PixelBuilder [HTML/JAVASCRIPT/WEBSOCKETS]

[JO3RY]

Changed the website header:

 

[The General]

Looks good!

You have some good designing skills :

 

[JO3RY]

Looks good!

You have some good designing skills :

Thanks!

Full me page, changed some litte things

 

[The General]

How about using the big news widget instead of the small one? I dont know if that'll do good to the layout but might be worth a try.

 

[N0tis]

But why do you use "sitelink/?joery"
Or is that gonna change soon?

I wish you goodluck with the project.

 

[JO3RY]

But why do you use "sitelink/?joery"
Or is that gonna change soon?

I wish you goodluck with the project.

That's gonna change, it's just for fast name changing .

And thanks!

 

[ryan8843]

Nice project! Could be something big in the future!

Keep going , like to see results!

 

[JO3RY]

Room information: (not a big update haha!)

 

[JO3RY]

Roomsettings (Only the first page is working.)

 

[The General]

Awesome

There is just nothing more to say. It really reminds me of Jabbo and I think you can even do better.

 

[JO3RY]

@HillBilly Thanks

Has someone an idea what function I can make ?

 

[The General]

multiplayer :

 

[JO3RY]

multiplayer :

It is already multiplayer?

 

[The General]

Oh lol. Well, maybe you can create bots or pets or maybe use swf furni files for the furniture to load.

 

[JO3RY]

Oh lol. Well, maybe you can create bots or pets or maybe use swf furni files for the furniture to load.

I think using SWF's is making it really slow. And bots and pets are hard to code !

Nvm its easy.

 

[Ddos Attack]

You should open a test hotel so that we can go online and test out how it all works

Also you should create a gaming Hub for games like SnowStorm?

 

[JO3RY]

You should open a test hotel so that we can go online and test out how it all works

Also you should create a gaming Hub for games like SnowStorm?

I've test hotel (Pixel-world.nl) but it's private, because it's too buggy atm.

 

[Ddos Attack]

I've test hotel (Pixel-world.nl) but it's private, because it's too buggy atm.

Okay thanks for the info

 

[N0tis]

But what about the source? People can rip it if they want to.
And html encryption is not enough?

 

[Komakech]

But what about the source? People can rip it if they want to.
And html encryption is not enough?

Why does it matter if it can be ripped? It's a public release.

It's difficult to protect the client source, all you can really do is minify it. Encryption of javascript would just mean the browser can't make heads or tails of it. Minifying the source will do these things:
- Make the file load quicker
- Obscure the logic
- Make it difficult to track variables (they will be named things like a, b, c, d, etc)

The main thing is if you add something new to your client as a feature that requires server code too they can rip your client but will need to build the entire server part themselves.

Edit:
Upon a bit of reading it is possible to obfuscate javascript using something like

You must be registered to see links

but this will only stop people 'quickly' taking your client. It can just be decoded (un-obfuscated?)