Cocoonjs Vs Crosswalk (Android)

Which is better in android ? Cocoonjs or Crosswalk ? <img src="smileys/smiley5.gif" border="0" align="middle" />

CocoonJS:

+ developed for longer time: less bugs

+ 10 MB for standard APK

+ MoPub ads

• loading everything to memory at app start (= memory spike)

There's a ton of threads about this matter on the forums already, no? I've been researching this matter myself and the official position of C2 devs seem to be in favor of Crosswak.

I will try Cocoonjs tonight on my game just to make sure.

Quick question on this matter : apart from those two options, are there any other ways of making an android /iOS app from a C2 game?

Sorry but what exacly is this 'crosswalk' ?

Sorry but what exacly is this 'crosswalk' ?

delgado : a new way to export to android by intel, C2 exporter refers it as "Android"

delgado

Crosswalk is a portable, packaged version of the Chrome browser, that supports all of the advantages associated with a browser (WebGL, Memory Management, Web Audio etc) see here.

C2 allows you to export your app via an Android option. You can then import this into the Intel XDK, and build for Android devices (export tut).

There are some other "Crosswalk" threads on the forum if you need any further info.

Hope that helps :)

Did crosswalk give me better performance than cocoon ??

Crosswalk:

+no splash screen (cocoonjs has a required splashscreen unless you make a deal with ludei)

+has good potential if they can they can add all the feature requests, might improve with time?

+maybe better slightly support than CocoonJS?

-Android only

-apk file sizes are bigger than CocoonJS

CocoonJS:

+iOS and Android support

+much better performance in my experience

+has some support for IAP and ads

+smaller apk sizes than Crosswalk

-long start load times, memory problems and crashes if your project is too big because they don't do layout by layout loading

-Ludei's lack of clear pricing model for removing the splash screen is annoying (why not just have a subscription model like Unity or something instead of trying to do a confusing profit share plan with developers?)

I favor CocoonJS mostly but am crossing my fingers that a better alternative will come up soon (I haven't tried crosswalk lately but last time I tried it it just wasn't as fast and apk file sizes are too big).

I favor CocoonJS mostly but am crossing my fingers that a better alternative will come up soon (I haven't tried crosswalk lately but last time I tried it it just wasn't as fast and apk file sizes are too big). russpuppy2014-02-09 21:42:49

Thanks for all of that info! I was wondering though, which you found easier to actually use and if there were certain features that were unique to each when building it.

TheDoctor Both are pretty easy to use once you've been through the build process once and figure it out. I like that CocoonJS has a web interface instead of a client you have to download (Crosswalk). CocoonJS just seems a lot more straight forward and makes more sense to me. It sends you both debug and release apk files, seems like last time I used Crosswalk it wasn't clear what the apk was that it sends you--is it an already signed apk or what?

Anyway, hopeful for Crosswalk's future and I'm always on the look out for other alternatives because CocoonJS isn't perfect either and it needs some better competition

I recently used Crosswalk and it works fine , i still can't figure it how to use cocoonjs, the steps are not so clear.

Cocoonjs Webview+ support WebGL and WebRTC , Crosswalk and Cocoonjs Webview+ use Chromium , can We conclude Crosswalk = Cocoonjs Webview+ ????????????????????

I complied my project in both yesterday and these are the results:

Crosswalk: 45-fps average

CoocoonJS: 60-fps average

So from a performance perspective I can't use Crosswalk as it is right now, not good enough.

For me crosswalk is pretty much perfect. The Only downside is the huge apk file size. A small app will be 5mb after install. Crosswalk's are 50mb... imagine 50mb flappy birds. Its nonsense.