Page 1 of 1

Why is bluebox not just a server update?

Posted: 26 Nov 2007, 09:29
by mixart
I'm just curious why bluebox is not just a part of smartfox server install. All this extra work but more importantly complexity. It would be nice if it was just part of the install (or an update).

I would love if when you made a SFS connection it tries normally, if that doesn't work it tried HTTP tunneling, if that doesn't work it tries bluebox.

Is this possibly something that could happen in the future? When I first saw the bluebox info on the site I just through it was some kind of plugin - or a paid extension or component and dismissed it for a while when now that I looked at it I see it's actually something I want.

Posted: 26 Nov 2007, 10:32
by Lapo
Hello mixart,
maybe there's a little misunderstanding. The BlueBox is going to be integrated with SmartFoxServer 1.6 and higher, you won't have to manually install it and configure it.

This is what happening with the beta because ... actually it's a beta :D

So, starting from version 1.6 it will work exactly the way you have described. If a socket connection fails to be established the API will transparently use the BlueBox

Posted: 27 Nov 2007, 07:08
by mixart
OK - thanks for clearing things up Lapo. I guess what makes it confusing is that (from what I can tell) if this included as part of the package - then why does it require a separate additional license fee? Put simply - We have to pay for this product separately if we want SFS to work for firewalled users.

The BlueBox final will ship with the next SmartFoxServer release ( 1.6.0 ) and it will be free to use with the same limitations of the free SFS license (20 users).
There will be one single license type available for the BlueBox, which allows unlimited connections.
The license can be purchased separately or together with the server. The price will be the same.

Posted: 27 Nov 2007, 07:12
by mixart
Oh - I do have one recommendation also.

I have users that say they cannot connect to my SFS application. I'm not sure of the exact reason these users cannot connect - it may be a firewall issue or could simply be a Flash installation issue or anything.

I would recommend you have a page on your site that users can test connecting to a SFS with the regular connection, and then with the BlueBox connection. This way I can direct my users to this page and see if BlueBox is what I need to fix their connection problems - this would help me decide if I need BlueBox or not.

Posted: 27 Nov 2007, 07:33
by Lapo
Mixart, nice suggestion. :)

To further clarify the BlueBox question:

-> The add-on will be integrated with SFS 1.6 and it will work out of the box, no special setup. We'll provide updated API that transparently switch to the tunnel-connection when the socket connection is not available.

-> The BlueBox follows the same licensing scheme of SFS. The free version will handle up to 20 users.

-> The BlueBox is not free and its license can be bought separately (in other words it is optional)

-> There's going to be 1 single license type which will allow unlimited connections.

Hope it's clearer now

p.s. = also stay tuned for a cool new annoucement coming these days!!