I've an embedded system which runs firmware and has USB mass storage with size 79kB. So when you plug in the device to any computer(MAC/Windows), it pops as a 79kB flash drive. The firmware creates files which has transaction records. The objective is to display these transactions (tables and simple graphs) to the user. I've narrowed down to a web browser. So the user (with MAC/Windows PC) can plug in the USB device mass storage and open an HTML file in the mass storage drive and view all the transactions in the form of tables and simple bar graphs. The tricky part comes here: the device(firmware) needs to update it's clock, and this time input has to be sourced from the MAC/Windows PC. How can this be achieved?
This is the minimum requirement. Further, through the web browser the user wants to write some configuration parameters for e.g. through a text box and a submit button in the HTML page.
NOTE: Here the device has USB mass storage type and the web browser approach were selected so that there is no prerequisites for the user.
Please suggest an alternative if this can be done using another approach for e.g. a different class of USB or some other application locally available on MAC/Windows desktop/laptop. For e.g. the application should run on both on Mac and Windows i.e. the code should be the same but can be built into separate packages one for Mac and the other (.exe) for Windows. Please suggest a platform for this that has same source but can be built for both mac and windows. Thanks!
As far as I know, there is no way a web browser could write to a file. If such a thing was possible, it would be a huge security issue.
You have to write a piece of native software to do all the tasks you name. That can be done in pretty much any programming language, and if you're developing embedded systems I reckon you must have some experience in programming.
I'm looking at doing something similar and have an idea, though you may be better equipped to run with it than I am. Have the define contain a directory called "SET_DATE" with files "YEAR15" through "YEAR99", "MON01" through "MON12", "DATE01" through "DATE31", "H00" through "H23", "M00" through "M59", "S00" through "S59", and "SET"; each such file should start at a different sector, though none of the sectors in question need to contain any data (they need not physically be stored anywhere). To set the date to July 4, 2020 at 12:34:56pm, read the following files in sequence:
SET_DATE/YEAR20
SET_DATE/MONTH07
SET_DATE/DATE04
SET_DATE/H12
SET_DATE/M34
SET_DATE/S56
SET_DATE/SET
The last access should cause the unit to set its clock. If a user might want to set the clock more than once, that could be accommodated by either having a bunch of essentially-identical directories under SET_DATE (so setting the date the first time would use SET_DATE/00/YEAR20, the second time SET_DATE/01/YEAR20, etc.) and/or having the drive unmount/remount itself if necessary to clear out any caching.
I would think it unwise to have directory fetches trigger actions, since Windows or an anti-virus tool might decide to pre-cache all the directories in a drive when it is mounted. I would not expect Windows or a browser to eagerly load files, however, so I would think one could have read accesses trigger actions.
Related
I am wondering if someone knows the best method for storing data in a global DB against a mobile device (iOS and Android)?
I am building an app that writes/retrieves information based on a query however I need to know if any of the records returned were sent from that device.
Basically the idea is that if a user submits some information (which is stored in the DB) they gain access to additional features of the app. When the app is launched, I will check the DB to see if they submitted information in the past and allow access to other areas.
I use local storage for the information they submitted but also store remotely so if the local storage becomes corrupted for any reason there is still a record of the information the user submitted.
The ID needs to be unique to the device as there could be 100 of users (hoping for millions) so the ID needs to be unique enough that it will never conflict with another device. Any information submitted will be available for retrieval by all other users.
Thanks :)
There are three options as I see it:
1. User
You can create a typical username + password user scheme and use this to verify the user. A possible advantage of this method would be that the user can log in from any of their devices (for instance, under your method a user using the app from their iPhone and iPad would have two different views - which you may not want). Of course, this means forcing every user of the app to register within your system, which is not ideal.
2. App Install
You can uniquely identify an app install by having your app generate a UUID the first time that the app is run (you can use an AS3 helper library to generate the UUID). You can store this UUID locally and send it along with every request the app makes. The downside to this approach is that it doesn't uniquely identify the device - only a specific app install. For instance, if the user deletes the app and then reinstalls it at a later point, it will now count as a new unique device, even though the user is on the same device.
3. Device
AIR does not have a built-in way of reading device identifying info. However, you can retrieve device info through AIR Native Extensions, for example this one can get the MAC address and some other things. There are privacy concerns and other issues involved in reading and storing device info such as these, so you are probably best served trying to implement the OpenUDID project as an AIR Native Extension, since they have already dealt with all such issues. Unfortunately, I have never looked too far into developing ANE's so I am not sure how complicated or feasible it will be to turn OpenUDID into an ANE.
Summary: I would recommend the app install method due to the ease of implementation. If you really need the unique device and are worried about the multiple app installs case, you will have to work out how to use native extensions to get the info you need. If you decide that you would rather identify by user rather than device, use the user method.
As of now I don't think its possible to get the hardware devices guid using air mobile. However you do have a couple of options.
If the MAC address is good enough for you there is an ANE that will let you grab it on both iOS and Android.
http://www.adobe.com/devnet/air/native-extensions-for-air/extensions/networkinfo.html
and an example of how to use it
http://cookbooks.adobe.com/post_Getting_NetworkInfo_from_both_Android_and_iOS-19473.html
You could also write your own ANE, it should be pretty simple to wrap both Android and iOS implementations.
Objective-c: [[UIDevice currentDevice] uniqueIdentifier]
Android: TelephonyManager.getDeviceId()
If your app requires any kind of user account or login the best option would be to store this setting in the remote db.
I need an offline caching system where my app can store about 0.5 MB of data. It is preferred that there is no interaction required by the user, but small amount of user interaction might be acceptable
Currently, Microsoft's Silverlight is being used to store data offline. It is a large download for the plugin, and not installed as standard on most machines.
I have been considering cookies - but they are far too volatile. I can imagine numerous reasons someone might clear their browser cache and lose all their data.
I am not sure about HTML 5 storage, and how volatile it is in practice.
I have been looking into flash, which is installed on over 97% of windows computers. It seems I can load data from a user selected file, and save data to a user selected file.
My questions...
How big is the microsoft silverlight plugin download (in MB) for windows? (I think about 8mb, but did not get clear answer from the internet)
How can users accidentally (or deliberately without realizing the consequence) clear their HTML 5 storage on common browsers?
Is there a way to get flash to store or load data from local files without user interaction?
Is there another alternative I have not considered?
Well you could use Flash shared Object storage, which will allow between 0 and unlimited space. Check this settings panel for details of your own settings to get a better idea of what I mean.
http://www.macromedia.com/support/documentation/en/flashplayer/help/settings_manager03.html
Of course this does mean that the user will have to allow third party flash content to be stored locally, which is the default. Also the default storage space is 100KB, with the user being prompted to allow for a larger amount unless they have previously increased the default themselves. So that's a small draw back, but still workable.
I am not sure how you would access the shared object from within a silverlight app, as I have only used it via a Flash swf. I will do some digging around using javascript and get back to you on that.
Also there is another post that may help you:
Javascript bridge to Flash to store SO "cookies" within flash
It sounds like what you need is isolated storage.
I use it with all my silverlight apps and it couldn't be easier to use. With only a few calls you can store and retrieve data programatically.
Edit: I was thinking that your app is already programmed in Silverlight. What is your app programmed in? Is it simply HTML/CSS at the moment?
For storing data offline WebApp can use:
session storage, "advanced version of cookies"
key/value based Web Storage (AKA local/global/offline/DOM storage)
sql-based Web SQL Database (deprecated) and Indexed Database API
FileReader and FileWriter API (requires user to select files each time the application loads)
But apparently there is no File Storage. Of course, there is a manifest-based caching, but it's just a cache and is not supposed to be used as a user data storage.
Does it mean that the user of WebApp is forced to use some sort of a cloud file storage?
Is there any way to save large files on user's local machine? Or maybe some way to select a local folder web application can use to store user data?
Edit. Security. HTML5 already has the ability to write big portions of data to user's local machine. I don't see any security issues if a browser will provide another, file-based abstraction to store data. It can be some virtual machine, virtual filesystem, whatever.
Hm, I think, it is possible to write JS filesystem and store it as a blob in SQL...
Similar questions.
Update:
Hm... recently I've found this and this. Maybe it is what I'm looking for... Yes, it is! See the answer below.
At last, I've found it! Here's the answer:
I’ll have the DOMFileSystem with a side of read/write access please wrote:
Eric Uhrhane of Google has been
working on the working draft of the
File API: Directories and System specification which defines a set of
APIs to create a sandboxed filesystem
where a web app can read and write
data to.
Wow! I'm so excited!
Why not use localStorage while the user is editing a document and the FileWriter API when they want to save it to disk? Most people are used to seeing a save dialog pop up when saving a document.
The only scenario I can think of that warrants userless access to the FileWriter API is an autosave feature, but autosaving to localStorage can be just as good.
There is a way to save relatively large files to a users hard drive if you are willing to use Flash. Look into Downloadify:
http://www.bitrepository.com/downloadify-client-side-file-generation.html
Downloadify allows you to send data to a SWF and have that SWF create a file on the users machine. My recommendation would be to store the data via one of the methods you listed, Webstorage, sqlite database, etc. Put all your assets, including the SWF in the manifest file so everything is cached locally to the browser. You can then pull information from your db or webstorage and use the SWF to create the files you need.
I'm not sure if you will be able to read these files back into your web application.
Another option to save data is by using link tags with the data URI scheme. However, I'm not sure if it is supported in all the major browsers at the moment.
For security reasons you can't write files to a user's local filesystem in case it gets used for nefarious purposes by evil people.
That's not likely to change, and that's a good thing.
The HTML5 FileSystem API started landing in Chrome 8 and is fairly complete as of now (Chrome 11).
There's a nice tutorial on it here: http://www.html5rocks.com/tutorials/file/filesystem/
http://fsojs.com wraps the FileSystem API effectively, if you want an easy solution
As mentioned by others here, the FileWriter and FileSystem APIs can be used to store files on a client's machine from the context of a browser tab/window.
However, there are several things pertaining to these APIs which you should be aware of:
Implementations of the APIs currently exist only in Chromium-based browsers (Chrome & Opera)
Both of the APIs were taken off of the W3C standards track on April 24, 2014, and as of now are proprietary
Removal of the (now proprietary) APIs from implementing browsers in the future is a possibility
A sandbox (a location on disk outside of which files can produce no effect) is used to store the files created with the APIs
A virtual file system (a directory structure which does not necessarily exist on disk in the same form that it does when accessed from within the browser) is used represent the files created with the APIs
IsolatedStorage, which hasn't been mentioned as of yet, also allows for file i/o from a tab/window context, but it is made available through solely through Silverlight and requires the use of managed code to access. It, like FileSystem, also exists in a sandbox and makes use of a virtual file system.
Given the high market penetration of both Chromium-based browsers and Silverlight (support for which, interestingly enough has been dropped by such browsers), you may find a solution which uses the first of the above approaches available on a client machine satisfactory.
BakedGoods, a Javascript library that establishes a uniform interface that can be used to conduct common storage operations in all native (including FileSystem), and some non-native (including IsolatedStorage) storage facilities, is an example of such a solution:
//Write file to first of either FileSystem or IsolatedStorage
bakedGoods.set({
data: [{key: "testFile", value: "Hello world!", dataFormat: "text/plain"}],
storageTypes: ["fileSystem", "silverlight"],
options: {fileSystem:{storageType: Window.PERSISTENT}},
complete: function(byStorageTypeStoredItemRangeDataObj, byStorageTypeErrorObj){}
});
Just for the sake of complete transparency, BakedGoods is maintained by this guy right here :) .
I have an application that people use through Remote Desktop/Terminal Server. The application supports digital signatures. Well, the digital signature pad is on the client, but the program runs on the server. The signature pad also does not support being shared as a device through Remote Desktop(not listed with "Supported Plug And Play Devices" in local resources).
What is the best way of being able to send the signature to the server from the client machine? Preferably with having the least amount of setup for the users(there are a lot of clients and a fair amount of servers this must be done for)
My best idea so far is sharing the clipboard and using it to send messages from server to client(with the client application "polling" the clipboard for a special clipboard format) I feel like this may not be very fast or stable though as I don't think Remote Desktop was designed for it.
Also, we are open to [reasonable] language choices like C/C++, C#, Delphi(the application is written in this), etc. Also, the signature pad is a Topaz TS460(connects by USB).
Can anyone give me ideas on how this can be done or if the clipboard idea of mine is probably the best?
tl;dr: What is the best way of sending an image from a client to a server through remote desktop?
Update:
Well, I've done a bit of testing with plain ASCII text(I can't get files to transfer) and it seems that there is problems copying large amounts of text. I tried copying 43M of text and after a long period of waiting I just got an empty clipboard(Like it did a paste, but there was no text pasted) I was able to transfer about 2M of data though (at decent speeds) between server and client, so this may be feasible for signature images(which will be either jpeg or png compressed)
Have you looked into using Remote Desktop Virtual Channels? http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa383509(VS.85).aspx
for topaz signature pad and credit card swiper you will need the serial type. It will work, already tried it. but I guess this question is too old for me to answer. Does IPAD as well as well as other tablets work on terminal and citrix setup?
I have not tried with Remote Desktop, but one thing that comes to mind is installing a good macro tool on the client. AutoHotKey ( http://www.autohotkey.com/ ) is a free tool that lets you create runable scripts that can do things like open applications and send key strokes to them.
I'm not sure how well it would work with remote desktop, but I know for certain that you can easily setup a script that would launch an application, send it "key strokes" to generate data, copy the data to the clipboard, switch to another application and then paste in the data.
When AutoHotKey is installed, you have the option of associating the file types of the scripts with the app so that end users could just double click your scripts desktop icon to run it. No command line messyness for them.
If all you need to do is transfer an amount of data (a file) from the client to the server it is fairly easy. Polling for a file seems also more logical as polling via the clipboard.
When you connect the client should enable sharing a harddisk (at least one). You can specify the options every time you connect, or you can send the client a .RDP file that is preconfigured.
If you can get the user to put the file on a fixed position, you can access the file C:\Shared \File.jpg using a path like \tsclient\c\Shared\File.jpg.
Here's an explanation (with nice screenshot) how to copy files with Remote Desktop:
http://www.jakeludington.com/ask_jake/20051218_copying_files_with_remote_desktop.html
I wasn't sure if your question rules already out this approach or not.
Consider the following scanning procedure in a typical document handling webapp:
The user scans a document using a scanner connected to his/her computer
The scanned image is saved locally on the user's computer as a BMP/JPG/TIF/PNG file
The user hits a file upload "Browse.." button in the web application
The user is presented with a file dialog which he/she uses to locate the scanned image
The user hits "Upload image" and the scanned image is uploaded to the server where it is stored
This process is quite complicated and I'd like to reduce the number of steps in order to make the process more user friendly/fool proof. Under ideal circumstances the above steps would be replaced with only one step in which the procedure initiate document scanning, complete document scanning and upload resulting image is automatically triggered from the webapp when clicking say "Scan and upload". Unfortunely it seems like the state of "web/scanner integration" is quite poor so this might be utopia.
How would you tackle this problem? More specifically, how would you go about reducing the number steps involve in the use-case described?
Well, two years have passed, so here's an update on the state of the art for those just joining us.
Both Dynamsoft and Atalasoft have multi-browser web-scanning toolkits which are compatible with any server-side stack. Both require the user to install an ActiveX (in IE) or an NPAPI plugin (Chrome, Firefox, etc.) to get access to the scanner via the TWAIN API.
Obviously if you have the time or a limited budget, you can create your own plugin. I heartily recommend the FireBreath plugin framework, and any TWAIN library rather than writing your own TWAIN code.
Once the ActiveX or plugin is installed, the rest of the work is a combination of javascript & HTML on the client, and some kind of handler on the server to accept and process the incoming image, which can be made to look just like a multipart form submit with an attached file.
I recommend doing the image upload in javascript using AJAX, because it is then part of the same browser 'session' as the web page, and it inherits the browser's proxy settings, session cookies and server-side authentication. I don't know about Dynamsoft's control, the Atalasoft toolkit includes such AJAX uploading. The image(s) are handed from the plugin to the javascript as a base64-encoded string, so no local file is actually created.
Disclaimer: I work on Atalasoft's WingScan web-scanning toolkit.
If your target audience is running Windows and IE, and you don't mind spending a few $$, Atalasoft has some components that will do just what you're looking for.
I actually saw someone at the bank do this while setting up my account and I was totally amazed. Bank in question was using Windows and IE, I assume your in an equally controlled environment. I think the bank used a combination of a custom/ predictable scanner driver and an ActiveX control.
A page loaded which said "Open the scanner" the staff member popped the document in and hit Scan on the webpage, then the page changed to say Scanning, then it showed the scanned document on the web page for the staff member to Approve. I can only assume that the scanner driver send the image to a certain location and the active X control was polling for it to appear, once it appeared it showed the image on screen, once the staff member had approved it the active x uploaded it in the background. She opened the next page and carried on with the rest of the process.
God knows how they made all that tech work but it can be done.
Silverlight 4 is coming out soon. It is supposed to have the ability to interact with COM objects on the user's computer (provided they are running Windows). In theory you call WIA methods from your Silverlight web page.
We implemented a solution to implement Remote Deposit for a bank. It works only in IE. A winforms dll was created that interfaces with LeadTools TWAIN dll. Leadtools TWAIN dll abstracts all the TWAIN minutae. This approach is slighly better than using an ActiveX control. .NET Framework would be needed on client. The scanned images are posted back to a hidden variable on the page and are processed on the server.
Hmm, I've always wanted to look at a scanned file before I did anything with it, but I suppose that depends on your scanner and how much quality you need.
If the goal is to "automate the scanning and uploading process" as opposed to "write a web app", I'd write an AutoIt script to control the existing scanner software and a simple ftp program.
The option most likely to remove the most steps, would probably be writing a customized scan utility that the user would download and run on their local machine.
SANE or TWAIN would handle getting the scanned image. cURL could than handle uploading the image to your web app. To make things even easier for the end user, I would use something like a Comet connection to update the web page when the file was available.
If that isn't an option, you might look into seeing what options your users will likely have using their scanners software. I believe many programs now support scanning to email or ftp.
The solution I have used for an intranet app, using multifunction scanner/copiers was to scan to an SMB share that the web server had access to. The user just goes to the copier scans to the share and when they get back to their desk, they go to the new scans page which shows a list of all the new unprocessed files.
Since your audience is controlled environment, You can write your own browser extension/program based on WIA/TWAIN that does the scanning. If you choose browser extensions such as BHO/ActiveX/XPCOM, etc, you need get the user's permission to install your extension. If you choose to write a program you may need web deployment technologies like ClickOnce or Java Web Start to be launched from web.
Interfacing TWAIN is a pain on Windows. Complexity aside, you have to display some GUI written by different scanner driver developers. It may be the only way to support old scanners or features not exposed via other interfaces like full-speed multipage scans from a document feeder.
Microsoft's WIA makes interfacing with scanner much easier with a scripting object model, however scanner-specific features are not available and some old scanners do not support the interface.
After scanning you can call a web service to notify the server and the web page can refresh periodically to check new images.
We have done something similar. we used a command-line TWAIN program (http://www.burrotech.com/quickscan.php). $$ $49
1) We developed a small .Net application to run the QuickScan program as a shell command.
2) The command was assigned to the Scan button.
3) Once the user presses on the scan button, a prompt will appear to enter the file name. The user saves the transaction Id as the file name.
4) Another .Net application (or maybe the same mentioned before) will read this file and upload it into database considering that the filename is the transaction ID.
Worked like a warm knife in butter!
You can try displaying the transaction ID into IE, user to select the ID then presses Scan. Your application will read the SELECTED text and save the file using the SELECTED text as the file name. We havne't tried it but it should work.
It is only utopia if you think that web applications are limited to web browsers, in fact, web applications can include a lot of different technologies, besides HTML and Javascript.
The cool way of solving that problem -- in fact, I already used that for some usbserial devices -- is to implement your application using SOAP+XMPP. You can do that in Perl by using XML::CompileX::Transport::SOAPXMPP, Catalyst::Engine::XMPP2, Catalyst::Controller::SOAP and Catalyst::Model::SOAP.
The interesting thing about using XMPP is that it simplifies the management of addressing, since you use the JID (Jabber ID) to look for the software agent, not some host+port addressing schema. The second interesting part of using XMPP is to more easily support the server pushing information to the client.
But if you don't want to handle XMPP you still can do the same thing with a lightweight embedded http server -- HTTP::Server::Simple, in Perl -- and somehow register the current scanner address in the server so it can call back.
And a last option, which is not so cute, is to have the software agent polling the server to see when there is a "scan document and upload" order for that specific machine and realize that operation when that is present.
In summary, having a local software agent to interact with the local hardware doesn't make your webapp less "web", as long as you use web standards -- like XML, SOAP and others -- to perform that communication.
You can put a Java applet in your website. This can access the scanner and send the data via REST to your web server.