Talk:Comparison of widget engines

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Software (assessed as Low-importance).

Dashboard Language Support

I found it interesting that Dashboard was listed as supporting Perl and C+ but not Python or Ruby. The only way to interact with any of these is through widget.system calls (as if you were calling them from the command line) and they are all supported equally in that sense. For that matter, PHP should be added to the list as you can interact with the PHP binary the same way. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.90.58.217 (talk) 03:06, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

SpringWidgets

It appears that a new player called SpringWidgets has recently entered the widget engine arena and is currently in beta. There don't appear to be many modules available as yet (only about five or so), but the program is being touted as a platform for both desktop and web. It may be worth keeping an eye on.

Opera

Opera's new widget engine ought to be added. More info flip 18:32, 25 March 2006 (UTC)Konfabulator[reply]

gDesklets

gDesklets also works quite well with other desktop environments and window managers (KDE, etc.), which are ewmh compliant! The article is wrong here!

Qt, GTK or wxWidgets...

Someone added Qt, GTK+ and wxWidgets libraries to the table... They are programming APIs used to write GUI apps with buttons, scrollbars etc Widget (computing) (like Qt, GTK, Cocoa, etc) NOT widget engines like the others. Please don't add them again...

File Formats and Standards

This should also describe what file formats this uses (Zip, proprietary, tar, etc.), whether the engines support widgets from other engines, and compliance with the W3C Widgets 1.0 Draft.

yahoo widget can run executables

.. via the runCommand() function (http://widgets.yahoo.com/manual -> Global Functions -> Functions -> runCommand).
I don't have a system to test this but I think this does provide the 'run executable' functionality. --212.202.41.116 09:19, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Technically, this isn't native executable packaging. You cannot bundle a DLL or .app file within the widget to be executed (as far as the documentation reveals to me). DesktopX, for example, compiles down to a native executable, making it capable of such executable compatibility. Someone should certainly make a note that the runCommand function is present, though it is not possible to bundle the code in the widget package.

Yahoo! Widgets and Flash

Should we add another column for Flash support in the Languages table? Asking first because Flash technically isn't a language. :-P Yonisyuumei (talk) 19:56, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Platform

Seems to me that there should be a column showing which platforms the engine is compatible with (Windows, GNOME, KDE, OS X, OS 9-, etc)

Jackfield

...leads to a page it definitely shouldn't. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.80.150.50 (talk) 22:59, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think the inclusion jackfield on this page is a bit confusing. Or maybe the page title is a bit confusing. The others in the list are widget APIs/formats, whereas jackfield is a widget host that (apparently) runs Dashboard widgets and plans to add support for other formats. The page conflates APIs with hosts, which makes sense in most cases but not jackfield and maybe others.

I may have this wrong - I don't know much about either jackfield or the other engines on the list (which is why I was on this page). --Joeboy (talk) 11:33, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Widgets 1.0

It should be noted that the "Widgets 1.0" column is meaningless, because it's meaningless to claim conformance to a set of specifications that are either all just working drafts, or even just editors drafts. Nor does Opera claim conformance to this specification, although Opera submitted the initial input to the W3C for what now is the set of Widget 1.0 specifications.

Note that I will not edit the document personally, as I might have a COI (Being editor of the Widgets 1.0 APIs and Events specification, and an employee of Opera Software. Arve (talk) 10:54, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

to do list

If you have Serious Samurize on this list then you should have rainmeter. Rainmeter is amazing. Simple C style coding language, web parser, integration with windows performance monitor for system monitoring.. This is an atrocity that it is missing, for it has become well known knowledge that rainmeter is the replacement for Serious Samurize.
Hairypaulsack (talk) 18:05, 11 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

adding engines/system from the categories which are here missing! --mabdul 0=* 09:39, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]