Just a question, not really to the Vibrant but it's the phone I have.
Anyways, at school (tech dept) we use a program that we use for job requests. We can use the client or a web based version. but the Web Based requires IE to work properly. I tried loading it on the Dolphin but it doesn't seem to work on that or the Default browser. Is there anyway to get this to work on Andy?
We are looking to get Android Tablets for the techs and would like to use it.
Really biggest question is... is the site coded in asp (.Net derivative or otherwise)...
Second would be, are you ALLOWED to edit the source to comment out the IE requirement. (Assuming the site does browser detection).
Honestly, doubt you could make it work easily.... Unless the webclient doesnt do browser detection and its just on paper "IE only".
I'm in the same boat, IE only webapp (.net and ajax). I use PocketCloud vnc app to remote into a windows box and run it that way. Works well for me.
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
Haxel said:
Really biggest question is... is the site coded in asp (.Net derivative or otherwise)...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How is that a factor?
ASP, ASP.NET, et. al .NET back-end frameworks, don't require IE.
lol
Teamviewer is another app that works awesome as well. Just install Teamveiwer android app and teamviewer on your computer and you will be able to remote in without much difficulty.
Basically what we want to do is have the tablets and be able to use the web based version of the app to push things out to comptuers/look up work orders. The program is called Altiris. So third party apps like Teamviewer wouldn't be needed.
From Altiris we can push updates, programs via scripts to all computers on the domain, and apparently the app requires IE.. I don't have the exact details. I have emailed our lead guy working with Altiris to see if we can edit the tag for IE requirement or changing the browser check, havent' heard anything yet.
EDIT: Sorry for being kind of vague and short on the OP.
We use Alteris at my company as well and from a user perspective it is one painful app to have to deal with. When it scans the computer it slows down the user computer like nothing else.
presence06 said:
Basically what we want to do is have the tablets and be able to use the web based version of the app to push things out to comptuers/look up work orders. The program is called Altiris. So third party apps like Teamviewer wouldn't be needed.
From Altiris we can push updates, programs via scripts to all computers on the domain, and apparently the app requires IE.. I don't have the exact details. I have emailed our lead guy working with Altiris to see if we can edit the tag for IE requirement or changing the browser check, havent' heard anything yet.
EDIT: Sorry for being kind of vague and short on the OP.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sounds like it's using active directory roles to do various things via built-in windows mechanisms.
A start would be to authenticate your device on the domain. No idea where to begin with that, though.
What mrxela was probably trying to say is that it could be using ActiveX. Do you know if this is the case?
Ian
It's kind a pain, esepeically when it goes down. But it is useful.
ipugh said:
How is that a factor?
ASP, ASP.NET, et. al .NET back-end frameworks, don't require IE.
lol
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
... oh lol your telling me a joke right? Your giving me a question then guessing answer to it... that must be your intent.
Based on coding, Firefox for various reasons does not acknowledge the "shortcuts" in code (usually the main reason asp sites do not work in FF, or "undocumented" microsoft api calls). Other browsers have similar issues, or may have a different issue with the same piece of code. Any more detail than that serves no purpose. So yes, ASP, ASP.NET and the framework can REQUIRE/ONLY work in IE. Thats why it is a factor.
I'll report back with hopefully some answers to these questions
Haxel said:
... oh lol your telling me a joke right? Your giving me a question then guessing answer to it... that must be your intent.
Based on coding, Firefox for various reasons does not acknowledge the "shortcuts" in code (usually the main reason asp sites do not work in FF, or "undocumented" microsoft api calls). Other browsers have similar issues, or may have a different issue with the same piece of code. Any more detail than that serves no purpose. So yes, ASP, ASP.NET and the framework can REQUIRE/ONLY work in IE. Thats why it is a factor.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You are unequivocally incorrect.
To say that IE is more lenient on various standards is one thing, but to describe it in such a fashion that you have is completely wrong.
A browser is not making "api" calls to "undocumented" Microsoft libraries. lol.. Further, a browser is interpreting markup that is controlled by the developer. As far as I know, there are no back-end frameworks that limit or control what markup you generate.
This has zero to do with Microsoft, and a lot to do with browser-specific javascript or markup, etc.
But really, you're incorrect and to purport your answer as being a solution or a reason is not only wrong, but could potentially derail his efforts.
Ian
I wish I had more info on altiris, we reviewed it about 2 years ago and went with Landesk and SCCM combo. I dont remember much about it, if its AD integrated you may have other issues to add on to your plate along with the browser detection.
I might be able to find the old install CD on our share and see, but wouldnt be until Monday that I could go to the office to find it.
ipugh said:
You are unequivocally incorrect.
To say that IE is more lenient on various standards is one thing, but to describe it in such a fashion that you have is completely wrong.
A browser is not making "api" calls to "undocumented" Microsoft libraries. lol
This has zero to do with Microsoft, and a lot to do with browser-specific javascript or markup, etc.
But really, you're incorrect and to purport your answer as being a solution or a reason is not only wrong, but could potentially derail his efforts.
Ian
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
oooh you must be a programmer, thats great. Over thinking is a programmers strong point. I have to fix that kind of stuff all the time. Up until later in the posting you didnt even know the software he was using.
As far as "undocumented api", you can embed .NET applications into the site (as you should know)... along with vbscript ect ect. Which with proprietary software they can/have added such in and gone OOPSIE DONT APPLY PATCH X OR IT WILL BREAK. (Which BTW is why some calls remain "undocumented" as microsoft is not sure they wish to keep it in the current form for whatever reason.) This can and does involve microsoft, or am I mistaken C# and the like is microsoft engineered and is using their own proprietary interpreter (.NET). Even if it is server side, the client side matters. Not to mention if it uses ActiveX...
I was giving the poor soul warning on speed bumps he MAY run across. Take it as you will. This wasnt an epeen contest.
Haxel said:
oooh you must be a programmer, thats great. Over thinking is a programmers strong point. I have to fix that kind of stuff all the time.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Engineer. And I correct people who are incorrect on a regular basis.
Ian
Just to clarify, I have the pleasure of having to use a web based in-house app built in CF, app was coded with to specifically check for firefox client and disallow any other clients. Yes, it can be changed fairly easy to work with other browsers, but that's on infinite back-burner...
Another set of web apps is built in .NET with third party ajax modules. It does not run a client check, but no browser except IE6 and above is able to even load these applications. .vb code behind does not exist so no one can even begin to touch anything without messing up another process.
VNC and desktop clients are your ray of hope when you are knee deep in doo doo!
The Web Address/website needs Active X and has a .cab file that gets installed to use the Altiris web client..
Bump.
So if this site requires Active X to run properly is there a way to run it on a different browser or in Stock Android Browser?
presence06 said:
Bump.
So if this site requires Active X to run properly is there a way to run it on a different browser or in Stock Android Browser?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Active X is a Microsoft only technology and IE is the only browser that supports it. There are ways to do most things that can be done with Active X using other client side technologies and in some cases plug-ins, but it requires more work and a larger support footprint on the part of the developer. If the developer does not support or provide a plug-in for your browser or have an alternate page that will do the same thing in javascript then you are going to be stuck with IE.
On the Android mobile platform having add-on or plug-in ability means either using Dophin HD, or Firefox Mobile (used to be Fennec). However, this is a moot point since it sounds like the developers have chosen not to support the platform.
This is where pressure from clients that have purchased their software comes in. With the right pressure they may add the ability or at least put it in the roadmap for a future version, but for right now you are most likely stuck with Internet Exploder.
Microsoft’s Bing team announced some significant changes and updates to Bing For Mobile. The core changes include better HTML5 support, better and faster image search, real-time transit and directions, iPhone app search, improvements to shopping, weather and movie search results.
The new interfaces and features currently work on all smartphone browsers that support HTML5, so that includes iPhone and Android devices but currently excludes Microsoft’s own Windows Phone 7 (until they add HTML5 support later this year) and Windows Mobile 6.5.
plapic said:
Microsoft’s Bing team announced some significant changes and updates to Bing For Mobile. The core changes include better HTML5 support, better and faster image search, real-time transit and directions, iPhone app search, improvements to shopping, weather and movie search results.
The new interfaces and features currently work on all smartphone browsers that support HTML5, so that includes iPhone and Android devices but currently excludes Microsoft’s own Windows Phone 7 (until they add HTML5 support later this year) and Windows Mobile 6.5.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'd argue that it's probably better on The iPhone and Android HTML5 supporting devices
So I was thinking about Google's I/O keynote recently and I've been wondering why the company is pushing tighter integration of Android with Chrome OS instead of Chrome Browser. The reason I ask this is b/c there's a real opportunity for Google to truly differentiate Android from iOS by making it accessible no matter what type of computer you use. If they only enhance accessibility from Chrome OS then it would be no different than Apple's continuity b/w iOS and Yosemite except that Apple sells a LOT more computers than Google.
Now if Google would have added these features to Chrome browser and we were able to text and/or answer calls from our browser, that would make Android a LOT more attractive as users wouldn't be handcuffed to any specific desktop OS. It would give Google a further reach and would provide those features to Windows, Mac and Linux users as well.
Is there a specific reason why these features (and others) could only be implemented in Chrome OS? I just felt like that was a significant missed opportunity for Google.
Hello.
I am here seeking for help and advice on how to approach the development of a security framework (via APP or via hacked Android ROM to be used by kids, that could be monitored by adults (parents or legal tutors).
The idea would be to develop a (white hat) hacked ROM, that would allow the kids to communicate with their friends, but also would allow their parents to supervise/monitor in real time what their children are doing, who are they communicating with and that way protect their children. The thing is not to spy on our kids, but to be able to check regularly if there is anything wrong going on with our kids (mobbing, insults or harassment). Kids aged (10-14) could be influenced by other kids, adults, or adults simulating being kids, and on some occasions they can be tricked to do things without their parents consent/knowledge that can lead to a tricky situation.
When I was a kid, we had the telephone (wired telephone, of course) on the middle of the hallway, so all our conversations were basically family-public. The truth is that there are not many secret things a 10yo kid could/should talk about, but nowadays, it could be a little bit worrying to lend a smartphone to a kid. I think it's just as letting a kid drive a car; he can do it right, or not be able to evaluate the whole consequences of driving a car.
Talking to other parents around me, they all found very interesting the idea of having a telephone that one could lend to their son, having the kid available all the time, and with the peace of mind that you could know what's going on. Of course the kid should be aware of this, and that the telephone comms are being supervised. I think it's no big deal. "Kid, it's very simple. The telephone is mine, and if you want to use it you have to use it under my terms".
Probably, all of us working for a company, have also our communications supervised, cannot make personal phonecalls with the company's telephones, probably cannot navigate to webs looking for personal content, and we asume those rules (because neither the company's phones nor the computers are ours but our company's). It's basically the same, switching the company-employee role to a father-son one.
So, let's get to the point (technically). I am a tech-geek, linux pro-user, have compiled a few ROMs just for personal use, but don't feel capable enough of starting a project of these magnitude alone. If there is anyone willing to help, opine, or whatever, will be very welcome.
First of all, APP or ROM? I basically think that the ROM is the way to go, but I'm asking just in case someone can convince me on the contrary. I will make a poll on this question.
APP An APP could be easily downloaded and installed but would require a rooted phone, and I don't see it clearly if an APP could resolve all the needed issues (access to communications for example) and could be fairly easily uninstalled too.
ROM On the other hand, a ROM would be trickier to uninstall (basically flashing another ROM) but wouldn't be as easy to install as an APP (though the installer model of cyanogenmod could be kind of a solution). There could be an universal (if possible) independent flashable module, over whatever android ROM, or an entire ROM solution.
Features that I want to develop in this ROM (by the way, I call it 'Vigilante ROM'):
Suitable for as many devices as possible
Web interface for parents available to see device-related information
Some hack-proof measures to avoid kids bypassing the ROM's security
Alerts triggered on some events (offensive words, whatever)
Position of the mobile -just in case-
Suitable for as many devices as possible
The first thing I though was what platform should be used for this ROM. To select Android over others (iOS, Blackberry, W7) was a no-brainer. Now, the question is should we use pure Android or make a CyanogenMod fork?
In my opinion, even though every phone maker has to supply their ROM sources publicly, they usually introduce so many modifications (HTC Sense, Samsung Touchwizz and so on) that it looks more difficult to develop a common security framework over each manufacturer's version of Android, rather than using a more standardized one like CyanogenMod.
CyanogenMod already works with a wide number of devices (and a wider one if you count the unofficial supported devices), I think CyanogenMod should be the base of this ROM. If all the 'things' needed could be flash on top of any Android device, would be even better, but technically I need help with this one.
I understand that basically there should be an internal proxy setup, so that all the communications go through this internal proxy, and based on the kind of communication, we could log whatever we need. For example:
Visited URLs
Whatsapp or other messaging apps should be decrypted
Incoming/Outgoing calls/SMS
Social network activity
I know the Whatsapp protocol because I'm familiar with a project called WhatAPI. The key point to be able to intercept whatsapp messaging is a key generated and exchanged during the app install (although there are ways to later ask the Whatsapp server to renegotiate this keyword) and that's used later to encrypt all the messages between the phone and the whatsapp server.
Web interface for parents available to see device-related information
Behind every kid with a smartphone there should be a responsible adult supervising the kid -even if it's remotely-. In my idea, logs of messaging activity, incoming/outgoing calls/SMS and even the position should be available to the supervisor through a web interface.
Some hack-proof measures to avoid kids bypassing the ROM's security
That's an easy one. CRC checks on some keyfiles would guarantee that the device is not being 'counter-hacked'. Some kids are also very techie, and we should make some defences against kids trying to hack (counter-hack?) the phone.
Alerts triggered on some events (offensive words, whatever)
It could be interesting if somehow the supervisor could receive a notification whenever the kid sends/receives and offensive word, or tries to enter some special tagged website.
I'm not saying Java apps are going to die but I feel that in the majority of cases, they are just not necessary anymore.
With responsive design, cloud computing and browser based push notifications, are we moving towards an era where mobile apps are going to reside in the browser?
This is already the case with desktops and laptops - heck, the only thing I don't do inside the browser, on my laptop, is code.
Let me know your thoughts