Android.. so, no windows phone/win mobile/insert x support..

Why not make it a java application so all phones can run it?

Just something which hit me, I know I'm nit picking since android seems to be going the way of monopolizing the smartphone segment anyway, but I for one am still on winmo and think I'll move to phone 7 and not android when the time comes my phone doesn't cut it anymore. So, see this as something posted out of self interest

The language used in android apps is Java but the way to program them is different. Windows Mobile 7 was not out when this was original app was first thought of so it wasnt mentioned but Im sure they will develop one for the WM7 phones because the app market is open unlike the Zunes original app market. I have to check if because of WM7 the closed App market for Zune has become open but i doubt it.

Ahh that's nice to hear!

Didn't know android apps where java apps, thought it was native *nix applications designed to run on a smaller screen. ( *nix being written in c/c++ ).

I took a java course years back, didn't get around to do the final assignment though. Java and .net are not that different

The only thing with the iPhone app is that not just anyone can do it. You must pay for the files needed for development and must have an apple computer to program on. This in itself is expensive unlike the Android apps that can be done anywhere. And Im still looking into the info for WM7 but Cbl hasnt been on in a while.

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ff402535(VS.92).aspx you mean this?

Win mobile is just another target in visual studio, haven't ran any updates to my dev environment so not sure but afaik it's just a silverlight template.

Edit:

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ff426931(v=VS.95).aspx <- c# only, that's why it's not in my default template list

I'm wondering though how the setup is, does the tracker feature a built in server component which communicates with the application ( eg, the tracker listens on a port for request, this monitoring app requests info straight from the tracker ) or does it use an intermediate server eg tracker uploads the xml files as it does now and then this monitoring app connects with the server the xml files are being uploaded to?

Would be nice if the author would post some more info about his ideas/implementations, I read he's doing it partly for a school project and therefore doesn't want to much 3rd party influences but these are pretty fundamental issues which when things progress are very much going to decide the amount of functionality which can be reached ( eg direct communication will allow more things to be done through the monitor app, where using an intermediate server and fetching xml files from it only allows one way communication ).

Edit:

Also important, will it be using push notifications based on tracker status changes or timed interval, or a combination of both depending on user preference or connectivity ( eg, incase of lost connectivity it will recheck when connectivity is obtained again ect ).

Sorry for all the questions, but as I said, I been waiting on things like this to be added to the the tracker so I'm asking allot of things which I feel will be important in regards to how much functionality can be obtained from it. And, it's now that things are not in a final stage yet that things might be reconsidered when needed. Less work then making something and then wanting to add something which will require redoing allot of things.

Ok so I just took a look at the repository code and noticed there is a new class for client/server communication over tcp which looks nice.. nice is not great since it uses string messages only.

I do hope you realize the security risks? I see it's not used in the version in the repository and that's good. If you would allow remote control of the tracker using this implementation it's asking for problems. Serializing something to binary and sending the string representation of it would help abit already though

Not even sure where the class is going to be used for, it's hardcoded for loopback adapter, so it's for internal communication? Multiple instances of the tracker on one machine? Why> Isn't the idea of the tracker to manage everything from one interface so you don't need x instances of anything? Confused I am


Also noticed the gpuinfo class is still a bit messy

the app has the ability to have a list of all of your Tracker clients from different systems once you fill out the information it needs. A list is kept and you choose the one you want to look into. Currently this app is in alpha which is why this section is not yet opened to the beta testers.

That's not even close to an answer

Edit: well ok it's a partial answer, it's a central monitoring app ( which I already gatherd )... but does it only monitor or also allows control over the tracker ect ect ect ( see questions above ).

Also, I know it's alpha, which I said above already is the right stage for me to ask all these questions. As I said, it's better to ask now and maybe change something if I'm able to point something out which might be better implemented in a different manner.

I'm not trying to be negative to be negative, I'm trying to put holes in things so they will be fixed, if I'm not able to put holes in it, I'm even happier

I dont think your trying to be negative I think its a good conversation to expand knowledge and understanding. Also in its current state it can only monitor. I hope that at some point we can make it so that it can control but this may need some UI or structure changes as the best way I could see is to have a login inside of the tracker and all tracker instances run off that login would then be selectable in the app.

The problem is the developer has not popped in in a long time.

My concern about security is so far only considering tcp communication, not even in authentication.

If the current client/server class is used, anyone in a dorm for instance who knows other people using tracker could run wireshark and intercept the plain text, analyse the packets, and spoof control functions ( eg I don't really like you, I'll stop all your clients so you don't get any points / aren't helping to find a cure )... or wurse, I could send a command which sets all your instances to fold for a different account/team.

You need to atleast encrypt the string commands, .net has built in cryptography classes. Authentication is simple, use a hash. But you cant use an hash for communication.

Hey there,
sorry i have been absent from this topic.

we are working on an iphone version, cadbane already described the difficulties with it being money and need for a mac.

if there is enough demand for windows phone 7 we will work on it as well. we have already discussed doing it so it shouldnt be a big deal.

the app does not control the programs its self. i have thought about it but that would be very difficult. im not saying that it wont ever do it, it could in the future if we get around to it. i like the idea of controlling the programs on the computer.

Iphone version is the next step, i have an iphone so i really want to get the app and it seems to have the most requests.

cblaxx

Cbl I would agree with your on the iPhone being the next step. The reason I do is because they have been out longer and the WM7 phones are still pretty new.