I was trying to build an android apk using Intel XDK.I just want to know if there is an option to set the splash screen, icons, application title in some build properties file rather than choosing it everytime you build the apk.
In the current build system the build menu is the only way to specify these assets. However, each time you build your app it will reuse the assets you provided initially. If you create a new project you'll have to provide them again.
In the Cordova build option you provide these assets by specifying them in an intelxdk.config.xml file. This is probably closer to what you are looking for. In the next major release we'll also be providing a way to provide those directly in the XDK, rather than on-line, but only for Cordova build options. However, there will be more flexibility in how you provide those assets, which will be easier to explain once that version of the XDK "hits the streets."
Sorry, but company policy does not allow me to provide a release date. All I can say is that it will be coming in the near future.
Related
I would like to add plugins like camera, scanner in an react-native-app but this involves addition of some additional code into AndroidManifest.xml and info.plist file for enabling plugin permissions
Whereas I would like to add the plugins at one place and it should update in appropriate Android and iOS files, similar to that of config.xml file configuration in cordova apps.
Are there any libraries available to implement in this way ?
Thanks
Unfortunately no. Adding libraries that deal with permissions has always been a bit of a struggle in react native, where you have to touch the android and iOS files and often times specify why your app requires those permissions in the first place. It gets a bit more complicated as different android versions have different ways to deal with permissions.
The good news is that most of the libraries you'll want to add provide a detailed documentation on how to set them up properly which does not take too long after you get the gist of it.
I am relatively new to flutter and app development. I noticed that whenever a new flutter project is created, there are many default plugins pre-loaded into the project and this makes the app take up a minimum of 80 Mb. Could i get a summary on which plugins are actually important in order to run any app in general?
Flutter provides almost all the basic things like themeing, icons, routing etc out of the box.
You can have any other package if you need more functionality like fetching data from internet and so on.
The important thing is the size you see is the debug build which is large as it contains the VM for hot reload to work at such speed. When you build the release version it is the minimum version which goes for about <5Mb on bare-bone app.
Currently my debug app stands at around 80mb on emulator but the release version is < 6mb.
So to answer your question,
it is the debug size,not the final version
Flutter requires no extra plugin for an offline app with basic functionality. Core components + testing is provided out of the box.
Nothing useless is shipped by default,
NOTE: there is a section called dev_dependencies in pubspec.yaml which means the packages listed under this won't go into the release build and are only for development purpose.
I really hope I'm doing something wrong. I've added crosswalk to a project and have had some serious app size increase. To test I've done the following.
created a new ionic project
added my app code to /www/
added ngcordova and various plugins
Ran ionic build and drop the apk onto a Genymotion emulator. The app was very slow but had a app size of 8.01mb (once installed - checked with app manager).
Then I deleted the app from the emulator
Ran ionic browser add crosswalk
Ran ionic run android which installed the correct .apk on the emulator. On checking in manage apps the app size is now 79.36mb!!! Thats a 71mb increase! Most places say 20mb at most but 71mb!!!
Can someone tell me what I've done wrong?
When I added the Android SDK I did add all the tools ad platforms availabe in the SDK manager, did that have some effect?
If this isn's fixable it's a show stopper for me, which is a shame after spending weeks developing an app...
Please help!
I'm also running into that issue. Unfortunately using crosswalk will definitely increase your apk size. However, I found some way to at least reduce the apk size. For instance you could make use of the crosswalk lite. It may reduce your apk size for about 15 MB (see crosswalk lite).
You can also specify that you don't want to build the projects for two architectures (explained here).
Same problem here. I think promissed size of 20Mb is for the apk file which is compressed, you are looking at installed size on device.
You can check generated APK size on platforms/android/build/outputs/apk/ or platforms/android/ant-build/
I think the problem you're encountering though Crosswalk related, it's emulation related. I've tried emulators from both Android Studio versions and Genymotion. They both didn't work well for hybrid app testing.
My advice is to try Chrome Device Inspector along with actual device testing. I don't think anyone will argue that's the best way to ensure performance. AWS Device Farm is just one of many offerings that will spit out physical devices for testing. There's even services that let you outsource testing on different devices by real people, just can't think of the name of it right now...
My current favorite is Cordova Tools for Visual Studio Code, but it has been buggy for me lately.
However, I'm in the early stages of a fleet of Cordova apps and was alarmed at the overhead Crosswalk has. ~20MB extra to your APKs, and ~70MB to the installed size of your application. That's pretty alarming, considering the apps we use it with, with resource assets (images, etc.) are about 1/10th the size of this one plugin!
We have one app that has actually degraded with Crosswalk. My theory is that Crosswalk doesn't do a good job parsing non-standard HTML which is a core feature we have since we have XSLT transformed XML which winds up being non-standard HTML. Traversing it is extremely slow compared to the default WebView. We do a lot of manipulation with raw DocumentNode objects, so maybe that's it. That said, I'm so surprised that if it's slow traversing/appending HTML via vanilla JavaScript that these other apps are seeing performance gains!
I also learned last night there is Shared Mode with Crosswalk which allows multiple applications that use Crosswalk to share one instance.
I am developing mobile web app using ionic sidemenu, but it is not as smooth as it should be. When I open sidemenu using slide left/right, I am getting less than 30 FPS as shown in figure.
How can I improve the performance?
Reaching 60 FPS would be great!
AppGyver's Steroids tooling also provides you with access to Crosswalk on Android. You can run it in your Ionic project directly without modifying any files.
Also, Supersonic's sidemenu/drawer is fully native, so if you're up for migrating, it'll run way faster. :)
(Disclaimer: I'm a programmer for AppGyver.)
My advice is to use Crosswalk instead of the Cordova as the webview for the app.
While both share the same end goal, they are different:
Cordova, from the Apache Foundation, uses the regular (pre-lollipop) Android webview, which is based on Android's stock browser since its inception.
The Crosswalk Project, created on the Intel Open Source Technology Center, is different. It wraps your app with Chromium, the open-source base code that gave birth to Google Chrome, which brings numerous performance enhancements: css3 transitions, animations, 3d transformations, html5 support, remote debugging and much better javascript support and performance.
At the time of writing, the Ionic team is already working on a beta version (1.3.0-beta1) that uses Crosswalk instead of Cordova. Not really stable just yet, but a huge promise.
In any case, you can use Crosswalk today, by manually copying your Ionic project's 'www'
folder content to the project folder inside Crosswalk folder and run it. You'll need to setup some manifest files previously, so read the docs.
In any case, it's not hard at all to try, and I'll recommend it everyday for all projects pre-Lollipop. If you're targeting Lollipop/Android 5 versions, you don't need it, because the default Webview in these versions is already Chrome-based.
Hope it helps.
I installed eclipse and the FDT plugin.
Now i would like to create a flex project.
I am wondering how to get a designer for the mxml where i could drag and drop lists, buttong and build a UI in flex.
I am totally new to flex.
Also, once i have that, if I build that as an application, it seems to generate a swf file.
Not sure if i can run this in anything other than a brower. The latest adobe flash player has not standalone exe.
I would like to understand the recommended workflow if I need to build a flex application.
I am basically looking at developing a desktop/web application that has fusion charts to visualize certain data.
I am wondering how to get a designer for the mxml where i could drag
and drop lists, buttong and build a UI in flex.
The current version of Flash Builder has one, and I thought that was the only Flex IDE that had a design view. The Flash Builder design view is limited, as it only works with the current version of the Flex SDK and is all around problematic. Most developer's don't ues it and the feature will be removed in the next version of Flash Builder.
I've heard rumors that IntelliJ may add one in a future version, but I wouldn't count on it.
Once i have that, if I build that as an application, it seems to
generate a swf file. Not sure if i can run this in anything other than
a brower. The latest adobe flash player has not standalone exe.
Correct; a Flex project's primary intent is to build an SWf file that will run in the browser. At one time Adobe offered a stand alone player that the SWF would run it. I'm not sure if they still do. It was not practical to assume end users had the stand alone version of the Flash Player, though.
I have no idea if FDT supports this; but you can use the same, or similar, code with Adobe AIR to create an AIR file. The AIR file should run anywhere that the AIR runtime can be installed. If you use the Adobe AIR Captive Runtime feature on a windows PC you can create an executable.
Idea won't ever get a design view, because it requires a special version of the Flash player built into the IDE. This in turn requires access to the Player source code, and adding a bunch of platform-specific JNDI junk to your IDE. And given that even Adobe is dropping support for the design view, it's apparently not economically viable to maintain that special version, even if you have the sources to Player and the right to use them.