Beyond Construct 2: Exporters

Hello all,

On this thread you may post your favorite exporters or other exporters that are not in the export dialogue. (As in the fact that they are not shown in the export dialogue.) Any platforms of exporters can be submitted.

Well I remember someone trying to do a wrapper based on node.js and firefox, not sure how it went in the end, nor if it added any functionnalities (after all, a wrapper is useful when it adds something).

Just for reference, it was here (not in english):

http://www.pascalsengler.fr/construct/f ... c587bedb46

Afaik, it had the advantage of not using the unfair XP gpu blacklisting that node webkit had.

We're always on the lookout for new ways to publish, but most of the alternatives we see have some significant caveat that make it a better idea to use one of the existing ones in C2. If there were any alternatives that were really compelling, we'd add them in to C2.

Aphrodite - note C2 has forced GPU acceleration enabled on Windows in node-webkit for several releases now.

Ashley

What's your opinion on atom shell? In a way it's similar to nw, but uses a different approach.

My initial test were ok, but i've just created a simple test C2 app and packaged it. I'm satisfied with nw, but it's always nice to have an alternative.

JohnnySheffield - it doesn't look like it does anything node-webkit doesn't already do, and NW also has the backing of Intel. So I don't see much point in supporting something else that does the same thing unless there's some kind of major problem with NW.

We're always on the lookout for new ways to publish, but most of the alternatives we see have some significant caveat that make it a better idea to use one of the existing ones in C2. If there were any alternatives that were really compelling, we'd add them in to C2.

Aphrodite - note C2 has forced GPU acceleration enabled on Windows in node-webkit for several releases now.

Well having a non systematic blacklist on XP and Vista but still some blacklisting rather than a total disabling of GPU was the point also, but I agreee that it does not seem that useful otherwise.

JohnnySheffield I wonder, does atom has potential for more low level interactions with the operating system compared to node webkit?

Aphrodite

Not really, both rely on nodejs+chrome. Main difference is the approach on mixing those two. In nw, starting point is a .html file ; in atom-shell you start with a .js file and create a window from there. Atom-shell is backed up by github, so it won't go away any time soon. Fun thing is that top contributor (zcbenz) to atom-shell is also the second top contributor to nw. Almost as if he created his own, better version of nw with hook... khm... easier build process and context management. Anyhow, for now i'm with node-webkit, i just threw this outhere because i think it would be wise to watch how things develop further down the road.

Also; not sure in what do you mean with more low-level interactions. Node can do low-level quite good... Can you expand on this?

JohnnySheffield I meant functionnalities like loading a .bat for exemple, or a more direct control of memory (this I would think not, due to the same base on chromium)

I know node webkit does not have this possibility last time I checked (security reasons sure, but who knows, maybe someone would have liked to access such possibilities), but I may be wrong as I never use wrappers anyway.

Aphrodite

Oh noes, you got it wrong! Basic idea and the whole point of node-webkit is to get low-access to so from a browser-like environment! That's why it's so great, nothing stops you from executing any kind* of system code.

You can execute all kinds of fun stuff, even with built in C2 plugins; when need arises look into nodewebkit plugin, action "run file". You can use that to execute a .bat file!

*for some things you'll need acquire system/user permission.

Ashley

Have you heard of bitballoon? It seems like it is a html5 website hosting platform... Here is the link for it: https://www.bitballoon.com/

Hope this can help!