I understand that Moovweb servers sit in front of my Desktop site load balancer. It seems like all of my traffic would have to be passed through the Moovweb servers. Does this cause a hit on performance of the desktop site?
Because the moovSDK does a request to your desktop and any desktopjs it does have an extremely slight impact on desktop performance. However, I would not say it is a negative impact, it's more views! You do not have to scale both a mobile and a desktop site, instead we worry about scaling your mobile site.
So while it can have an impact on your desktop site, the fact of the matter is, the imact is less overall than it would be to run your own desktop and mobile site!
Related
I live in an area where net access is mobile or nothing. While I can occasionally get access by tethering a mobile to that network, it isn't often connected, and when it isn't connected, no local device will function on its own, no matter which protocol it uses. Why isn't there any kind of server/cloud resiliency built in where devices can communicate in a peer fashion like Apple's Bonjour (Rendezvous? I can't remember)? If I have an Echo device, I should be able to switch it on through an Alexa interface. I'm OK without speech processing which requires interpretation of commands through an AWS or Google or Apple or whatever cloud, but being able to locally control a switch seems as though the interface could be smart enough to route locally. I guess I may have just answered my question. It seems as though routes could be internally stored so as to not to definitely require a server. Can you imagine shipping a colony to Mars and all the IoT devices stop working? If you ask me, they should not require a branch variation or special programming in order to function.
From the experience of having sat down and built a few, there are a some key reasons why viable IoT gadget products for the general market typically end up having to have a cloud-mediated mode, no matter what was envisioned when the design effort originally commenced:
General consumers (at least think) they want the option to control things when outside the home
Often even at home, a mobile phone may be on the mobile network not wifi, meaning that even if the user is physically inside their home, in network terms, they are not.
Firmware updates, dynamic content, etc are easier when they don't have to be relayed through a mobile phone or PC, especially a mobile that might sometimes have to jump networks partway through the process.
Ironically, having once set out to build an IoT product that could work entirely offline, the further the project progressed, the more and more difficulties that approach presented for general users, and the more the cloud path that was added as an option, started to look preferable in terms of how things should work all the time so that it could become the exclusive focus of development efforts.
My conclusion is that it's very hard to build an offline IoT gadget. Not only the developer, but also the users and marketing people need to understand and accept what sorts of difficulties and limitations that can mean.
So where does it happen? In the situations where the "users" are the "developers" - eg. open source. If you look around a bit, you'll find plenty of gadgets either built form scratch, or more commonly reverse engineered so they can run a custom firmware. Want a local RESTful API? Done! Want could relay via MQTT over SSL to your own broker? Done!
When you control the code, you control the mode.
But with products for the general market, most customers want things to work, not a lengthy technical explanation of why the details of their network setup mean they cannot.
Virtualized browser apps such as Puffin Browser and Flashfox allow mobile devices to playback and interact with Flash and other restricted content.
To my understanding, this is achieved through an RDP-like protocol which effectively means a browser is launched on a cloud server and streamed back to the client app.
However, my confusion comes with my limited use of remote desktop software. Typically, opening an RDP/VNC connection will launch a full-experience shell, sharing the entirety of the GUI including the desktop, menus and application chrome. Instead, only the viewport of a browser session should be shared.
Additionally, how is the user sandboxed to the browser viewport? How are they prevented from right-clicking, opening new tabs, invoking application menus, tabbing to other applications or launching the Start menu, etc.?
I'm not expecting a full break-down of the software and configuration required to achieve this; I'm happy to investigate that myself. I would simply appreciate some pointers to guide me in the right direction.
the app that i'm developing, needs to interact with a server, to accomplish some operations: save user's data, retrieve data about other users, services and so on...
before paying to rent some space on a server, i'd like to test my app making it interact with a server located on my computer, simulating a real a LAMP server as a localhost.
did you ever tried to do the same? can you suggest me a LAMP server that i can use locally?
do you suggest any other solution in place of the one i'm seeking?
thanks for help
While the server is running make your requests to your own IP address. I'm fairly confident this will work while you are using the simulator, and likely it will also work from an app.
In terms of finding LAMP server software for the mac... you should check out MAMP which allows you to simulate a server on your mac.
How does something like itether work? Is there an HTML5 api that gives you this level of access to the device? I would assume giving a web based app this much access is a huge security risk.
Tethering's HTML5 app works by by using the iPhone as a proxy server,
so one sets up an ad-hoc Wi-Fi network and runs special desktop software
to direct HTTP traffic to the iPhone.
The HTML5 page loaded onto the iPhone pushes the traffic on and
returns the result, creating tethering without having to get approval
from Apple, or the network operator. ( Original Source )
I think they are using HTML WebSockets detects the presence of a proxy server and automatically sets up a tunnel to pass through the proxy.
I noticed one application on app store recently named onavo which access internet connection usage from other applications on iPhone like safari, facebook, youtube, etc. Is there any API available for this. How they have implemented it. Curious to know about it.
I've found the answer on Quora. As follow:
http://www.quora.com/How-is-Onavo-able-to-direct-all-the-data-traffic-to-their-proxy-without-using-iOS-private-APIs
Roi Tiger, CTO of Onavo
Hi, I'm the CTO of Onavo, thank you for checking out our service. After installing Onavo you are prompted to install a configuration profile which allows the data to be redirected through Onavo's servers using a proxy server settings.
Configuration profile installation does not require any private API access in the iOS platform.
Another answer:
http://www.quora.com/How-does-Onavo-manage-to-compress-data-traffic
They're not monitoring the apps’ data usage on the phone itself. It looks like Onavo sets up a proxy on the phone (probably via a configuration profile) so that your data traffic goes through their servers, so monitoring which sites that traffic is going through is trivial on their end. From their privacy policy (emphasis mine):
Onavo provides services for reducing data usage of certain mobile phones. To benefit from the Services, your access to the Internet through your mobile phone will be routed through Onavo's servers, which strive to reduce the volume of your downloads, and potentially your uploads as well.