MediaSignage support forum

community support => Open source Digital Signage => Topic started by: tmmidiaTI on June 25, 2014, 01:37:27 PM

Title: Doubts about API
Post by: tmmidiaTI on June 25, 2014, 01:37:27 PM
Hi guys.

I have some doubts about the DigitalSignage API.

1º - Which one Signage Studio or Studio Lite is customized?
2º - I downloaded the Monster Signage, but there is a problem with map_flex_1_20.swc
That is:
C:\Users\TM_MIDIA_REDACAO\Adobe Flash Builder 4.6\MonsterSignage\libs\map_flex_1_20.swc- not respondingSWC file failed to load. Any component dependent on this SWC file will not be displayed in the Design Mode.The SWC may have failed to load because of:   *  Incompatible definitions caused by usage of a different SDK version   *  Missing referred class definitions
3º - I need print the report in a spread sheet, actually it is showed to me in an archive .txt totally desorganized, there is possibility to do this?

A question off topic, but still important, I need show a RSS News, some people already did it, but it is spending too much time to charge, there is someone that know how can I do that with Action Script?

Thank you.
Title: Re: Doubts about API
Post by: admin on June 25, 2014, 02:24:18 PM
StudioLite is open source and supported via
MonsterSignage has been disc.
RSS News? no Actionscript needed, simply drag and drop and use...
Title: Re: Doubts about API
Post by: tmmidiaTI on June 26, 2014, 06:27:38 AM

What do you means with "has been disc."?

I have another error here:


I already installed Flex SDK, but wasn't solved the problem.

And how about the spreadsheet, there is possible to I do that?

Title: Re: Doubts about API
Post by: JMH on June 26, 2014, 06:51:40 AM
It has been discontinued, so they no longer support monster signage.
Title: Re: Doubts about API
Post by: tmmidiaTI on June 27, 2014, 06:40:23 AM
So, there is no way to customize? If there is no support how the Digital Signage makes corrections in their software?
Title: Re: Doubts about API
Post by: admin on June 27, 2014, 07:00:23 AM
Sorry not for Monster no.
But, we do have StudioLite which is 100% open source via and it is much more powerful and HTML5 based.
Title: Re: Doubts about API
Post by: teethstraight on August 12, 2014, 07:04:11 AM
I really would appreciate it if Admin and co would make these announcements more clear and official. I spent a large chunk of yesterday going over your video tutorials regarding Monster Signage and API dev. When was it announced that Monster Signage is discontinued?

You guys really seem to be touting Lite, and it may be more powerful than Monster and HTML5 based, but it's not compatible with Pro accounts. So how does that help? In another post, Admin described Lite as a 'stepping stone' to Pro. But what customization is then left for Pro if Monster is discontinued?

It's looking like your ultimate goal is to phase out Pro by replacing it with Lite in order to survive the inevitable abandonment of Flash based signage software.
Title: Re: Doubts about API
Post by: admin on August 12, 2014, 04:31:56 PM
sure, let me explain.

StudioLite is not designed to replace StudioPro, it serves as a simpler editor with more basic functionality.

Adobe AIR is as strong as ever (actually strongest ever) with over 1 billion installs (yes billion with a B):
so we are pushing hard on Adobe AIR with new native installers (Windows / Mac) as well that will release next quarter.

As for Monster Signage, yes, most developers are looking for a web interface and for that reason we abounded Monster Signage in favor of what JS / HTML5 is, the most adopted programming language for the web. StudioLite is not really a competitor to Pro nor is it a replacement for Monster Signage.
StudioLite is a simple, open source platform that can be adopted to many different applications around Digital Signage.
Pepper SDK on the other hand (which drives StudioLite) is inline with the capabilities of Monster Signage and can be used to build any front end platform equivcelent to Monster Signage.

I hope this help...

Title: Re: Doubts about API
Post by: mseibert2 on August 19, 2014, 05:19:45 AM
I love the product and have been using it for several years however I have to agree with teethstraight. I want to manage the enterprise via Pro but would like the option for the end user to use the "lite" version. The way it works now its just not possible.

Title: Re: Doubts about API
Post by: admin on August 19, 2014, 07:14:38 AM
But I am not sure what is the issue, you can do that today!

Manage all accounts via Enterprise, but also create Lite accounts for your users...
Please explain what it is that you need?
Title: Re: Doubts about API
Post by: criley on August 21, 2014, 12:43:33 PM
Here is what I think most, including myself, envision:

The ability to have the end user (this would be our clients) edit and build what they would like with their accounts and add resources to the timeline on their own when the want. This would be through a portal such as the lite version that is simple to use. We would then have the ability as the network manager to access the advanced portal (Studio Pro) to make the necessary changes, updates and so forth.

People love having the ability to make some changes in their own, such as on a website, but only want to make changes from the front end if the site, while their webmaster works on the backend. I fully agree with all of the past requests over the years to have this capability, and also understand that this may not currently fit into your business model now or in the immediate future.

If I could build a timeline that would run where the client could just update a folder, say on Dropbox, and the content then play on the screen, this would be a huge step. But now that you have Lite, it would really be nice to have Lite be a basic portal to the same business ID that the pro accesses.

Does this make any sense?

I am a Network Manager and Content Builder for the most part as I really wear many hats. My clients want the ability to add and build their own images and other resources without having to contact me to do it. It would also save me a ton of time. People want instant gratification and waiting on me to be available is not helping matters, even if it only means waiting an hour sometimes. They want to see what they just built now.
Title: Re: Doubts about API
Post by: admin on August 21, 2014, 01:11:21 PM
Sure, I understand. The Lite to Pro is a one way ticket (once you save in Pro you can't go back to lite due to tech limitations).
However, I think that Lite should be easy enough for the normal user, and if you wanted to cut it down further you could customize it via JS and remove the need for Dropbox...  just my 2 cents.
Title: Re: Doubts about API
Post by: teethstraight on November 14, 2014, 09:37:12 AM
I fully agree with what criley said. We're in the exact same position regarding clients who need their presentations overseen and managed by an admin, but also want user friendly control options at their disposal. I initially thought that this is what Lite aimed to be. But the fact that is has no interfacing with Pro, makes it useless, in my opinion. Sacrificing capabilities for a slightly more user friendly interface doesn't make sense.

I've said this before, but someone who actually takes the time to research and setup a digital signage platform for their office/business is likely going to be advanced enough to operate Pro with no hassle, or at least figure it out in a few days. They will immediately recognize that Pro is better than Lite, and likely go straight to Pro. You guys have said it yourself, "Lite is a stepping-stone to Pro". Most business owners are wanting to hand over the content updating to their staff. So while the owner might be tech savvy, his staff are not.

My 4 years of experience in this industry shows that the business owner who wants digital signage doesn't have the time to figure out hardware, setup, workflow etc. They hire a digital signage to come in and set everything up, and they just want to know how they can quickly and easily update the content. They don't want to worry about software updates, system crashes, no signal messages, scheduling, timelines, polling, aver media bugs, and all that other nonsense. That's what they pay me to take care of. They want it to work and they want it to be quick and simple to update. They don't care what software it is, they just want it to work. Lite is still too advanced for the average staff member to operate. You guys might disagree, but take it from someone who deals with staff on a regular basis handling support issues. Things that seem incredibly basic for us, are impossible for them.

As criley suggested, I see a portal being the best solution holding massive potential, with absolute basic control such as paste content in folder and have it populate to campaign. My company has invested a bit into such development, but it's ultimately still a proxy that doesn't directly interact with SignageStudio or SignagePlayer. It just makes my workflow easier for managing, but still has many limitations.

There is a huge gap in the marketplace for this. People like me and criley, and hundreds of others, who manage networks using your software, deal with those who run digital signage in their workplace on a daily basis. We're the go-between for the developers and the business owners. But this is resulting in a disconnect, because the developers are developing based on what they think the business owner wants, instead of listening to the network manager who is actually providing the service.

Please listen to us and bring about some change that will benefit everyone.
Title: Re: Doubts about API
Post by: admin on November 14, 2014, 12:15:53 PM
Hi teethstraight,

But that is exactly why we created StudioLite + API, so "more techi" customers can use Lite, and you can provide via the API a bare bone interface as well...

Title: Re: Doubts about API
Post by: criley on November 14, 2014, 12:22:48 PM
Well, not exactly. A true system that would mirror what everyone is looking for would be the Studio Pro that allows the manager to restrict access and viewing rights to any part of the system. Each resource would be able to be placed into a work group and/or sub work groups where users are given permission to access those work groups and only those work groups. This would include the campaigns and timelines as well. Not to mention the ability to only show the components we wish to be seen by certain work groups and roles. I think you are close, but there needs to be some modification to the access codes to allow unlimited codes, but rather than access codes, use work groups so the managers can create groups that are meaningful to them and their clients.
Title: Re: Doubts about API
Post by: admin on November 14, 2014, 01:53:43 PM
ok noted, yes we do have plans to enhance the privileges and permissions...