Please use this thread to give your feedback about Mobile Web Server.

[iketo]

We would be very happy to hear your ideas about how we could make MWS even better.

All kind of information is welcomed here so please feel free to share your
improvement ideas, suggestions or general feedback about MWS.

__
On the behalf of MWS development team

[stickershock]

Fantastic, wonderful, all my friends are amazed.. :-)

As for all the projects at research nokia, in my opinion, this is the most ambitious and most impressive to the average joe (Ok, Sports tracker, very cool as well), When on WiFi the server is plenty fast

Congratulations, I'm looking for other scripts now, so anything I get installed I'll credit on the index here http://octobit.at.openlaboratory.net:8080/

I'm still playing with it, my results,

Didn't quite catch the part about signing the certificates, as mentioned in one of the threads here, re location doesn't work (I get none) and on my n93 browsing the photographs doesn't work HTTP Error 403 - Forbidden

so I guess I'll play with .htaccess and read up in my cetificates, aside from that, installation was a breeze.. I wish my *nix stuff always installed as easily :-)

The python scripts that use the camera sometimes complain that they could get the camera, and it seems that the full image doesn't make it to the browser.

The N93 doesn't have any selector between the 2 cameras in the OS seems it should so I wouldn't doubt there are issues beyond humble me's comprehension. Again, thanks, very cool, tweak it more and I'll be looking for more amazing stuff. I've always said the folks at nokia were the most progressive, nobody will argue with me now :-)

David - Sevastopol Ukraine

[120430]

Can I use and configure mod_expires and a access.log?

[ueffchen]

I think all features like camera, IM are quite interesting - no doubt that this is a very good complement if not replacement to SMS and MMS.
Would be nice to have all users that are online displayed on one website, similar like in RacconOnMap.

The features I like most are related to location service.
I would like to have a tracking function like you have it in SportsTracker in Raccoon, too, so not only the latest position but also the way (since a given starting point that should be selectable by the phone owner) can be tracked/recorded and displayed online. And online-tracking should work simultaneously to navigation apps - for me a very typical application. I can be guided by a navigation app and in parallel people can see where I move.

-ueffchen

[koez]

It seems to me (based on a quick glimse) that the concept demo (at open source pages) is a lot faster than the beta (mymobilesite.net) version?
- it took me almost half a minute to open a web page with a GPRS connection (while a hourglass was shown).

How about automatic IAP selections based on predefined user preferences; i.e. as a rule, use mainly WLAN connections, and if not available then the GPRS/3G connection...

[jhnwkmn]

It seems to me (based on a quick glimse) that the concept demo (at open source pages) is a lot faster than the beta (mymobilesite.net) version?

That's probably true, for a couple of reasons.

• Most of the Raccoon concept demos are implemented as native Apache modules, which means that they are fast. The MWS applications rely upon Python, which means that there is some overhead at startup and also during content generation.
• The Raccoon concept demos are very simple.
• The connectivity mechanisms, although very similar in principle, are implementationwise quite distinct. The Raccoon solution is very lightweigth, but lacks support for secure connections and uses a distinct TCP/IP connection for each concurrent request, while MWS has secure connections and multiplexes multiple TCP/IP connections (between the gateway and browsers) on top of a single TCP/IP connection between the gateway and the phone. So, the MWS solution has more overhead, but is more versatile.

Johan

[moleyj]

Just successfully installed MWS (the one for mymobilewebsite.net rather than Raccoon) on a Nokia 5500 Sport, and it seems to work a treat! As it's over GPRS (Vodafone UK) it's a little slow, but that's expected really. I'm guessing it works better over WiFi - any chance of getting it to work via Bluetooth-to-PC-to-Internet?

The thing I kind of miss is that there isn't an interface on the phone itself to add and edit site content - e.g. I'd like to blog on my phone so people could then view on the web, rather than having to blog via a web-browser in the first place. I'm trying to set up a gateway and use Raccoon too as I'd like to try my own scripting, but having trouble with setting up the GW (already posted in the forum).

The remote camera function is quite fun too... could be used for some stealthy spy stuff I guess!

Anyway, I'm impressed how easy it was to get this running...

[iketo]

The thing I kind of miss is that there isn't an interface on the phone itself to add and edit site content - e.g. I'd like to blog on my phone so people could then view on the web, rather than having to blog via a web-browser in the first place. I'm trying to set up a gateway and use Raccoon too as I'd like to try my own scripting, but having trouble with setting up the GW (already posted in the forum).

The remote camera function is quite fun too... could be used for some stealthy spy stuff I guess!

Anyway, I'm impressed how easy it was to get this running...

Hi Moleyj

There should be a way to add blog messages by using the phone. Have you checked the
phone's messaging application? When you select "new message" from messaging application, there should be "blog entry" selection among the usual selections (sms/email/mms).

br, iketo

[moleyj]

Thanks iketo! I was a bit too keen and didn't actually read the user-guides...

[jukkaekl]

It seems to me (based on a quick glimse) that the concept demo (at open source pages) is a lot faster than the beta (mymobilesite.net) version?
- it took me almost half a minute to open a web page with a GPRS connection (while a hourglass was shown).

How about automatic IAP selections based on predefined user preferences; i.e. as a rule, use mainly WLAN connections, and if not available then the GPRS/3G connection...

Hi koez,

about the automatic IAP selection, that would be very nice to have and we are looking into it. In S60 3rd Ed, FP2 there are some new ways to do application-level IAP roaming so let's see.

[landerluu]

That's probably true, for a couple of reasons.

• Most of the Raccoon concept demos are implemented as native Apache modules, which means that they are fast. The MWS applications rely upon Python, which means that there is some overhead at startup and also during content generation.
• The Raccoon concept demos are very simple.
• The connectivity mechanisms, although very similar in principle, are implementationwise quite distinct. The Raccoon solution is very lightweigth, but lacks support for secure connections and uses a distinct TCP/IP connection for each concurrent request, while MWS has secure connections and multiplexes multiple TCP/IP connections (between the gateway and browsers) on top of a single TCP/IP connection between the gateway and the phone. So, the MWS solution has more overhead, but is more versatile.

Johan

Dear sir,
I am a student and I work as an intern .
I have done the mobile web services for two months.
following your open sources---Raccoon, I design my
mws architecture based on the Linux OS and we develop many web services for example call and SMS and Synchronize in browser instead of mobile .we develop web application for example googlemap calender YUI and gmail we design the architecture like httP://www.netvibes.net. but there many questions we don't resolve
first ,Raccoon provide the mod_python .but we compile the mod_python in the apache_httpd. when we write python script in server.the mod_python doesn't work.I try many times .last we use the python instead of mod_python.
Second, I want to ask How make sure the security of the mobile when you access to the PC using wlan or usbnet. bescaue we meet this question.
Third, If mobile access to the IP we can develop many web services using Internet provided. so the mobile may be push and get the data from the remote server.but may be the mobile and the Remote server can't access each other. for example "Flickr" IF I want to download or upload. How to deal with this problem?? do you notify the crossdomain questions??? I have test many methods but not very well???

[jhnwkmn]

Dear sir,
I am a student and I work as an intern .

Please don't post the same question in multiple threads. Check the answer here.

Johan

[Zargron]

I have read several posts that defend the current MWS approach, however I am not convinced. I would like to see a mixture of mobile web server content and (for want of a better word) fixed web server content. A likely major benefit being that MWS would find it easier to progress beyond personal MWS use into the general market.

When someone visits my domain.mymobilesite.net web page, I want them to "always" have a positive experience. In this modern age, we are accustomed to a high percentage of up-time. If a web page is inaccessible, the average user is quick to strike it off their re-visit list. And, even if the mymobilesite it is up, if it is slow, the average user simply won't put up with it.

I feel participants should have the opportunity to balance a phone web server presence with a conventional web server presence – both through the one portal. My guess is that participants would generally upload public domain stuff to the conventional web server repository, and access private stuff through their phone web server. Family and close friends could be given access rights to the phone content. When these "special" users choose to go into such areas, they would be educated to accept the slower and less dependable nature of access to that information. Acquaintances and the general public might only be given access to data stored in the conventional web server repository, where they would expect good speed and a high level of connectivity.

Either way, when someone hits a domain.mymobilesite.net web page, it should NOT demand that the mobile web server is connected and running. A hit should always provide access to the conventional web server presence, in order to give visitors a positive "yes I am here" response. Obviously mobile data, (stuff that the participant has decided stays on the phone), will only be available if the mobile web server is running and the phone connected to the network.

Thanks for listening...

[jukkaekl]

We are definitely listening, and I can say that something along the lines what you just described is on our agenda. Individual mobsites as themselves is an interesting service, but now we need to make the necessary connections to "integrate" with surrounding web.

Stay tuned, and thanks for the feedback!

[jhnwkmn]

I have read several posts that defend the current MWS approach, however I am not convinced. I would like to see a mixture of mobile web server content and (for want of a better word) fixed web server content. A likely major benefit being that MWS would find it easier to progress beyond personal MWS use into the general market.

When someone visits my domain.mymobilesite.net web page, I want them to "always" have a positive experience. In this modern age, we are accustomed to a high percentage of up-time.

That's true, but it may be that with mobile sites it's the assumption that is flawed. That is, the assumption that websites are available 24/7 simply no longer holds when the sites reside on personal mobile devices.

All the time, of course, it is becoming easier to keep a mobile web server online continuously. As flat fees become more common and smart switching between WLAN and cellular prevalent, fear for an excessive phone bill disappears as a reason for not keeping the server on all the time. Phones also become more powerful and are equipped with more and more memory, so keeping the server on becomes also resource wise cheaper (relatively speaking) all the time. The remaining problem is the power consumption, as there are no revolutions in sight in that area. Smart access control - e.g. strict when roaming on cellular, relaxed when connected over WLAN and attached to charger - also makes it easier to keep the server on all the time.

But yes, there will always be situations when the server will not be available. However, also in that case it is possible, due to the intermediate gateway, to keep the browsing experience pleasant without resorting to moving part of the content somewhere else. You could, for instance, ask to be notified when someone is online again and failed access could also be conveyed to the server owner "When you were offline, Bob tried to reach you." and so on.

If a web page is inaccessible, the average user is quick to strike it off their re-visit list. And, even if the mymobilesite it is up, if it is slow, the average user simply won't put up with it.

I feel participants should have the opportunity to balance a phone web server presence with a conventional web server presence – both through the one portal. My guess is that participants would generally upload public domain stuff to the conventional web server repository, and access private stuff through their phone web server.

Well, yes, when we concocted this concept at Nokia Research Center, one of our mantras were that a site on a mobile personal device can be dynamic and interactive in a way not possible with a regular server. You can read that the other way around also - don't put a regular site on the mobile device.

However, I'm not so sure about the general validity of that anymore. It seems that a mobile web server is contextual in an almost extreme sense of the word. It's not really possible to state something about it, without fixing some boundary conditions.

For instance, if the only one accessing your site is you and your spouse, then having a "regular" site on your mobile might be the right thing to do, out of sheer convenience. However, if you intend to share images with the world, then uploading them to Flickr is probably much smarter.

Family and close friends could be given access rights to the phone content. When these "special" users choose to go into such areas, they would be educated to accept the slower and less dependable nature of access to that information. Acquaintances and the general public might only be given access to data stored in the conventional web server repository, where they would expect good speed and a high level of connectivity.

Either way, when someone hits a domain.mymobilesite.net web page, it should NOT demand that the mobile web server is connected and running. A hit should always provide access to the conventional web server presence, in order to give visitors a positive "yes I am here" response. Obviously mobile data, (stuff that the participant has decided stays on the phone), will only be available if the mobile web server is running and the phone connected to the network.

We actually demonstrated something like this last week at the CCNC conference. We've built a Facebook application that fetches from your mobile the phone state, the last images and the communication history (between the phone owner and the one browsing your page on Facebook). In addition it provides a way to send a textual message straight to the display of the mobile. That is, you can be present on Facebook without being logged on. So in this case, the mobile web server is used for providing an always on, realtime presence, to Facebook and is not at all like a regular website.

My point really is that a mobile web server is the universal enabler that can be used for pretty much anything. The situation is not black or white, there are only numerous shades of gray.

Thanks for listening...

Many thanks for the feedback!

Johan