card.io team:
Our team use card.io sdk to scan bank card number,but we got a problem that is the so libraries is so large, almost 4.1M. when packaged a apk about 2M.
Our app is just 2M,so could you please suply some methods to reduce the so files.
Josh from card.io here. We've actually taken considerable pains to get the SDK to be as small as it is! The card.io SDK does a significant amount of non-trivial client-side work and the resources required to do that have already been shrunk as far as we feel currently possible without negatively impacting usability.
Related
I am trying to integrate card.io sdk in my android app. I was wondering if it supports non-embossed cards as well as it is very important for the kind of app I am working on.
I went through some old posts where it was mentioned that it is not supported yet. I just wanted to know if -
With latest release 5.2.0, is there any support for printed cards?
Is there any plan for near future, to support non-embossed cards?
Thanks
Unfortunately, printed/non-embossed cards are not supported as of card.io Android SDK 5.2 (nor in card.io iOS SDK 5.3).
The feature requires a non-trivial amount of work, but if you're interested in adding the feature, you may be able to look into the source repositories and try to get a few people on GitHub to help contribute. (Android, common dmz).
I have been looking framworks for developing mobile apps and i have been told to work on rhomobile framework but i did google and i found very limited resources and tutorial... my apps are bit complicated and at this point i am not even sure rhomobile framework is good choice....
do you guys think it will worth investing time in learning?
any suggestions?
Thank you,
It depends on your requirements. If your application is data centric then I highly recommend Rhomobile, and If your application has less data and more static page then better use Native frameworks.
You can quickly start with following resources http://rhomobile.com/resources/
If you have some knowledge in ruby it is not very difficult to start using rhodes, but it will always depend on your requirements and on how much time you want to invest to develop apps for different OS.
I have found Rhomobile very easy to follow. Of course it is limited as it is a relatively new framework, but you can get very good help on their Google Group.
I have developed on iOS and Android, and I must say I hated Objective C. Android with Java was more familiar and easier for me, but still, it is not compared to doing one app that works for all (even though you have to make dome minor tweaks for each OS).
One thing I did have problems developing in Rhomobile was working with maps. Rhomobile's Maps have different limitations depending on the OS of deployment.
Anyways, specially if you are working by yourself, I would recommend experimenting with Rhomobile. I believe you will get your job done faster that developing for each one (Objective C is a nightmare!)
One thing I love about Rhomobile Rhodes framework is their support for those old Symbian S40 phones, although they are not the mainstream phones today but still those platforms need to be supported in many enterprise apps
We are considering migrating our site from flash to silverlight, and also building additional components in silverlight. However there is a strong argument that many people do not have silverlight on their computers, and will not or cannot install silverlight.
Are there any official figures on how many computers have adopted silverlight, and is it a bad idea to build a company website with elements of silverlight on it?
Please note I am not trying to be subjective here, I am looking for solid, official figures and also advice about whether this is considered in general by developers to be an acceptable deployment solution.
I have to discuss this issue with my boss later.
From my answer to this question:
Adobe Flash is on 97% of computers.
Silverlight is on 55% of computers.
Java is on 73%
Source
According to Microsoft (so read into that what you will) current Silverlight penetration is 60%. For further "solid, official figures" you might need to cite the authorities you are willing to accept as being "official".
Whether it would be a good idea for you to migrate would depend very much on what sort of site you are running. Your site would need to be quite compelling to entice others of the 40% or more web clients to install Silveright to access your application.
If you are already a "Flash site" you must surely have built up some skills in this tool and you already have access to a larger set of clients. You would therefore have to have some killer reason to use Silverlight because Flash has something very important missing. What would that be?
"Is it a bad idea to have elements of Silverlight on your site"? I would say that this is the best way forward as long as those elements are not critical to delivery of your content. That way you can gauge the willingness of your visitors to install Silverlight without blocking their access to the reason they came to your site in the first place. This will give you basis for your own "solid, official figures" about whether to grow your usage of Silverlight or not.
I like to know difference between Silverlight and JavaFX. Anybody help me.
Take a look here:
Some differences among JavaFX, Flex, Silverlight/WPF
Differences between JavaFX, Silverlight and Flash
RIAs comparison - part 2 - simple programs
As much as between Java and .NET. Purpose is more less the same - to replace Adobe Flash and provide better environment than ActionScript. At this stage both technologies are relatively unpopular among consumers (compared to flash).
NON-TECHNICAL
One difference I should add to the discussion is money for adoption. Microsoft is really making a serious bet on RIA apps and Silverlight, very serious and to that extent they are committed financially to the platform beyond development costs but also in willingness to fund initiatives to drive adoption. Things like the Olympics web site, NFL Sunday Night Football and others are showcases for Silverlight and the massive costs of development and operations on those sites are subsidized by Redmond as a means to build the communal acceptance of SL as a viable RIA platform.
Now with Silverlight 3 (offline, out of browser stuff), what are the main differences between the two technologies?
There are some significant differences right now in the Beta, no idea if these will still be differences in the release version.
There is no way to hide the window chrome in Silverlight OOB.
No ability to create a notification tray icon.
Air apps can be multi-window, Silverlight OOB cannot.
Air apps have more access to the system, Silverlight apps are sandboxed.
There are differences in the install and update procedures, not sure of al of the details.
AIR gives you access to the file system and a SQLite db. SL3 only lets you write to the file system with user interaction (a Save As dialog) and doesn't have any support for a DB in Isolated storage or on disk.
SLOOB runs in a sandbox still, so you're limited to the same cross-domain issues as a Silverlight app running in the browser.
It's a three way war: Adobe AIR, MS Silverlight and Mozilla Prism.
Read this blog-post and this article. A quote from the second article:
Silverlight is the clear winner in terms of power, but as one of my colleagues pointed out the other day does it matter? His point was that Flash has an incredible penetration rate. According to Adobe it’s in the 99% range. When considering rolling out a new product that requires a plug-in why introduce another barrier to adoption?
and another one from the second:
We then asked of those who answered yes which formats they use. Unsurprisingly, given how long it has been available, Flash leads with 61% of respondents. More surprising was Silverlight’s very small market share of a little over 2%, essentially the same as that of the Real format. Quicktime did surprisingly well, at just under 20%.
As for VOIP support in SL read this.
Read up on Prism here.
In addition to what Dave said, Silverlight seems to be missing device support (microphone and web cam).
One thing I'd like to point out, that nobody else has mentioned is (and I'm not picking favorites when I say this, as we use Air/Flex for a project at my job):
Adobe doesn't have the talent needed to create quality run times and IDEs for developers. Their ideas are fine, it's the execution of those ideas that I doubt. I think we can all agree that Visual Studio is light years ahead of any IDE out there. Quality wise I'd even go as far as to say that VS2005 is better made than anything on the market (it's now 2011) 6yrs later.
If you feel Flex/Air meets your needs better, my all means, go with it. But if feel either platform will give you what you want, I'd say Silverlight wins every time. It's more mature, it's substantially more stable.
Our biggest headache for our commercial app is that Air does not managed garbage collection well, for the past year and a half, our app has suffered from slowdown, the only resolution is to do a nightly reboot on a kiosk because we nest objects inside objects, once you hit the 3rd nesting, it seems Air cannot flush those objects correctly, Adobe is will aware of it, and considering how much time has passed and all the newer versions, Adobe has no resolution. That is the sign of poor run times and Adobe developers who just aren't very good. Despite the fact people love to bash MS, these days their platforms are pretty reliable is reliable overall, especially their .NET runtimes. Adobe feels like Microsoft circa 1997, they're years away from offering reliable solutions.
PS: I'm sure a couple koolaid drinking Adobe devs will be down voting this answer.
Assuming only minor changes are necessary to run a Silverlight app on the desktop, the differences are in implementation details. Silverlight is a .NET-space framework based on WPF. Flash/Flex/AIR are proprietary Adobe products based on ActionScript.
In terms of capability, they seem to be roughly equal with complementary strenghts and weaknesses. Example: SL3 will have GPU and pixel shader support. The latest Flash as Inverse Kinematics. Different strokes, etc.
From the users standpoint I like the Silverlight installation process a lot more... Specially on the Mac - Air app installation is unnatural (to many clicks and processbars) but oneclick Silverlight install is nice :)