[yongfook]

have just been reading up on widgets as I'd like to have a go at making some when Tiger comes out.

However, since it appears widgets will be basically free to open up (vie show package contents) and thus edit, tweak etc - does this mean that we basically won't ever see commercial widgets? I mean, who will want to risk selling a product that can be easily copied or edited like this?

And if we won't ever see commercial widgets, do you think that will lead to a potential loss in the quality or production value of widgets? I mean there is definitely lots of great open source software out there, but still, if there is literally no chance of monetary remuneration (other than via donationware) are the good developers simply going to avoid making widgets altogether?

I think widgets are a great idea but I get the feeling we are going to see lots of widget sites opening up, offering thousands of variations of "stickies" and iTunes controllers, with the really cool original stuff being in the distinct minority.

[wataru]

.app bundles are also openable in the exact same way, and you don't hear anyone complaining. Although in that case the important stuff is really the compiled binary at the heart of it. Are widgets not compiled? Are they really just scripts, or can you use executables?

[yongfook]

Originally posted by wataru:
.app bundles are also openable in the exact same way, and you don't hear anyone complaining. Although in that case the important stuff is really the compiled binary at the heart of it. Are widgets not compiled? Are they really just scripts, or can you use executables?

reading the documentation, it doesn't look like they are compiled. From Apple's widget documentation:


Easy to create
A widget is a special directory called a “bundle” that consists of at least four files and is identified by the .wdgt filename extension. While bundles can be opened and examined as a directory, they appear to users as a single item in the file system, making them easy to copy, move, install, and distribute.

The basic elements of a widget are:
• A PNG background image. This file is displayed while the widget is being loaded.
• An icon. This is also a PNG file and represents the widget in the Widget Bar.
• An HTML file. This file contains the implementation of the widget and specifies the image used as the background and any text or controls to display. The HTML file is a plain-text (ASCII) file and can be created using your favorite word processor or text editor. In the HTML file, you can use any technique or trick that you would use when designing a web page, including HTML, CSS, and JavaScript.
• An info.plist file. This file specifies details about the widget such as its name, size, unique ID, and more. You can create the file using a text editor, but Mac OS X also includes a property list editor utility to make the task easier.


the text files will be editable by anybody with a text editor.

[leperkuhn]

Originally posted by yongfook:
reading the documentation, it doesn't look like they are compiled. From Apple's widget documentation:


Easy to create
A widget is a special directory called a “bundle” that consists of at least four files and is identified by the .wdgt filename extension. While bundles can be opened and examined as a directory, they appear to users as a single item in the file system, making them easy to copy, move, install, and distribute.

The basic elements of a widget are:
• A PNG background image. This file is displayed while the widget is being loaded.
• An icon. This is also a PNG file and represents the widget in the Widget Bar.
• An HTML file. This file contains the implementation of the widget and specifies the image used as the background and any text or controls to display. The HTML file is a plain-text (ASCII) file and can be created using your favorite word processor or text editor. In the HTML file, you can use any technique or trick that you would use when designing a web page, including HTML, CSS, and JavaScript.
• An info.plist file. This file specifies details about the widget such as its name, size, unique ID, and more. You can create the file using a text editor, but Mac OS X also includes a property list editor utility to make the task easier.


the text files will be editable by anybody with a text editor.

Yes, those are the basic visual elements of a widget. however you can tie a widget to a cocoa program, which is compiled. You can also tie it to bash scripts, or pretty much anything..

So yes, you could have a commercial widget.

[Mithras]

Yeah, you can put all your interesting amazing bits in a Cocoa plugin if you so choose.
They're a lot like Microsoft's XAML apps in a sense.

[PurpleGiant]

Basically, if you really need to keep a certain feature private, you will need to Embed a Cocoa object to do this. There is no way to 'copy protect' any of your javascript, html and the like, simply due to the nature of what a widget is.

Another option is to embed flash in your widget. Not necessarily recommended, but it's an option.

[Millennium]

No, it just means that the business model can't be based around having a monopoly on functionality.

That said, as others have noted, it is possible to embed compiled objects. Compilation is a powerful deterrent to those who would examine your code, but it is not foolproof, as the makers of CherryOS have recently found out.

[phillryu]

Guys, this Monday, I'll be launching the Weekly Widget, which will be for widget news and discussion at MacWidgets.net. Our first issue will include part one of a pretty lengthy, detailed, and comprehensive article by developer Jason Harris (ShapeShifter, MightyMouse, etc.) on piracy prevention methods for widgets. So I'll post back here when the site's up

[PurpleGiant]

Originally posted by Millennium:
No, it just means that the business model can't be based around having a monopoly on functionality.

And to some degree, this is a good thing. The web has benefitted so much from the sharing of code, and with a bit of respect and honour, the same can happen for Dashboard Widgets.

As usual, one isn't blatantly allowed to copy from a widget anyway, even if they can see the contents. It is just as easy for the author of the original widget to look inside the code of the copy to see their offending code, and request it be removed from Widget sites.

[smeger]

Yeah, as Phill just mentioned, I wrote an article about exactly this topic last night. It'll be online next week.