlled remotely via web browser.
My concern is about performance of such control. I'm afraid that Broadway may be a bottleneck.
Probably I'm wrong but even in simple pilot I built it looks not so good.
It will be very appreciated to have your inputs based on real experience.
Thanks a lot
I've used broadway to deploy gtk+3 apps for multiple projects - usually in cases where the client's desktop is locked down, or people are stuck on Windows. Broadway performs significantly better than VNC or RDP.
There are solutions to the single-user nature of a broadway application. For example, I've developed a partial solution: http://tesla.duckdns.org/transparent-proxy-for-broadway-gtk3-html5-backend/ ... if you want security, you need to implement a login page, cookie setting, and port redirection based on a cookie. The example code is commented as such. I've been meaning to complete all this, but every time I've done it, it's been in a highly custom way for particular clients - not something that I can really open-source.
Related
Just looking for some help/suggestions with this. I require my own server for an upcoming project that will be hosting users websites. I want to build a control panel the user can log into and modify their website which will be stored elsewhere on the server. This all seems easy enough, It's just managing domains and emails that confuse me.
What should I look for to manage domain names and point them to the correct website and also what would be the best way to manage email accounts/set up new ones etc. I want to avoid cPanel/WHM if possible, I'm looking to control most things through the control panel I will be building. So any suggestions on this would be useful as well, as I will be wanting to add email accounts through php (Can be done using a shell I assume?).
I will also be wanting to measure bandwidth used on the websites contained in each users directory, any suggestions on making this possible?
I'm really looking for some suggestions on what software to use to set this up, any advice would be really helpful!
Thanks,
Graeme
It sounds like you've got a lot of creative room. May I suggest a web framework? Django. With it you can build out a nice control panel, it's template system is clean and concise. It's also based on Python and thats why I suggest it. If there is a python module for it, you can use it in Django... so things like altering, creating, etc. local data/files is a breeze. you simply us Python (you can even forget it's "django"), crunch your data and then spit it out (into django... out to templates.. to display to the user).
You'll likely want AJAXY biznazz, their is a nice Django App for that, Dajax. Django has a rich and helpful community and tons of resources. Just hop on GitHub.com and search for Django, You'll find tons of stuff.
Im building a DNS Control Panel with it. Which sounds like a minimal version of what you're doing.
Hi
we are expanding one of our projects in a major bank to include access via mobile devices. We are evaluating a few tools - inc. perfecto mobile, experitest and deviceanywhere.
From our initial evaluation perfecto and device anywhere cover a larger set of handsets inc feature phones. Experitest on the other hand is strong and simple to operate with smartphones(iphone, android etc).
Can anyone share experience from using these tools for large scale projects? we are mainly concerened re stability, ability to work with QTP and support considerations (support for new devices etc).
I have used DeviceAnywhere extensively. Perfecto, not that much, after a pretty dissapointing trial period. DA has support/add-ins for QTP and QC. Perfecto does not cover QC. Perfecto is not faster than DA, since most of their devices are in Israel, and not the US. DA has a few datacenters in the US and abroad, hence you have a better chance to get better performance. DA has an pretty long list of Enterprise and Carrier customers...while Perfecto seems like a very small company. Compare their website quality-it's pretty obvious which one looks more professional...You should try them both and make up your mind...
I have used all 3 platforms many times
Only Perfecto Mobile and DA are robust enough for real testers (at least for enterprise level).
DA have more devices but Perfecto are 100% web based, faster and MUCH cheaper. Both offer automation environments with pros and cons but Perfecto offers QTP integration and enhanced security solutions
Conclusion - both systems good, Perfecto cheaper, Perfecto much better for enterprises engaging in mobile testing.
Guido
Think of coupling a standard software remote control product with a standard software test robot (like QTP).
As an alternative, and being a mostly device-independent, but bitmap-dependent solution, you could use one of the many remote controls to bring the mobile's display contents to the desktop. Then, you'd "click around" in that remote control window using you favourite test robot.
Stupid that sounds? Well, it has its strong and its weak points:
If QTP is set for you, you'd be stuck on bitmap synchronization, no other useful GUI properties would be visible. However, if you have some QTP know-how on board, you could reuse all the know-how for test management integration via QC, test data addressing, and so on, scripting "art" like wait-for-the-right-thing, convert bitmaps to text, and so on. You could even "in real time" verify the results displayed on the mobile to stuff in the corporate backend, or research expected results in some central database after doing some transaction on the mobile -- all that would be easy since your test robot runs as part of the IT infrastructure all the time, so it has easy access to those resources. And those accesses could be done with all the comfort we got used to on PC-based test robots, like for example QTP's database checkpoint.
The positive aspect would be: Using such a scenario, you are largely independent of the mobile's technical details, and could support a lot of different devices by just using different sets of expected bitmaps. (Provided the workflows are exactly the same, which of course is not always the case.)
If you don't have to buy an extra test robot, this solution might be unbeatable cheap. Most Windows mobile devices for example can be used with Microsoft's free remote control, and there are lots of commercial vendors offering remote control functionality for a variety of devices in one package.
Also, you could develop test scripts using emulators emulating the mobile device, because the test robot would not know the difference between a display being fetched from the real thing, or being shown by the emulator.
I've done all that with various remote controls and PDA/smartphone devices, using CitraTest or QTP as the test robot. I was very happy not having to mess around with yet-another-specialized tool, or even more than one of them, each with their own language, or methodology.
Biggest hurdles besides the ones already mentioned were:
find a remote control that is versatile, fast and reliable
find a way to let the mobile use its "normal" communication path (for example, cellular connection) for all applications while, for performance reasons (and to minimize side effects), the remote control is connected through a direct connection (USB, propretiary synch cable, network...whatever the mobile supports).
create a scripting "standard" which is sufficiently exact to keep test robot and mobile app execution synchronized while avoiding re-capturing expected bitmap for all supported devices too often (this can be partly automated)
timing problems -- when you are on the bitmap level, it is hard to tell if you waited "long enough" for some message to appear, disappear, or whatever.
cover exotics like "app continues only after you took a photo with the mobile camera". Generally speaking: Control the built-in periphery (what a contradiction...) of the mobile (in my case, I had to make the barcode scanner "see" specific images -- quite difficult and usually very device-dependent to automate)
It's feasable, though, and such a solution can be very stable and realiable, with a sufficient grade of cost-efficiency in terms of test maintenance effort (depending on what changes how frequently in the app-to-test, of course).
jQuery runs a lot of tests automatically on both feature phones and smart phones, maybe you can use their test system. As a side note, check if jQuery mobile is for you, it seems very cool.
To the best of my knowledge Perfecto Mobile has made some major improvments to its offering and currently offers some major benefits over the others, including price. In the last few months they've added popular devices like Lenovo nePaone. You can see the full list om their website:www.perfectomobile.com. Since they use differentontrol technology than Device Anywhere they are capabable of supporting new devices really quickly. Regarding stability and QTP they also have many advantages over the others. For instance, tools to record your own specific user scenarios and test them repeatedly across devices - this is a great automation tool for large scale projects.
If you are testing bank application you should consider the security issue.
How do you protect your application and application data. Once you release a phone, someone else can get control over it.
My recommendation is to use the on-site capabilities I believe all the above solutions have.
I was thinking about developing an app that enables the user to remotely check the progress of a longrunning task. The server application running the task is an existing commercial tool and comes with a proprietary client to connect to the server to manage it. However, the client is available only for windows computers and not for mobile devices, hence my desire to fill the gap.
The communication between client and server is neither encrypted nor password protected in any way.
What would be the best way to analyze or reverse engineer such a proprietary protocol?
Are there any legal implications (I know this is not the place to ask legal stuff, but if you happen to know how to reverse engineer stuff you maybe know whether it is legal or not, too)?
I'm a fan of http://www.wireshark.org/ for protocol analysis. Free, powerful, extensible, cross-platform.
As regards legal stuff: It depends on jurisdiction - and each country's courts seem to enjoy not coming up with consistent precedents. The general rule is reverse-engineering is okay for 'interoperability'. You'd really have to ask a lawyer for more info, though.
Personally if something is running on my machine and I want it to behave in a different way, I have no ethical issues forcing it to. That's just me, though.
I can fully imagine a virus writer ringing me up and making some kind of legal threats that I breached his EULA...
Duplicate:
Testing a website for cross-browser/multiple-version support
How do you test visual components
I recently talked to a colleague about a tool we use at work for system testing web applications. The colleague then raised the question as to whether we tested the appearance of the application.
Does anyone else do this and if so, how would one test it to ensure things don't get moved out of place or that things are the correct dimensions etc?
If you want to check what your website looks like in many different browsers checkout Browsershots.
One of my clients was already set up with Litmus when I got there and that project was a breeze to work on. So smooth.
I'd like to be able to roll my own system like that, though. It's too bad they don't sell the actual software - just the service.
I'm looking for a way to give out preview or demo versions of our software to our customers as easy as possible.
The software we are currently developing is a pretty big project. It consists of a client environment, an application server, various databases, web services host etc.
The project is developed incrementally and we want to ship the bits in intervals of one to two months. The first deliveries will not be used in production. They have the puropse of a demo to encourage the customers to give feedback.
We don't want to put burden on the customers to install and configure the system. All in all we are looking for a way to ease the deployment, installation and configuration pain.
What I thought of was to use a virtualizing technique to preinstall and preconfigure a virtual machine with all components that are neccessary. Our customers just have to mount the virtual image and run the application.
I would like to hear from folks who use this technique. I suppose there are some difficulties as well. Especially, what about licensing issues with the installed OS?
Perhaps it is possible to have the virtual machine expire after a certain period of time.
Any experiences out there?
Since you're looking at an entire application stack, you'll need to virtualize the entire server to provide your customers with a realistic demo experience. Thinstall is great for single apps, but not an entire stack....
Microsoft have licensing schemes for this type of situation, since it's only been used for demonstration purposes and not production use a TechNet subscription might just cover you. Give your local Microsoft licensing centre a call to discuss, unlike the offshore support teams they're really helpful and friendly.
For running the 'stack' with the least overhead for your clients, I suggest using VMware. The customers can download the free VMware player, load up the machines (or multiple machines) and get a feel for the system... Microsoft Virtual PC or Virtual Server is going to be a bit more intrusive and not quite the "plug n play" solution that you're looking for.
If you're only looking to ship the application, consider either thinstall or providing Citrix / Terminal services access - customers can remotely login to your own (test) machines and run what they need.
Personally if it's doable, a standalone system would be best - tell your customers install vmware player, then run this app... which launches the various parts of your application stack (maybe off of a DVD) and you've got a fully self contained demo for the marketing guys to pimp out :)
You should take a look at thinstall(It has been bought by vmware and is called thinapp now), its an application virtualizer.
It seems that you're trying to accomplish several competing goals:
"Give" the customer something.
Simplify and ease the customer experience.
Ensure the various components coexist and interact happily.
Accommodate licensing restrictions, both yours and the OS vendor's.
Allow incremental and piecewise upgrades.
Can you achieve all of these by hosting the back end (database, web server, etc.) and providing your customers with a CD (or download) that contains the client? This will give them the "download/upgrade experience" that goes along with client software, without dealing with the complexity of administering the back end.
For a near plug-and-play experience, you might consider placing your demo on a live linux or Windows CD. Note: you need a licensed copy of Windows for the latter.
Perhaps your "serious" customers might be able to request their own demo copies of the back end as well; they'd be more amenable to the additional work on their part.
As far as OS licenses, if your vendor(s) of choice aren't helpful, you might consider free or open-source alternatives such as FreeDOS or linux.
Depending on if you can fit all the needed services into a single OS instance or not...
Vmware Ace or whatever they're calling it nowadays will let you deliver single virtual machines under strict control, with forced updates, expiration and whatnot. But it sounds easier to just set up a demo environment and allow remote access to it.
The issue here I guess is getting several virtual machines to communicate under unknown circumstances - if one is not enough?
An idea then is to ship a physical server preconfigured with virtualisation and whatever amount of virtual servers needed to demonstrate the system.
Using trial versions of the operating system might be good enough for the licensing dilemma - atleast Windows Server is testable for 60 days, extendable to 240 when registering.
Thinstall is great for single apps, but not an entire stack....
I didn't try it yet, but with the new version of thinstall you are able to let different thinstalled application communicate.
But I guess you're right a vm-ware image would be easier