I haven't used this yet. I just had a couple of questions.

Hi all.

1) what web browser engine is embedded with PhpDock?
1a) Can the browser do client-side XSLT (PHPs lib is very weak)
1b) If it's not gecko based, can you substitute a gecko based browsing engine (with a view to creating chrome:// apps/extensions)?

2) Can you install browser plguins/extensions like Flash and PDF readers?

3) Can you do interactive debugging against PhpDock?

4) are there limitations as to what PHP extensions can be used?

5) Does PhpDock have some sort of API you can access from your PHP code to determine if it's online/offline?

Personally I think the info page on the main website should have more information that it does so people don't have to join a forum to get what should be basic information. The product is targeted to developers after all. The marketing spiel at the beginning of the main product page was just irritating. Just being honest.

Thanks in advance.

1 - system-provided IE which is pre-installed with Windows OS
1a - up to IE (read http://www.w3schools.com/xsl/xsl_client.asp for futher details)
1b - it's not gecko-based (but support for gecko and google chrome can be added in the future)
2 - up to IE. Normally it enables activeX but no other plugins are available. Some activeX are known to crash when running in IE component (possibly due to lack of IE browser menu and toolbars -- perhaps they are what activeX tries to access). In case of gecko (mozilla) no plugins / extensions are supported by the brower component. With chrome/chromium (webkit) based browser it's possible to have plugins (in some extents).
3 - like with any other php+js applications, you can debug them in PhpED, which is another product
4 - no
5 - no API is provided on phpdock side. But if you need to check whether your script can access internet, why don't you try socket and/or http functions to check connectivity against known to be online services like google.com and yahoo.com?

Thanks for your response dmitri.

Good to know that information.

The reason it would be preferable not to ping is because you have to decide on a timeout and then you can't act on the results without waiting for the timeout to complete (in the case of them being offline). If PhpDock already knew their status, then it would be much quicker to query PhpDock about their status. So it's worth asking.

Given IE's poor history of security issues, I can't say I find that choice confidence inspiring.

"In case of gecko (mozilla) no plugins / extensions are supported by the brower component."

Whilst this may be true for installed extensions and plugins, you can still use un-privileged XUL-based interfaces which is definitely something worth considering when you want to write a web app that looks like a desktop app.

Ideally, the PhpDock deployer (developer) can choose the web component engine, but if not, I would definitely be choosing gecko for it's XUL capabilities. Further to that, it may be worth finding out how to 'persuade' the gecko web component to recognise the local PhpDock web server as privileged.

"By accessing a file using a chrome URL, the files receive elevated privileges to access local files, access preferences and bookmarks and perform other privileged operations. Obviously, web pages do not get these privileges, unless they are signed with a digital certificate and the user has granted permission to perform these operations."

https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/XUL/Tutorial/XUL_Structure

Sounds like a great product none the less. Hope my input helps.