6 ms·

http://code.google.com/p/chromiumembedded/ http://code.google.com/p/chromiumembedded/ What's the main difference between this project and awesomium ?

by devmach 15y ago

sjs 15y ago
I'm not familiar with either project but a big one is that Awesomium has a C# and .NET API. That alone could be reason for some to choose it.
- adamkhrona 15y ago
  Indeed-- there's a lot of demand for this kind of component in .NET (especially considering the limitations of the built in WebBrowser class). Our .NET wrapper is open-source and up on GitHub: https://github.com/khrona/AwesomiumSharp https://github.com/khrona/AwesomiumSharp Btw, AwesomiumSharp has recently been re-written and now includes a drop-in WebControl component for WPF that you can hook up to your application with XAML. We're about to stage a major re-launch of the wrapper + new 1.6.2 SDK release in a couple days.
evmar 15y ago
(I am a Chrome developer.) As far as I know we've never heard from the Awesomium developers; they don't mention which version of Chrome they're based on which makes me suspect they're not staying in sync with trunk. That suspicion comes from the fact that the Chromium Embedded developer does participate in Chrome development -- to the extent that he keeps his project working -- and occasionally pops up on our mailing list discussing API changes that would benefit embedding. PS: wonder whether the Awesomium people are doing the right thing by WebKit's LGPL license, hmm...
- adamkhrona 15y ago
  I'm the main Awesomium developer-- the 1.6 branch is based off a stable revision from April 2010. We've recently updated to the latest Chromium trunk and will be launching an experimental, public build of our 1.7 branch soon. (Would have happened sooner but we've been focusing more on getting the library stable rather than absorbing new features.) By the way, we do participate in the development of Chromium (albeit, rather covertly in IRC), I personally have been a long-time lurker of the mailing-list since the first month it opened. :-) Regarding WebKit's (or, more specifically, WebCore's) LGPL license-- we've sought legal counsel on this and believe we've satisfied the conditions. We are, nonetheless, planning to package up WebKit into a separate dynamic library in the near future.
adamkhrona 15y ago
Hey, main developer of Awesomium here-- allow me to answer your question: Awesomium 1.6 was designed from the ground up with the following goals in mind: * Must render to a 32-bit BGRA pixel-buffer (most common image format) * Must be absolutely windowless (to allow use in any context, 3D or otherwise) * Must emulate Chrome's sandbox architecture (for security and crash isolation) * Must support platform-agnostic input * Must support Flash plugins on all platforms * Must be flexible and easy to configure * Must maintain a simple, easy-to-use API Chromium Embedded Framework (CEF) is largely intended to be used by "embedding chromium browser windows" in your application. That's a key difference-- you're embedding a window inside of your application versus the more versatile pixel-buffer that our RenderBuffer class provides. This makes it nearly impossible to use inside a 3D graphics context or in other situations where embedding a native window handle is not feasible. Additionally, CEF has a single-process architecture which means it does not scale as effectively nor isolate crashes in the manner that Awesomium or Chrome does (the Flash plugin can crash on a web-page in Awesomium-- as is liable to happen-- and your application will continue to run as normal). I personally have been working on embedding WebKit, Mozilla Gecko, and similar technologies for nearly five years now so I've got a pretty good deal of experience on how to do it right. If you need any help, feel free to drop me at line at support@awesomium.com
- sixcorners 15y ago
  What about http://berkelium.org/ http://berkelium.org/?
  - deleted 15y ago
    [deleted]
  - dddddannyyyyy 15y ago
    very little conceptual difference. In practice however, Berkelium is really really immature. The API is much weaker, things like Flash may or may not work. The install is not as clean. I guess that's the difference between a small cost to a corporation vs free. I realize that hobbyists would prefer free, but that's ok, since Berkelium is open enough that they can fix it.

http://code.google.com/p/chromiumembedded/ http://code.google.com/p/chromiumembedded/ What's the main difference between this project and awesomium ?

by devmach 15y ago

http://code.google.com/p/chromiumembedded/ http://code.google.com/p/chromiumembedded/ What's the main difference between this project and awesomium ?

sjs 15y ago

I'm not familiar with either project but a big one is that Awesomium has a C# and .NET API. That alone could be reason for some to choose it.

adamkhrona 15y ago
Indeed-- there's a lot of demand for this kind of component in .NET (especially considering the limitations of the built in WebBrowser class). Our .NET wrapper is open-source and up on GitHub: https://github.com/khrona/AwesomiumSharp https://github.com/khrona/AwesomiumSharp Btw, AwesomiumSharp has recently been re-written and now includes a drop-in WebControl component for WPF that you can hook up to your application with XAML. We're about to stage a major re-launch of the wrapper + new 1.6.2 SDK release in a couple days.

evmar 15y ago

(I am a Chrome developer.) As far as I know we've never heard from the Awesomium developers; they don't mention which version of Chrome they're based on which makes me suspect they're not staying in sync with trunk. That suspicion comes from the fact that the Chromium Embedded developer does participate in Chrome development -- to the extent that he keeps his project working -- and occasionally pops up on our mailing list discussing API changes that would benefit embedding. PS: wonder whether the Awesomium people are doing the right thing by WebKit's LGPL license, hmm...

adamkhrona 15y ago
I'm the main Awesomium developer-- the 1.6 branch is based off a stable revision from April 2010. We've recently updated to the latest Chromium trunk and will be launching an experimental, public build of our 1.7 branch soon. (Would have happened sooner but we've been focusing more on getting the library stable rather than absorbing new features.) By the way, we do participate in the development of Chromium (albeit, rather covertly in IRC), I personally have been a long-time lurker of the mailing-list since the first month it opened. :-) Regarding WebKit's (or, more specifically, WebCore's) LGPL license-- we've sought legal counsel on this and believe we've satisfied the conditions. We are, nonetheless, planning to package up WebKit into a separate dynamic library in the near future.

adamkhrona 15y ago

Hey, main developer of Awesomium here-- allow me to answer your question: Awesomium 1.6 was designed from the ground up with the following goals in mind: * Must render to a 32-bit BGRA pixel-buffer (most common image format) * Must be absolutely windowless (to allow use in any context, 3D or otherwise) * Must emulate Chrome's sandbox architecture (for security and crash isolation) * Must support platform-agnostic input * Must support Flash plugins on all platforms * Must be flexible and easy to configure * Must maintain a simple, easy-to-use API Chromium Embedded Framework (CEF) is largely intended to be used by "embedding chromium browser windows" in your application. That's a key difference-- you're embedding a window inside of your application versus the more versatile pixel-buffer that our RenderBuffer class provides. This makes it nearly impossible to use inside a 3D graphics context or in other situations where embedding a native window handle is not feasible. Additionally, CEF has a single-process architecture which means it does not scale as effectively nor isolate crashes in the manner that Awesomium or Chrome does (the Flash plugin can crash on a web-page in Awesomium-- as is liable to happen-- and your application will continue to run as normal). I personally have been working on embedding WebKit, Mozilla Gecko, and similar technologies for nearly five years now so I've got a pretty good deal of experience on how to do it right. If you need any help, feel free to drop me at line at support@awesomium.com

sixcorners 15y ago
What about http://berkelium.org/ http://berkelium.org/?
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]
- dddddannyyyyy 15y ago
  very little conceptual difference. In practice however, Berkelium is really really immature. The API is much weaker, things like Flash may or may not work. The install is not as clean. I guess that's the difference between a small cost to a corporation vs free. I realize that hobbyists would prefer free, but that's ok, since Berkelium is open enough that they can fix it.