0

There are a lot of questions on this topic, but they don't seem to distinguish between executables for desktop or server-side apps. I suppose my first question would be: what's the difference? For example, Zeit/pkg says they are a "node.js binary compiler", whereas nwjs (formerly node-webkit) says they are a "an app runtime based on Chromium and node.js".

I tried zeit/pkg and it works great, but have read that there can be performance issues unless it's configured properly. I wanted to make sure I was choosing the right tool and came across nwjs. It seems to do a lot of the same stuff pkg does, but has a larger following, as well as more docs and a robust api. Can I use nwjs as a server-side executable (i.e. not using the desktop feature) the same way I would use pkg?

This answer states that nwjs "is an option, but it really isn't set-up to do a server - client type relationship", but then a comment says "you can launch a server from node-webkit just in the way you launch it in Node.js. It's just that node-webkit provide another way beyond B/S architecture".

So, is nwjs effectively the same as pkg, or fundamentally different?

I realize that there's also Electron, which states "build cross platform desktop apps" and appears similar to nwjs. I'm not trying to get into a Electron vs nwjs debate, but rather desktop vs. server, if there's a difference.

Andrew
  • 2,368
  • 1
  • 23
  • 30

1 Answers1

1

you got most things already, only few clarifications are needed. Reason nw.js / Electron declares itself as for desktop application is, it's core architectural design is intended to integrate node.js with chromium to have UI enables create application does have UI. You can still use part of those framework (node.js side) without initiating visible ui, in that case behaviorwise it'll be similar to plain node.js does. Still there is caveat, like as it tightly integrated with chromium in core already for some cases you should have screen to chromium correctly initiates (or creating virtual buffer as lot of CI does, or etcs).

Also, when your concern is performance, I'd doubt using UI framework for server side work achieves what you desire - while there won't be huge, integration between node to chromium have overhead compare to bare node.js obvioulsy.

Getting back to original question, I feel question itself is somewhat vague. If the intention is truly server side application probably you won't need to package it but correctly deploy node and its dependency modules or packaging it sort of installable manner instead of creating single binary as pkg does.

OJ Kwon
  • 4,385
  • 1
  • 20
  • 24
  • Thanks for the info. I want to package it so that the customer doesn't have to install nodejs, hence the use of pkg (simply click an .exe). Also, there's source code protection since it's binary. I'm curious about your comment "packaging it sort of installable manner" - do you have an references for this? Is it a preferred methodology than pkg? – Andrew Feb 22 '18 at 22:05
  • there are huge number of resources around plain old installer. You can internally install nodejs via those installer as well, then install proper module. Lastly, there is nothing like `code protection` - regardless of how you package it, code is readable. – OJ Kwon Feb 23 '18 at 01:02