| Views: 6028 |
Report
|
This is the best article I've found online about the best desktop widget platforms: [Source: Yahoo Blogs]
The Ever-Changing Widget Landscape
January 29th, 2007
The world of Widgets has changed a lot since Konfabulator came along back in 2003, when it was the only option of its kind for developers. Since then, similar offerings have emerged from several places, including Apple, and tomorrow, Microsoft as part of Vista. It has grown to such a point that Newsweek is proclaiming 2007 as the Year of the Widget.
Speaking of Vista, I should point out that our current release (Yahoo! Widget Engine 3.1) runs very well on it. That means you have over 3,700 Yahoo! Widgets ready and waiting to be unleashed on Vista tomorrow. But I digress:
Arlo and Perry created Konfabulator because they wanted to build cool stuff but found the available options lacking. Ever since, our product roadmap has been driven primarily by the needs of our Widget developers — trying to give them the tools to create compelling experiences. And with all the new options available, there’s never been a more exciting time to be a Widget developer. But, it’s also a more complicated world than when we were the only choice. So in the spirit that has always driven Konfabulator — helping developers build cool stuff, here’s our (pretty darned candid) view of the landscape and some advice on choosing the solution that best meets your needs.
So, which Widget platform should you use?.
The simple answer to that question is “it depends”.
What are you trying to accomplish? How much (or little) power do you need? Will it be a web-only Widget, or will it run on the desktop? Do you have existing code you want (or need) to reuse? All of these factors can influence your decision.
First, let’s address web Widgets
There are two major categories of Widgets: web Widgets and desktop Widgets. Web Widgets run inside a web page and are also known as “modules” or “badges”. Web Widgets allow anyone to create their own website “mash-ups” by embedding content from one site into a page on another site. These types of Widgets are completely based on browser technologies — HTML, Flash, etc. And while they have been around in various forms for a while, the use of the term “Widget” to refer to these web page modules is relatively new. Widget has (at least since Konfabulator’s introduction) conventionally meant a desktop-based mini-application that shows discrete information, often connected to the Internet. And, it is these types of Widgets that I want to delve into more today. So, if what you want to create is something that can be embedded in a personalized homepage, profile or blog, then you can probably stop reading now.
Why choose a desktop Widget?
The advantages of a desktop Widget over a web Widget include:
Lives outside of the browser
Access to local resources
Potential for offline use & background downloading
Greater interaction with the rest of the system through standard desktop interaction.
Desktop Widgets blur the line between the web and the desktop by pulling the content out of the browser and integrating it into your desktop.
Within the world of desktop Widgets there are several choices.
Apple Dashboard
Microsoft Windows Vista Sidebar
Google Desktop Gadgets
Yahoo! Widgets (Konfabulator)
(There are also some less mainstream desktop options and some emerging solutions that are attempting to bridge desktop and web. But for the sake of not making this a novel, I’m going to stick to the top four in this post.)
Apple and Microsoft each took the approach of using their native web browsers to implement their Widget environments. Google’s Desktop gadgets and Yahoo! Widgets use their own proprietary XML formats and rendering engines. Each approach has its pros and cons, so let’s take a quick look at both.
Apple Dashboard / Microsoft Windows Vista Sidebar
The Apple/Microsoft approach can be very appealing. By using their native browsers, these companies could build a Widget engine without having to invent anything new.
Pros:
If you have existing code for a web page, it’s fairly easy to adjust it to run in these Widget environments.
You can use special objects in Javascript to get at the underlying system.
DHTML is easy to learn and work with.
You can take existing AJAX libraries and use them right off the shelf.
There are many HTML authoring tools available. Apple has a brand-new DashCode IDE for writing Dashboard widgets, which is actually pretty slick (and mercifully not related to my arch-nemesis, XCode).
Cons:
Each Widget is a full-on web page, and can take a significant amount of system resources.
Strong ties to the OS. While this has some advantages, the downside is that Apple’s widgets will only run on Macs and Microsoft’s gadgets will only run on Vista.
Google Desktop Gadgets
Google is currently using custom XML file and object model. Their object model is not based on W3C standards, but is their own custom creation.
Pros:
Fairly easy to understand if you know HTML.
Not constrained by HTML model.
Can use either Javascript or Visual Basic.
Better platform ties: drag/drop support, etc.
You can use their Gadget Designer development tool to aid in writing your gadget.
Not very resource intensive.
Cons:
Still fairly limited in its abilities compared to other engines, particularly in the presentation layer.
Interface is filled with update flashes and jerky motions. This is somewhat out of place in today’s world of the highly polished Mac OS X and Vista interfaces.
Requires download of entire Google Desktop package to run.
In its current form, positioned as more of a consumer product than a platform for developers. So, it’s more like developing a plug-in for someone else’s product than creating your own experience.
No Mac OS X support
Yahoo! Widgets (nee Konfabulator)
We also use an XML file format and a home-grown rendering engine. In the past, our object model was not W3C standards-based, but over time we’ve been creeping in that direction. I believe this helps us get more traction from those who are familiar with DHTML programming.
Pros :
Largest addressable audience. We’re the only cross-OS Widgets platform — Mac OS X, Win 2000, Win XP, and now Windows Vista.
We are not hamstrung by web standards (although we adopt them when possible, e.g XMLHttpRequest). This gives us flexibility to produce Widgets and platform features that truly take advantage of the desktop.
Easy to write for. While we aren’t as familiar as DHTML, we are just as easy to code for. Our API is less “techie” than other offerings, making it more accessible to more people.
Powerful design, animation, and interaction facilities — based on 5 years of developer feedback.
Slick tie-ins with the platforms we run on — features like drag and drop, open and save dialogs, etc.
Much more application-like environment than DHTML or Google gadgets. It’s easy to write Widgets with multiple windows, for example. DHTML engines can create new windows on the fly, but each window is its own little HTML world. In contrast, all of the windows can see one another in our Widgets, so sharing information across windows is easy. A good example of this in action is our Picture Frame Widget when you are managing your Flickr photos.
Cons:
You need to learn our XML language vs. DHTML, so it’s marginally less accessible to those who already know DHTML.
Since we don’t own an OS, our platform requires a one-time download of components. We’re working on making this much more streamlined.
To be frank, our current version (3.1) consumes a fair bit of resources. We hear this feedback loud and clear from our developers and users, and I think they will like what they see in our upcoming release.
Lack of video support.
And in conclusion:
The takeaway from all of this is that DHTML is great for those people who only care about one platform, or have a strong needs or desires to use DHTML. It’s familiar and fairly simple. Plus, these systems are built-into the OS, so no extra software is required. But the resources required to drive such a Widget can be a bit excessive, and you’re limited to the one platform.
The Google approach is more in line with ours in terms of technology, but it’s Windows only. Also, the model is more like a plug-in than a mini-application, and it seems (at least to me) that there is less room for artistic or brand expression.
Yahoo! Widgets is cross platform and has the most desktop Widgets available over 4,000 across all OS’s). You can write your Widget once and reach the largest possible audience. We aren�t as familiar as HTML, but we make up for it with features that help generate some of the coolest Widgets around thanks to our powerful presentation layer. We know we have some areas we need to work on, but that’s exactly what we’ve been doing over the past few months. Our next release will really change the way users perceive Widgets, and I can’t wait to get it out there.
I hope that sheds a little light on the different technologies available today. Rest assured, we’re still cranking on new features in our own engine, as I’m sure others are. So, look for a lot of exciting thing to happen in this space over the next year!
About this poster:
Posted by:
Bones
(male, mid-30s)
(Posted 3/9/08)
|
Post your review
Responses (0)
Related Posts
|
|
Responses (0)
|
|
|
Best Desktop Widgets
