Slashdot Mirror
New IE Disables Netscape-style Plug-ins
Snibor Eoj writes: "In his latest column, Robert Cringely takes a look at Microsoft's motivation for disabling Netscape API plug-ins in IE. As always with Cringely, it's an interesting take on things. We'll see how this one turns out..." Among other things, this will disable Quicktime plugins.
if you had debug information, would you know what to do with it?
could you name a windows debugger?
They're not idiots.
But like any battle/skirmish, it's better to have in your head and in the head of those who support you, the idea that your enemy is weak, fumbling, and can do no right. Hey, read Modern Tyrants for great examples of this mentality in the 20th century.
And even those that DO know about it don't
seem to realize the huge improvements that have been made just since 2.1, like, in the last 2 weeks.
i do!!
Not even close to the truth.
Apple's Market cap is 6.4 *BILLION*.
Microsoft "invested" $150 million in Apple in 1997 as a function of settlement for M$ dicking around with Apple and their tech. (Out of that $150M, 2/3 of it was for licensing.)
For their money, they picked up 150,000 shares of Apple stock that they couldn't sell until 8/5/00. There was one split that I know of prior to the sell point, which was a 2:1 split, which means that MS would hold 300,000 shares. If they still hold it (can't find records to indicate that they do) at current price puts it at about $5.4M in stock.
(If you take a high point in the stock after they were able to sell, it would have been about $18M worth of stock. But I don't know if any/all has been sold in the last year.)
So, no matter how you look at it, $5Million out of $6.4BILLION is a drop in the bucket. (For Apple. A pico-drop for MicroSoft.) Hardly what anyone would call "a large portion."
(Oh, and M$'s stock jumped nearly the cost of the investment in Apple when the news was made public. Of course.)
______
Once: you're a philosopher. Twice: a pervert.
I knew this. I just have that click happy trigger finger.
Everyone forgets that Netscape plugins are being removed by a Service Pack! Is that really normal? A Service Pack removing a major feature like plugins? So if a user wants to patch a security hole, he has to give up Netscape plugins? Sounds fishy to me.
(IANAL)
Just because 95% of the people choose to use Microsoft's OS's and software doesn't make them a monopoly.
Maybe not in the purest, Webster definition, which incidentally is:
Main Entry: monopoly
Pronunciation: m&-'nä-p(&-)lE
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural -lies
Etymology: Latin monopolium, from Greek monopOlion, from mon- + pOlein to sell
Date: 1534
1 : exclusive ownership through legal privilege, command of supply, or concerted action
2 : exclusive possession or control
3 : a commodity controlled by one party
4 : one that has a monopoly
...but the most conservative, business-friendly appeals court in the US disagrees with you, and unanimously no less (7 to 0).
Microsoft has a legal monopoly because of the immense market share they have. All it takes is one gas station not selling Standard Oil, and anyone can go buy from them. With Windows, you can't just go out and get something else, at least not without a great deal of cost and hassle. First you have to install a new OS on your computer (something almost all users are incapable of), then you have to replace all of the programs you have invested hundreds/thousands of dollars in to work on the new OS. Not to mention the fact that most of these programs aren't even available on other platforms the run on Intel-compatible PC's.
These are the reasons (more or less) why MS has a legal monopoly (which is different from an absolute monopoly).
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Apples and oranges. Microsoft _had_ the feature, and they are removing it; Netscape _doesn't have_ any such feature. Whether MS can/should remove it is a different issue, but annoyance is more understandable over a soon-to-be-removed feature some people found useful. And also, given MS's less than good image in regards to abuse of monopoly power, they'll be more readily accused of all kinds of nasty schemes behind any action they take.
I like paying taxes. With them I buy civilization -- Oliver Wendell Holmes
Cringely's delusional. He's a Steve Gibson parrothead. He's paranoid about the almighty power of Microsoft. He has little to no basis in reality.
No wonder you guys love him so much.
Because a lot of people want to run executable code on their web pages. To do that, you have two options: a Netscape-style plugin, or an ActiveX control. ActiveX controls are an IE-only monstrosity, but Netscape-style plugins (used to) work in both, so if you used a plugin, you got IE and Netscape support with a single implementation.
We had planned to do this very thing with a project I'm working on. Looks like we'll have to revisit it. Moan.
It's perfect! MS will be slapped down by their ignorance, and the mass of netizens will flock back to Netscape because they can't be without the ability to load web pages!
Alright, we know from the article that Quicktime is out for sure.
:)
But won't removing also kill Flash, one of the few Internet-wide plugins that I can be pretty sure these days that the majority of the visitors to my website can see? If that happens, a whole lot of site designers will sure be peeved.
Course, that will include every media company and such.
However, it would help me get away from those cutesy webpages I see sometimes that keep on playing annoying loops of midi quality music and disable the controls too (and which takes it's own pleasant time to load on my 56k)
Go to www.opera.com and grab opera, go to www.quicktime.com and download quicktime, when the installer asks you where the netscape plugin goes, send it to c:\program files\opera\plugins (or wherever you put Opera). Now run opera, go to file, preferences. Go to plugins, hit find plugins. Hit cancel on everything that comes up, but watch for "video/quicktime". When you see that, hit OK, then keep hitting cancel. Now go to www.adcritic.com, and enjoy :-)
ActiveX controls run as the user on the system - there's no "sandbox" and the only security is that it'll only run digitally signed controls. And on the default permissions, it'll ask you first. That's it.
As a plugin framework, ActiveX - well, works. I personally do not enjoy trying to write ActiveX controls, but I've never really tried to other than a simple one that didn't work. It seems to work about as well as the Netscape plugin API for simple plugins. It's just as secure - both involve running native code as the user - and it's actually much easier to install new plugins with.
MS's entire browser technology is much more extensible than Netscape's ever will be, and ActiveX controls as plugins are one part of that. ActiveX controls as downloaded content are a security nightmare, but as plugins, it's just as secure as any Netscape plugin.
You are in a maze of twisty little relative jumps, all alike.
Why REMOVE a used feature when leaving the code doesn't actually hurt anything and supports your current user base?
To make lots and lots of money.
Konq has been my one and only browser since KDE 2.0 came out. I am in LOVE.
-- Fester
"Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows."
...from shipping its award winning Java virtual machine...
...They spent several years suing to stop Microsoft from
shipping a high performance Java virtual machine that took advantage of
Windows. Rather than pursue a new licensing arrangement...
Gotta love pr spin.
Forgot to mention that you were violating the license you already signed.
If you can't get the select tag to work in Netscape 6.1, then I dread to think what your HTML must look like. It's hardly rocket science. You can do stuff using CSS with SELECT's in Netscape 6/Mozilla that don't work at all in IE.
Last I knew, Outlook wasn't part of IE. Of course, the way MS has been "integrating" things, who knows how long that'll remain true.
They can't have a valid patent. It is a patent on a pure idea or the use of a generic machine. Those should never be valid patents. Make your ATMs with computers inside and patent them for all I care. Just don't patent pure mathematics.
Best. Comment. Ever. Enjoy!
Is because it sets the tone that ANY third party widget that some one slaps onto a Microsoft product is subject to their whim. You are to let them use the fruits of your labor as they see fit. And if you don't like it, then in the time it takes for you to win a law suit against them, they will have created a parallel technology and simply code you out of the OS.
This is bad because it establishes the fact that your app/plugin/whatever working in Windows is a priviledge that M$ can revoke if they decide they don't like you or if they want your revanue stream. I hope the US government takes the necessary steps to correct this sorry situation before the entire software industry is M$
No it isn't. It's Sun's. They refuse to let it go, refuse to let it be an open standard, and they never will allow it.
I'm afraid it is you who are wrong about a great many things...
In particular, it's finally time to lay to rest the false notion that Sun controlls Java. It is controlled by a standards body called the Java Community Process, plain and simple. IBM has a major VM as do other companies, and they are not letting Sun alone hold the reigns on Java. There are far too many corperations from all sides that have gone with Java to let Sun alone control things.
Furthermore, I would argue that not only is Java controlled by other groups besides Sun but in fact Java is the most open and interactive standard to ever come down the pike, and THAT is what has really made it popular with developers. All new aspects of Java (like generics support or new API's) come through the JCP, and along the way ANYONE can help shape the direction of things - I know as I've been on the KVM mailing list as well as the Java 2D mailing list before they were finished standards, and ideas from individuals were incorperated into final standards. That means everyone who wants to has a say in how the API works along with the giant corperations, who send reps to the ISO bodies you seem to think Java needs to be controlled by. I don't know about you but I like enhancements done out in the open with vigorous discussion from everyone rather than by some smoky-back-room process.
If Java really is closed, how can projects like Kaffe exists? (GNU JVM).
Ugh, this is getting so tired. XP CAN run Java. In fact, in can run the MS JVM if you download and install it. It can run any JVM you want that you download and install.
Well, that's great! So support then is on the same level as Perl, in that you can download and install that. What percentage of users do that again? I think right now I'd say that XP comes with better support for Code Red than Java.
I agreee though with the concept that XP really has shot itself in the foot by not including Java. This leaves the door open to say "well, they're going to have to download a VM anyway so we might as well use the Java plugin". Microsoft could have kept Applets mired in the old Java 1.1 world for quite some time, but now that the plugin is more of an ooption it can help further the use of Java. I know that discussion is happening right now at my own company, we're pretty sure to move on to using the Java Plugin for external applets to help provide a more standard applet environment.
Why do people insist on writing long comments trying to look smart, without actually bothering to know what they are talking about?
Why do most posters here insist on furthering group-think that's patently wrong? Who knows.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
oh don't get me wrong. i love winamp. i use it daily. i just thought it was ironic he would pimp it as a non-ms product, even tho it's owned by a company i consider to be just as bad if not worse (and i'm sure most would agree. or am i?)
I believe that Konqueror is getting support for ActiveX.
Meldroc, Waster of Electrons
Why not? There's a netscape plugin that runs ActiveX (used to be something called NPEXP). Can't find NpExp, but Esker makes a plug-in that does so...
Fascism starts when the efficiency of the government becomes more important than the rights of the people.
I really hope AOL does a smart thing and drop it. I can't wait till netscape dies. geez what a awesome day that will be. yay!
Java is no longer Sun's alone. Java is the industry's
No it isn't. It's Sun's. They refuse to let it go, refuse to let it be an open standard, and they never will allow it.
Although Java is technically still under the Sun umbrella, Java has grown too big for Sun to dictate its direction alone.
Danese Cooper a.k.a. Sun Microsystems's "Open Source Diva" and Manager of Sun's Open Source Program Office, recently quoted in an interview about the Reaction to OSCON's Microsoft-Red Hat Debate as saying:
Sun doesn't want Java to be their proprietary code, but until companies such as Microsoft learn they can't taint Java for their own ends Java is better under the watchful eye of Sun.
Do you seriously think that Microsoft wouldn't have gotten away with distorting Java without Sun there watchdogging them and suing them when they tried?
They can ditch whatever they want, period. Regardless of "monopoly" status, which can be debated here for ever, MS is still in control of thier product. MS has no monopoly in browsers, never has, and never will. Therefore they can create any browser any way they want forever, period. They can license it, give it away, kill off Netscape, DO ANYTHING they want to it. Its thier property, thier software, thier decision.
;)
Monopolies are regulated. Monopolies - regardless of your overwhelming adherance to capitalist-dogma - can occur with much less than %XY of marketshare. Any business with enough power to do as they will, with no effective opposition to check on technology, direction and price is a monopoly. Period. Corporations serve customers. When customers have no choice the corporation is a public service.
And btw, if MS ditched RFC 822 and did their own e-mail thing then yes, it would be their perrogative. They could do ANYTHING they want with THEIR software, and I will do ANYTHING I want with my computer.
Wrong, they would be doing exactly what it anti-monoply laws are meant to prevent (see above) - one major player cannot randomly force their clients to make a move - one that makes no sense, other than to cripple already limp competitiors - this is abuse of their monopoly position. If they *DIDNT* have a monopoly - would they arbitrarily switch to a non-open standard? NO, of course not, it would be suicide, unless their was a compelling reason (technology or price)... breaking the plugin API is almost the same as saying "we are a monopoly - watch us extinguish our only competitor and ram change down the throat of the plugin vendors.. try and stop us"... where do the vendors go? NOWHERE b/c m$ is a monopoly... see it coming round now?
Its important to remember that popularity and market share do not mean monopoly. Even if 99.99% of all computer users used IE it still wouldn't necessarily mean MS had a monopoly in browsers.
Most people, and the law disagree. It really matters how you define monopoly. In the US, if Microsoft isnt a monopoly - your laws need to be adjusted. M$ has been running rampant in the IS industry - UNCHALLENGED - for far too long.. the health of the IS industry is suffering, opportunity is non-existant, innovation has been stiffled.
If the DoJ dosnt win a reward with some teeth this wont be the end of Anti-Trust concerns for M$... there is always the EU
Kick back, relax, and have a cold, refreshing can of SHUT THE FUCK UP. If you use & like IE, don't bitch. If you use Netscape/alternative browser, it doesn't even apply to you - so don't bitch.
Yeah, but the article conner_bw linked to is the clarification Netscape put out a week later. They aren't getting out of the browser business, they're just emphasizing the media side of Netscape a lot more. Most of the Imminent Death of Netscape articles were just oversensationalization, not hard fact.
If god had intended you to be naked, you would have been born that way.
> They only took out the Quicktime plugin because
> it is a stable feature, and thus isn't
> compatible with any Microsoft products
Err, how about Windows Media Player? You can't tell me that that's any better?
http://support.microsoft.com/directory/article.asp ?id=KB;EN-US;Q303401 says that you are wrong.
Netscape didn't say they were out of the browser business, that was merely the spin put on it by the online media. They actually said they'd no longer be seen as *just* a browser company. There's no slowing in Mozilla development, Netscape 6.1 was just released a few weeks ago, and Netscape and/or Mozilla is likely to be part of a future AOL line-up.
So anything about Netscape being a dead product is just a red herring.
Actually they are not crippling XP as relates to running java, they are just removing the default 4 year old JVM.
.Net so it only makes sense that they jettisoned Java.
If OEM's pick up the call and install a JVM on new systems Java will be better off.
The downside for Sun is now they have to pay for this rather than have it done for them by MS. The upside is they can get better JVM's installed.
Besides MS has to make room for default hooks needed by
GO MICROSOFT! and everyone stop picking on them. (although this technique will expire in a month, when everyone decides to jump on MS again...)
Microsoft thinks to itself ~if we change it these ways, and don't point out what we changed, lots of people won't notice they're writing "Java" that runs only on our systems~ (this is documented in the antitrust findings of fact)
Sun takes umbrage at M$ breaking their contract and trying to hijack their product. Sun takes M$ to court, and wins.
M$ then blames Sun for the fallout, and whines
-- I especially love the "real world compatibility" part: compatibility, that is, with Microsoft's trojans, designed to get their corrupted "Java" in.Lord, how I pity the honest people who work there.
As always, all IMO. Insert "I think" everywhere grammatically possible.
Actually it is hilarious to see items from the Unix haters list getting recycled as anti-Microsoft items.
I would consider it hilarious too that you are preferring a less secure operating system than the one you used to ridicule for it security.
They should have had a popup message informing the user the functionality would be depricated in the near future. Instead, they caused it to break. I'm not sure if Microsoft is so competent at crushing the competition, or they do it like a bumbling giant stepping on the little people while looking for the light switch.
Obviously, we'll get a slew of complaints concerning anti-trust allegations and such. Yet here's my question: should intercompatibility and interoperability be mandatory in software when they aren't in the rest of market law?
Also, isn't this motivation for a new standard in web browsing? We have one for the languages of the web, and for the content. Yet we don't have one for the viewer or plugins. If there were a standard, such as in CD players or other infrastructure, then we would have a reason to be upset when someone deviates from the standard. As it is, the businesses devise their own standards, for good and bad.
Pax Digitalia
"what is the use of supporting the api of a dead browser?"
1. Netscape 4.x did not magically stop working the day AOL bought Netscape.
2. WinME STILL runs Win3.1 apps.
3. It required time, money and effort on MS's part to actively REMOVE Netscape style plugin support. Why REMOVE a used feature when leaving the code doesn't actually hurt anything and supports your current user base?
Burn Hollywood Burn
150 Opening BINARY mode data connection for slashdot.sig (129323052 bytes).
What everyone here is missing is that .NET is covered by this patent too!!! "Switching to .NET" doesn't help M$ at all, and it wouldn't help Netscape either.
The settlement was about shipping a non-conformant version of Java, and calling it Java. The evil empire was attempting to hijack Java by including proprietary pieces in the dev tools and runtimes. If they had gotten away with it, everyone else's Java would have "broken". Sun did the right thing. Bill Gates can eat my ass.
When IE doesn't support NPIs, while being the majority browser, developers will have to decide if they want to write two plug-ins, one for IE, and one for the rest of all browsers, or just write one for IE.
I case you didn't get it yet, MS is trying to break a working defacto standard of a competitor (that benefits all users) by using their monopoly power. IOW nothing new to be seen here.
Lars T.
To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck
Why do people insist on writing long comments trying to look smart, without actually bothering to know what they are talking about?
welcome to the net...
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Quit bashing microsoft.
No. I love to bash MS. It's what gives my life purpose. I'm glad there is so much bickering in the industry. They all want to be on top: Oracle, Sun, Apple. What galls intelligent people is that Microsoft and their mediocre products are on top. Is Scott McNealy really any more appealing than Bill Gates?
They only took out the Quicktime plugin because it is a stable feature
Quicktime isn't stable in IE. It crashes on big files about 3/4 the way through playing. I know some others who have the same problem.
Microsoft practices the Conan theory of competition:
Man: Conan, what is good in life?
Conan: To crush your enemies... see them scattered before you... and to hear the lamentation of their women.
"You'll get nothing, and you'll like it!"
Heh, it isn't even a point release. It is a "Service Pack". IE 5.5 supports it, so does IE 5.5 sp1. Just not IE 5.5 sp2. It's crazy. If they are so afraid of violating the patent, why don't they also remove support for the tag?
I'm trying to code an online test that has an audio clip with questions about that audio. The desginers requested that I make it so that the audio can only be played twice.
My first thought was to have an embedded quicktime movie that used javascript to control when it was played, and how many times. Not only does IE not support the quicktime/javascript API, but now I read that they are doing away with completely.
Great. so what am I supposed to do? Insist that all students who take the exam use netscape? Learn activeX and write two completely different versions of the test? Create an interactive flash movie to do something as simple as control the playback of some audio?
Those are great options. Man, the web has become a shitty place to publish content....
How much for the land?
(Which of course means it will never happen.)
Well, I didn't suggest that they *still* hold the stock, but that they couldn't sell it for a period, and *even* if they still held it, it wasn't worth that much in the big picture. :)
But, seriously: Do you have links for the time frame and point that they were shorted on? Your comment seems to suggest that it was well before Aug '00.
I am a little curious and I looked (until I lost interest) and didn't find specific info. [It is much easier to ask someone for info...]
Thnx.
______
Once: you're a philosopher. Twice: a pervert.
zombocom will still work!
<bart
As far as I know, Apple isn't going around fucking with anyone. They make their hardware, they make their software, and they throw out some marketing about thinking different, or whatever the current slogan is. Apple did sue a couple of companies that tried ripping off the Imac, but I can see why. Their legal department is a bit feisty when it comes to copyright stuff, but wouldn't you be to if you were fighting tooth and nail for 7% share or so? At least they're not out breaking laws and agreements, and planning on subscription licences and .APPLENET.
Just my viewpoint.
Vote monkeys into Congress. They are cheaper and more trustworthy.
I guess if your local phone company decides they're going to switch their signal to an encoded digital format, for which only they can supply compatible phones, that will be fine too.
Yes it is... I mean, no it's not... aw, hell I give up :)
I prefer xmms, splay, or freeamp. The are really Free.
Hmm, probably none.
5)By creating the perception that plug-in technology is a liability, the laywers start looking for other browser publishers who do use plug-ins and sue them. Hello Netscape, AOL, and maybe even desktop shells with integrated HTML support. Hello Gnome.
Whose lawyers? Suits about what? WTF _are_ you talking about?
it's a relief that quicktime plug-ins are going to be disabled. Microsoft Media is a better format. All we need is Media Player for Linux.
Sun's Java plugin uses NS API.
Not as far as I can see. I've been running it on XP for a while now and just had a look in my plugins folder and nothing there. Nothing in the registry pointing at it as a NS plugin either. Looked at the exports of the DLL and there are both NS API and ActiveX exports so you'll find on IE it is loaded as ActiveX.
Fear: When you see B8 00 4C CD 21 and know what it means
Instant 5 Insightful.
Bite the hand.
1) If IE stops supporting external plug ins, how many plug-in publishers will go out of business?
.NET.
2) If a plug-in maker goes out of business, I won't have future updates of that plug-in for my Linux based browser.
3) If a plug-in such as RealPlayer or Flash goes away, websites will change to a MS based technology to drive it's content.
4) If a websites require MS based technology that is not supported by my browser, the internet starts becoming much smaller for non-MS people.
5)By creating the perception that plug-in technology is a liability, the laywers start looking for other browser publishers who do use plug-ins and sue them. Hello Netscape, AOL, and maybe even desktop shells with integrated HTML support. Hello Gnome.
6) Without plug-in support it becomes damn near imposible for other OSs (Hello Linux) to utilize Microsoft's
7) This is a very clever way for MS to further the goal of "the browser is the operating system". Hello monopoly.
Depending on your version of IE you may need to download the "IE Power Tools" from microsoft.com to do this, I believe (could be wrong)
Well, it sorta is. You didn't see Netscape rushing out to support ActiveX when it came out. Come to think of it, who really uses Netscape on the Windows side, anyway? When I browse in Windows 2000, I tend to prefer IE. (When I browse in Linux, I try to use Konqueror/Netscape 6).
Just more of the same nonsense.
Let's face it, a cometitors' plugin interface is bound to be more stable and consistent than anything MS publishes, for reasons that have been beaten into the ground.
Having an IE plugin interface in Mozilla, for example, would be ludicrous. The lizards would spend far more time playing catchup with MS interfaces than doing anything else, thus killing the project. Duh.
Hopefully the courts will demand a few things from MS immediately:
1) Open MS Exchange to LDAP/POP3 access unconditionally.
2) Allow OEMs the right to add or remove components, software and icons unconditionally.
3) Allow OEMs the right to ship dual boot systems unconditionally.
If Ford shipped a car that only ran on Ford(tm) gasoline, or a GM dealer couldn't add accessories to a vehicle at the customer's request, or on their own initiative, there would be OUTRAGE expressed by the dealers, end buyers, and accessory shops.
These steps should have been taken years ago.
Treatment, not tyranny. End the drug war and free our American POWs.
See my user info for links.
RXC says:
Goodbye indeed. See ya. Don't let the door hit you in the marketing department on the way out.
I, for one, won't miss the EMBED tag. I'd also be willing to go without IFRAME, MARQUEE, and BLINK.
Microsoft's getting rid of EMBED? Bully for them. It's about time.
I believe that Konqueror is getting support for ActiveX.
Just a note. Konqueror, if I recall correctly, will be supporting ActiveX via the WINE project.
I couldn't say what popular opinion is on this, but I personally don't agree with the goals of the WINE project. If you support the ideals of Free software, why would you create a system, the primary purpose of which is to run proprietary software?
That being said, I suppose adding support that increases web interoperability is good, but I think my personal approach will be to just live without ActiveX. I've gotten along pretty well without Java applets or Javascript. Adding another annoying (personal opinion) web technology to that list shouldn't hurt me too much.
As for WINE, while I have plenty of respect for the talent and dedication of its developers, I just can't bring myself to install it. If I want to run Windows programs, I'll run Windows.
Alan
P.S. (offtopic) How do WINE developers get away with what they are doing without having the holy hand of Microsoft come down upon them? Does anyone have any information about the legality of reimplementing the Win32 API?
dude you have dried cum in your beard.
NO NO NO NO
These are not "Netscape style plugins"
They are <EMBED>, yes Netscape probably
was the major force getting them into HTML
but they are legal HTML (3.2 I believe)
Now IE has dropped support for this tag and is breaking HTML 3.2 support (surprise
surprise).
What people are calling "IE style plugins"
are <OBJECT>which are part of HTML 4.0.
PS> All those filters and still doesn't translate HTML enitites in text-mode, gret code Slash!
Were that I say, pancakes?
I always immediately leave any site that *requires* a plugin of any kind. If you can't take a picture of it, write some words about it or (in a rare case) make a video of it in a format everybody can read, I'm not interested.
And if you WERE interested in it -- what exactly could you do about it?
"And like that
Cool! I own MS stock, so the more anticompetitive they are, the better.
Why would a developer create a Netscape plugin on the Windows platform?
Perhaps because he wants a plugin that works in Netscape and Opera? The Netscape plugin API has been the defacto standard. It has of problems, but it's relatively easy to implement on the web browser side. The Netscape plugin API is also relatively easy to understand as a plugin developer. ActiveX has a fairly steep learning curve. Sure, you can support both, but for a small developer this is just more time (and money)
Our school uses kerberos authentication for many web pages, and we use a "kweb" Netscape-style plugin. So.... any user who "upgrades", loses the ability to authenticate. And then they go and whine at tech support. What a pain.
My server
I believe that was Digital Research, not Digital Equipment Corporation.
Ok... That URL (the one in the location box in the image) works perfectly in Mozilla build 2001080703, and /. has for at least the past 3 months.
"Official" Netscape builds are a big mistake. Actually, was that 6.1 or 6?
This isn't a statement of Microsoft's reasons for dropping Java so much as as a thinly-veiled excuse to sling mud. For shit's sake, the first thing they do is call Sun a bunch of hypocrites. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.
If you think this is a clear statement of Microsoft's reasons for dropping Java, then I have some land to sell you.
Tastes like burning! - Ralph Wiggum
Wow, moderators must be on drugs today...
EVERYTHING that is happening in software engineering, everything new and bold and adventurous, is happening in Java.
Java is simply taking over.
Java is no longer Sun's alone. Java is the industry's.
Obviously should have been (+1, Funny). And quite hilarious at that. But Insightful? Sheesh.
WAKE UP! M$ will have to also remove support from IE if they lose that patent suit. They aren't making any noises about doing that, are they. This is just an example of them trying to make up an excuse for taking an action in the meantime that the DOJ would otherwise see as being blatantly anticompetitve.
... why people seem to think that IE and Netscape are the only choices for a decent browser out there when there's such wonderful browsers like Opera out there (not to mention Konqueror--but I digress). It's small (compared to MS and NS bloatware), fast, doesn't spy on you, and it's free (as in adware--oh well, three out of four ain't bad!). The ability to turn off images with the click of a button (or a single keystroke) does wonders for surfing sites with annoying graphics! Give it a whirl--you won't be sorry!
You can ditch MS and their crapware. All it takes it a little digging!
-- Shamus
Bleah!
use winamp for mp3s!! It's free and much better than Media Player... not to mention not Microsoft =)
If God gave us curiosity
They only took out the Quicktime plugin because it is a stable feature, and thus isn't compatible with any Microsoft products.
If Apple were willing to add some buggy code, I'm sure the Microsoft would be more than happy to allow the feature in Internet Explorer
Would we expect any less? This way, they get to screw Apple's video standard in favor of their own, *and* they get to get rid of a deprecated feature that almost nobody else uses.
Sure it is a hassle, but Windows or Microsoft per say has an API they're trying to get developers to follow. Netscape a few weeks ago if you don't remember basically said "We are out of the browser Business" so what is the use of supporting the api of a dead browser? Especially one that is based on Mozilla which isn't even a 1.0 product yet?
Sure netscape 6.1 amd mozilla browsers are getting there, but not quite there yet and maybe in IE 6.01 ot 6.1 you will see it back in or an optional download
Finally Microsoft is trimming some bloat, and all we have to do is complain or bring up things that aren't even relevant (like monopolistic practices, what in the hell does that have to do with supporting a dead products plugins?)
Again, just my opinion.
GM started "Planned Obsolence" in the early 20th century. The person given the credit for the idea is Alfred Sloan. During his time GM went from a tiny manufacturing company of ball bearings, parts and accessories to becoming the largest manufacturing company in the entire world. GM and all other American Car companies were stagnant, which is why they had problems in the 80's. "Planned Obsolence" is not why GM had problems in the 80's.
How many people noticed that mime-type functionality has been removed from IE for awhile now? IE now supposedly "sniffs" the type of file coming from the web server and then uses a windows associated program for that particular file extension. The problem comes in when you want to force a download of file (add file extension to octet-stream mime-type on web server), this flat out does not work in IE anymore! Sure there are hacks but M$ removing mime-type functionality and using the OS' file associations is crazy! Just another example I guess of M$' web makeover!
...it's funny that in his article he makes it out to be some convoluted evil plot that MS is doing this to stick it to Sun. But, surprise, surprise, IT WAS IN THEIR LEGAL SETTLEMENT. As much as one may believe that MS can and does ignore the law at all turns, eventually a company--no matter how motivated they are to avoid it--will have to abide by a ruling of a judge eventually. Sun pitched a hissy-fit, and they're getting exactly what they asked for. It's just unfortunate that Sun didn't think about what it was they were really asking for in the first place--they just went on a usual knee-jerk reaction to attempt at sticking it to the Evil Empire. You can't have it both ways. If you force someone (or attempt to force them) into doing something, don't be surprised and call "Unfair!!" when they decide to play along. And, I'm sure this will make me *really* unpopular... But, honestly, that guy is *way* too paranoid for his own good. Really, if MS wanted to roll out TCP/MS they would do it whenever they felt like it--not make an excuse. *L* (Innovation need no reason. ;-)
What's a sig?
Interestingly enough. I think what will make this difficult, is the large number of old I.E. browsers out there (not to mention the 5-10% of users who use other browsers). These browsers won't have the capability to do what I.E. 6 supports.
Huh? Are you under the impression that .NET has anything to do with web browsers? It doesn't, not at all.
Who I feel really bad for are designers of web pages who are caught in the middle.
Why would you feel bad for them? If they've been coding to the W3C standards, then Microsoft's been the leader in displaying their pages correctly for years now. I guess it would suck if they cared about Netscape 4.x and earlier users, but well, few people care about them anymore, and there aren't that many left anyway. And if they do care about 'em, they'd be better off complaining to Netscape about poor standards support than spending a single second bitching about Microsoft.
Not related to your post, but maybe someone else can tell me why Microsoft is supposed to keep Netscape's shoddy plug-in API? When did Netscape ever support any of Microsoft's APIs? Hell, just dropping the stubborness over supporting "document.all" would've done wonders for their own users.
Oh yeah, and my RealPlayer, Flash, and Shockwave plug-ins (controls) work just fine. It's Apple's fault that they're not properly coding to the API, and this isn't the first time that they've had this problem with QuickTime. Why do you think QuickTime has always had such a bad reputation for nasty installs on Windows? That's why they're working with Microsoft to get the problem solved.
Finally, I'm guessing that it must be Mac zealots who think that this is some big anti-competitive move against Apple, because the rest of the world knows otherwise: The company with which Microsoft is heavily engaged in a battle over media is called Real. Apple's QuickTime isn't even on the radar screen, so please, for the love of God, get over yourselves already.
Now they don't have the burden of claiming that they are a crossplatform de facto web standard for streaming media, which Mickeysoft has assaulted to the detriment of all web users on MS MAC or Linux!
How I marvel at the sheer brilliance of that underpaid genius, Steve Jobs!
So this little company, Eolas holds a patent that essentially wipes out Java, ActiveX, etc. Only they are just suing Microsoft. Microsoft holds out until .Net is ready (now) and then says that IE won't support the functionality that violates the patent. They switch over to .Net applications and are now in the clear. Meanwhile Eolas is still free to sue Sun, etc. From the article:
.Net strategy. It will be interesting to see what happens if Eolas goes after Sun for Java.
"The Eolas patent covers the whole concept of executable content, which is at the very foundation of Java. So it looks like Java, too, is in violation of the patent. For that matter, so is Microsoft's Internet Explorer and ActiveX."
So, it could be argued that M$ is just covering their butt over the Eolas suit. Luckily for them this also pushes their
Microsoft Suggestion Form
I have sent them a polite request and I suggest you do the same. I also placed instructions on the video page of my website for visitors to do the same.
Stand up for interoperability - it is always good.
That is complete horseshit.
This just goes to show people will read whatever they want into a media story.
There is no requirement for Microsoft to support some random API they decided to support 5 years ago. Not even if it's popular or cross-platform. Heck, they don't even have to support HTML if they don't want to.
Female Prison Rape in NY
What, is this guy mad at Microsoft for being clever? So what if it gives Microsoft the perfect out for not supporting competitors' technologies within Microsoft products? A patent is a patent and if Microsoft doesn't want to pay the license fees of the patent holder, their legal obligation is to not use the patented technology. To me, the real problem here is the broad scope of Ealos's patent, not how Microsoft may screw some competitors by actually honoring someone else's patent.
You may not like Microsoft's possible actions in this case, and you may not like how it may further their end goals, but I don't see where they would have any legal choice.
And I for one would actually like to see Microsoft set a precendent by following the law.
My sigs always suck.
M$ breakdown proccess is being revised by another judge and they take such a monopolistic attitude ?
Don't gtes realize that this is just another nail in his company's coffin ???
What ? Me, worry ?
"I'd love to sign up for this, but we're not close enough yet. To succeed, we must do what AMD does - be better and cheaper."
Although AMD is having problems, because they don't have that one other bit in place: They can't sell it. They couldn't sell water to a man with a bag of gold dying of thirst in the desert. And that's why Intel's still raping them in the OEM market.
Fortunately, this is not a problem Sun has -- otherwise, Java wouldn't be where it is today.
So, let me get this straight, ms is blaming sun for not letting ms distribute its own proprietary, non standard version of java and trying to control the future of java (and change it to ms-java)? That is not an argument. That is a pr spin.
-CrackElf
"Blake is an idealist, Jenna. He cannot afford to think." - Kerr Avon, Star One, Blakes 7
The rest of us enjoy porn.
"Ugh, this is getting so tired. XP CAN run Java. In fact, in can run the MS JVM if you download and install it. It can run any JVM you want that you download and install."
You're missing the point: Mom & Pop modem-user don't have the time or the energy to download a Java VM. It's going to piss them off.
Your argument is just as lame as the Microsoft's argument that including IE withe OS wouldn't affect Netscape: "Oh, people can still download Netscape if they want to! We're not doing anything!"
The difference is that this time, people will blame Microsoft. And they'll be right to do so.
Windows API is Microsoft's?
That's funny, I don't need Microsoft licensed software or IP to compile this here cygwin application. In fact, last I heard the people making WINE were working on a reverse engineered library to implement the Windows API on Linux.
I can't believe you actually managed to say something funny for once.
As great hyperbole as that is. Apple will have an IE plugin of QT shortly. Thankyoumovealong.
Contrary to popular belief, coding is not all free blow-jobs and beer. Those things cost MONEY!
I'm talking about this.
You are in a maze of twisty little relative jumps, all alike.
Check out HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Classes\CLSID\{CAFEEFA C-0013-0001-0000-ABCDEFFEDCBA} in your registry -- The Sun Java plug-in loads via ActiveX.
What I'd really like to know is, while thinking this shit up, is Bill Gates petting a white cat in his lap?
Agreement is not conformity.
pr0n - keeping monitor glass spotless since 1981.
Loved the reference to a classic.
After all, he got modded up.
/. is no longer the pure nest of "rabid Linux-ism" that it used to be. Some people may see that as a bad thing, but I think it's a good thing. The ideas behind Linux/open source/free software are good ones and deserve a thriving community. The community is made stronger by some idealogical opposition, which keeps it realistic.
In short, the Windows folks here really add favorably to the mix. The reaction isn't automatically "f*** off" anymore to ideas which aren't automatically hostile towards Microsoft.
That's the way it should be.
Please mod this post only if you think others should/n't read this. I have enough ego^H^H^Hkarma. Thanks!
My microsoft fury isn't blind. It has been educated by 7-8 years of corperate abuse. When they change their ways maybe I'll cut them some slack. Declaring a vacuous development environment open and submitting it to ecma looks good on the surface but doesn't prove anything. At best it's a way to kill java with a monopoly-backed, but oh-so open, standard. At worst it's a bait and switch to get everyone on .NET, then woops we're all paying an MS tax on all our important transactions.
I may appear quixotic, but I think a good deal of skepticism is neded to battle this C#/.NET love-in. It's just plain unhealthy.
From the IE 5.5SP2 Download Page:
Anti-virus software users:Some anti-virus software programs may interfere with this download. Please disable anti-virus software while installing Internet Explorer.
Fascism starts when the efficiency of the government becomes more important than the rights of the people.
No, it's NOT the same. There's nothing to install, just a couple of radio buttons to click, AND they're already setup to prompt you before downloading signed controls and to NOT DOWNLOAD unsigned controls. This is the IE default setting.
Now, perhaps the prompt should be changed to "Do you want to download and run this bit of code on your machine? Are you sure? It could be dangerous, so you'd better have some idea who's sending it to you, even though its signed by CorporationX." Still, the current prompt isn't awful, but people just glance and click.
What'dya mean there's no BLINK tag!?
The like shows a screen capture of slashdot, broken in netscape 6. My appologies fom my other comment.
Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
I have IE, which does not crash at all when browsing. When running any "Netscape plug-in", it proceeds fine. Only when I run Quicktime movies, and the plug-in is being loaded, does the browser crash.
You're going to tell me it's the system, when nothing within the system is at fault here?
If you are on linux, at least give galeon or konqueror a shot. Mac OS X has iCab, OmniWeb, and IE. Windows users should stick with IE, naturally. I can't think of a good reason to be using netscape nowadays.
This is a wonderful sentiment, assuming a level playing field. Unfortunately there are likely to be no individual consortiums and very few consortiums who can stand up to the amount of sheer monetary power that Microsoft can throw at a given issue.
Remeber back in the days of yore, when if you wanted to surf the web, you had NCSA Mosaic or Lynx? Mosaic was "superior" in that it was a GUI browser. Then came Netscape, which was "superior" mostly because it took Mosaic and threw some money at it. Then the web starts becoming very popular, and Microsoft decides that they need a web broswer too. Because "embrace and extend" seems to mean "find out what's hot and spend a lot of money on it, Microsoft decided to put a lot into developing IE. I'll probably get flamed for this because I don't have a link to back up the statistics, but as is my understanding, Microsoft's inital R&D budget for MSIE was greater than the entire operating budget for Netscape, Inc. Additionally, they're not writing using a developers's kit. They've got the source code to the OS right there. How the hell do you compete with that?
I don't know what the answer necessarily is. But when you've got an OS that ships default on god knows what percentage of the PC's sold (I'll call it 90%, and I bet that's conservative), and the browser/media app/chat client/etc that is installed default on that OS, the normal rules of business competition don't apply.
And as a Linux user (surprise) it's one thing for Windows users if they want to use Media Player vs. Quicktime or who cares what. It's another thing when group apathy regarding standards and market forces means that I'm left sucking hind tit because of the choices I make regarding my desktop. Come on, people. The whole fucking point of HTTP and the Web was platform and browser independent access to information.
But masters, remember that I am an ass: though it be not written down, yet forget not that I am an ass.
were, not ware :)
I guess I spoke to loosely for you to understand.
.Net's long term adoption and acceptance.
MS needed to get rid of Java to remove a competative barrier to
How exactly did you apply computer science to the statement anyway. Are you narrowly refering to some type of technical implementation?
it's under a catagory entitiled 'vaporware'
if it makes you feel any better, I hate it too. I've posted a few really thought out and interesting and conversational posts and got zip for it. I've also posted 4 or 5 stupid funny 1-liners within the first 20 posts and gotten (+5, Funny) for it. Whenever I get mod points I make sure to read "Newest First, Threaded, -1" and give points to people who make points, not stupid one liners =) Moderate away... I have karma and I know how to use it!
If God gave us curiosity
Why would a developer create a Netscape plugin on the Windows platform?
Simple -- because it makes porting their application to other platforms much easier.
"And like that
Screw Flanders
.NET is based on ActiveX? Dude, what the fuck are you talking about? Go educate yourself, please.
To see quicktime images and movies! Did you read the arcticle? I bet you didn't. Did you read the title? Not that closely apparently. It is talking about Nescape-style pluglins--as in methodology for doing plugins. The quicktime plugin works this way. The quicktime plugin will not work with "IE 5.5 SP2 [for Windows]" (from the article).
At the next eco-hypocrisy-meeting, count the private jets used to get to the meeting. Should be interesting to see that
Does he really think the success of Java is based on the success of applets embedded in a web browser?
The way I see it, the longer Java exists, the further it is moving away from the client and into the server. And for good reason. Server side programmers get a well designed, well supported, well documented and open language with proper OO, and client side programmers get Flash.
You give me 5 websites with useful java applets and I'll give you 500 that have a java-powered server.
I don't really see what this has got to do with Microsoft. If they want to remove Java support with out-the-box XP they can. It's their product.
Java doesn't need Microsoft to survive, and Microsoft doesn't need Java.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not against Microsoft per se, I think Windows 2000 is a superb piece of engineering, but at the end of the day if all this goes through the only thing they will be losing is the enterprise application server market.
Invoicing, Time Tracking, Reporting
This was the first time I'd heard of the Eolas patent. Sounds like another company that's looking to get rich off of patents instead of, you know, creating any sort of useful product. (If you go to their web site, it seems to be little more than information about their lawsuit.) If I were Microsoft, I'd probably do the same thing, just to piss them off. But I'm petty and vindictive that way.
"Do you expect me to talk?" "No, Mr. Bond. I expect you to die!"
Huh? I said "From where I sit, most coding development, be it Java, C++, or C# is written based on the context of where it will be used."
Where from that do you get the impression that I'm 'bent over to microsoft'? My argument is that whatever language is used, environment mandates technology. Some people actually use C#, so it applies. It would have applied just as well if I substituted Fortran or Assembler.
Sheesh. Don't let your blind Microsoft Fury force you to tilt at windmills.
Kevin Fox
Java is Proprietary until sun gets off there ass and standardizes it.
It is only helping, as anyone knows java 1.1.3 sucks and 1.2 and 1.3.1 are mucho better.
Monopolies never give away something for free, unless it is to maintain market share. There is always one thing reflected in the actions of any monopoly: they will do anything legal, or illegal, even at a loss, to maintain that all important market share. Nothing is more important than market share. Even if you loose your shirt in the short term. Even if you are found guilty and have to pay fines. Once you have everyone bent over a barrel, you can make it up to them.
I doubt Microsoft really gives Solitare and Hearts away to further their monopolistic evil plot to conquer the universe.
Geeze... I really hope they don't start putting a Solitare icon on the desktop!
What's a sig?
Yes they can.
Sun never took Java away from Microsoft. The MS version of Java was IMHO, a non-standard implementation with the sole attempt to wrest control of the language away from Sun and the burgeoning Java community (e.g. JDirect instead of JNI).
Microsoft had the choice to build a version of the JVM that could at least implement the standard and they chose not to... Don't blame Sun for protecting their intrests and the intrests of the Java community from a bastardized MS version of the language.
"He was a wise man who invented beer." -- Plato
An activex Java applet engine is silly, but that's what MS wants, so they can co-opt part of the Java developer base. Sun's Java plugin uses NS API. Most of Java is open enough that you can run Java code and code in Java without using anything Sun. Cool high-profile things are happening with Java, and the only thing funny about that is how prejudiced programmers are language bigoting themselves out of jobs. Java is the best thing the open source movement has going for it, the only winner if Java loses is MS.
AC's cheerfully ignored
Comment removed based on user account deletion
You just don't get it, do you? You buy Windows, it comes with IE. If you don't buy Windows, then you can't run IE. Unless of course, you run MacOS, or Solaris. Which clearly the person that you where replying to did not.
I repeat the question: What are you, stupid?
Not knowing what the Netscape plug-in API and the ActiveX architecture are like, is there the possibility of developing a meta-API of some sort that would allow you to develop your plugin in a somewhat neutral manner and be able to deploy it as either an ActiveX or Netscape Plug-In style component?
_lpp
It's a classic -think big- strategy. Maybe some day HTML will be replaced with something else, with hypertext features - the patent still stands.
Bizar technology?
Yeah, sometimes standards changes, and old product gets broken. Sucks to QT developers - but they will have to pull a few all-nighters I guess..
<^>_<(ô ô)>_<^>
From where I sit here in academia AND software development, Java means zilch. Smalltalk had the first crossplatform GUI, the first bytecode, pure OO language w/GC that isn't a C++-addon-like kludge like Java is. Maybe some people are discovering that that stuff is actually cool, but then they go and reimplement it poorly and make it proprietary so that its saleable. Java is /just a programming lanugage/. There are many like it, some with a superset of its functionality. When you're done learning your new programming language and want to get work done, you write in Fortran or C w/ inline assembly for the tight loops. No Real Programmer gives a fuck if there's a marketing push behind a language. If you want to go Java-circle-jerk with your MBA friends, do so, but if you hurt my technology in the process I'll have to hurt you back.
no one should do anything about this. Let them shoot themselves in the foot and let DoJ take care of things. No support for java by default, HA people are not going to rewrite everthing, they are going to switch to a better suited OS.
OTOH - I am not a big fan of embeddable executable content.. Somehow I do not like when web pages I visit start doing something on my computer...
<^>_<(ô ô)>_<^>
Distribute OS with PC cheap. (Xenix was a choice for early PCs but was expensive)
Have people write software to OS standard.
Now their OS is only one with Applications
People buy only their OS.
Got Control of OS.
Change OS to break competitor's Applications.
Say competitors Applications are buggy.
Distribute MS Applications "Free" (come bundled with PC at purchase)
No More Application competition.
People try to break MS control of OS.
Company creates work alike DR DOS.
Change Windows 3.1 so that DR DOS is buggy.
No one buys DR DOS
Eventually combine DOS and Windows (Win 95) to shut out this possibility in future.
Not in control of Internet?
Distribute Browser Free with PC (like OS and applications before)
Comine Browser with OS to shut out competition (Like Windows with DOS)
Become dominant in Browser Market.
Others write software to use Browser (like OS before)
If anyone tries to make a competitor that is compatible change Browser (like OS). When user complains say competitor is buggy, just use IE.
Use control of browser to eliminate competitors plugins. Make competitors use Active X. Change Active X, OS, API at random to break Quicktime, RealPlayer, MP3 players, Netscape Browser, Office Apps etc.
Users complain? Competitors software is buggy not MS.
Once MS apps are standard change Media formats (say they are improved, innovated) now control Media formats, Internet Protocols, OS, Application and file formats. Charge media companies distribution fees and consumers playing fees.
MS rich. PC users poor. Internet Coporate playround. RMS crying in corner somewhere.
If Microsoft is =selectively= crippling IE, to force users down a specific upgrade path, then that is a very serious problem. So serious, it may well come up in the DOJ vs Microsoft trial, during the re-evaluation.
Using a monopoly in one area to create a monopoly in another is a violation of the Sherman Anti-Trust Law.
How is this relevent to plug-in technology? Actually, that's surprisingly simple. Dropping the API is not the important part. That's just the mechanism. The important part is that they are "conforming" to this patent only in part. That part being dropping compatiability, which is the entire point of a =world= wide web.
What is happening is that they are generating negative press for competitors, at the same time as making it difficult to impossible for users to use any products other than Microsoft's.
If it were a case of needing an API wrapper, to use Apple's, Netscape's or Sun's plug-ins, there would be no problem. No such wrapper exists, and I very much doubt that sufficient documentation exists for anybody to write such a wrapper.
If you remember, when Microsoft dropped Java support, people voiced the opinion that all people would have to do is download the Sun Java plug-in. It now turns out that Microsoft won't let you.
So. No 3rd-party plug-ins from ANY source Microsoft doesn't approve of. That's a monopoly. Or, to use "real english", that is a Feudal state. THIS is the "real issue", not whether the API is alive, dead, or both. Schrodinger's Cat it is not.
To sum up, the allegation reduces to this: Microsoft is running an operation bordering on the paramilitary, in an effort to conquer and plunder territory, in a manner that is more rememiscient of a feudal war-lord than a civilised corporation in the 21st century in a country based on freedoms and democratic principles.
I don't know about you, but I don't give a damn what runs in what. =I= don't want Napoleon Bonepart running the tech industry at gun-point.
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
If this company is truly steamrolling gates & co. in court, they probably have a valid patent. They're not fighting Joe Public - they're up against a big litigation department.
/. complain against patent abuse, not the idea of patents. (Most, not all. Some just complain anyways.) If these guys truly invented the plug-in, they deserve credit and fees.
Most of
Just IMHO.
That wasn't funny.
Backwards compatibility only adds bloat anyway - from the consumer's perspective, downloading a new plugin (or having your favourites shipped with IE 6) is really not a big deal.
Who are we crying for here, anyway? Apple? Small time plugin developers? The end-user on a 14.4 modem?
I know there are a few plugins that will not be rewritten in time for IE 6 - academic simulations and visualizations come to mind - but how can the people who use them expect to be able to run an ancient plugin with a spankin' new browser?
Hands in my pocket
yeah... all that wonderful code development being done in C#... yeesh. You guys are already bent over to microsoft, and they haven't even asked it of you yet!
We both know you're exaggerating. Object-oriented programming is an exciting place to be in the SE field, but C++ and C# definitely have their place.
Java is no longer Sun's alone. Java is the industry's.
I wish that were true. Can MS include Java support in VS.NET? I might be a Java programmer instead of a C++ one today if Sun would've let people choose their IDE instead of taking it away from Microsoft.
Netbeans
Sun Forte
Borland JBuilder
IBM Visual Age
No Visual Studio != No choices.
" Since Netscape 6.1 no longer supports the tag" uh....? what the screaming fuck are you talking about? You must have been smoking some really bad shit. Of course N6.1/Moz. 0.9.x support the select tag. Have you not been closing it or something? It'll be a cold day in Hell before Netscape/Mozilla stop supporting an HTML 3.0 standard tag. I'm a web developer. The vast majortity of stuff I do requires hefty form usage. The select tag works just fine. It even responds to CSS style commands just fine.
Once IE is utterly the uncontested king, and there are no other browsers to compete, you can bet it will not remain free. Someday it will be unbundled, amidst a bunch of marketing manure, stating how this provides the best value for customers and other such bullshit.
I seriously doubt this. Do you have any evidence to support this claim? The chance of IE being unbundled is about the same as Solitare or Notepad being unbundled - probably even less given the Windows shell depends on the rendering engine now to display folders and the like.
The fact is that HTML rendering engines *are* being built into just about every modern GUI shell (Windows, KDE, GNOME, OSX etc) and any unbundling would give that shell a significant disadvantage over the rest of the systems.
Monopolies never give away something for free, unless it is to maintain market share.
Generalised Bulls**t. Monopolies are just companies with a significant market share. Many exist and behave as normal. It's only the ones that take advantage of the limited competition that cause the problems. In fact, by the definition of a monopoly they don't NEED to give stuff away to maintain market share (the legal definition says that they can arbitrarily set prices and maintain the same share).
There is always one thing reflected in the actions of any monopoly: they will do anything legal, or illegal, even at a loss, to maintain that all important market share.
Again, you misunderstand what a monopoly is. By virtue of being a monopoly they aren't doing anything illegal - they have just achieved the elimination of any serious competition. This may be because of a better product, better marketing or just stupid competition. Your statements are so general that they just cannot possibly be true.
The rest of the paragraph just goes on to reiterate your misunderstanding of corporate practises. Basically what you are describing is the behavior of a highly competitive amoral company. The actions listed can be taken regardless of your monopoly situation and you'll find that non-monopolies actually care more about their market share than true monopolies (their share is guaranteed by definition).
Fear: When you see B8 00 4C CD 21 and know what it means
I suggest you change your browser's user agent to help make your point. Example: "Mozilla/5 (the real thing TM; i can't use your plugin, jackass, because it only runs on windows. please, will somebody think of the children? atari 2600) Gecko 01/2/2001". Then reload the page a few hundred times.
This could go one of two ways:
The latter is the more likely situation, as marketers won't soon give up on their pretty animated crap.
Don't even get me started on all the ActiveX security holes we'll be able to exploit.
Here's the recipe to remedy this:
- Load a squadron of F/A-18s with cluster bombs and bunker busters.
- Set course for Redmond, WA
- Drop said munitions on the Micro$oft complex
- Repeat as necessary
Of course, we should make sure Gates and Ballmer are there."You done taken a wrong turn."
-Bill McKinney, in Deliverance
Hey, I offer it up with no editorial comment whatsoever. I'm not saying Sun did or didn't make them get rid of Java. I'm just saying that's their story, and they seem to be sticking to it. (Loudly.)
Breakfast served all day!
Another reason for excluding Java from Windows XP wasn't mentioned by Cringley but was hinted at by Prasad. It would seem that Eolas's successes against Microsoft in court pose the threat of competition to .NET in the form of a Java-based open-source distributed application environment.
Always do right. This will gratify some people and astonish the rest. -- Mark Twain
Apparently it is just you. Conspiracy theory bastard.
MICROSOFT, what corner would you prefer being forced into today?
I guess it's a good thing you didn't pay a lot of money for MSIE, did you?
You killed Netscape's API plug-ins! You bastards!
Kierthos
Mr. Hu is not a ninja.
"...Which will force the general public to use MSMedia Player forever...Muhahahaha" Bill Gates
If you do a Windows Update from the Start menu and choose Recommended Install (or whatever it is) it will install Outlook Express automatically. You have to choose Custom Install and deselect OE in order to not install it.
Can somebody please write an Active X control that implements the Netscape Plug-In API? Then we can all just move along. Thanks.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
And the same version of IE 6 seems to run Java Applets to.
So what is everyone talking about?
You cannot renew a patent.
The only good weather is bad weather.
In my opinion, the plugin scheme is really a sort of "crummy patch" to a widespread used technology (the browser). I think that these guys understood that and chose the path of a new internet client.
Now it's a conspiracy theory, tommorow it could kill all sorts of products and projects, like the browsers I mentioned. This patent could be bad for internet advancements anyway; it might be very hard to create an alternative scheme flexible enough to work around this patent.
Bizar technology?
Microsoft has exactly as much right as anyone else to promote a standard.
Actually, as a confirmed monopoly, they most definitely do not have the same rights as any other company. And until/unless the supreme court overturns the unanimous opinion of the circuit court, that's exactly what they are.
Nope, no sig
OK, the more I hear about XP, the less I like. I don't see myself buying XP anytime soon, and that's a shame because I was looking forward to continuing to use all my Windows apps on the latest and greatest hardware with the latest and greatest software.
This reminds me a lot of Netscape. Netscape peaked with 3.x of their browser. I seem to remember using it for what seemed like an eternity until IE 4.x, and the only reason I switched to IE was because OE was so much better than Eudora and Netscape Mail.
I think MS may have peaked with Windows98. From this point forward, it could be all down hill. The only question is what will replace Windows? Sorry guys, I just don't see Linux doing it for me. I could however, be easily persuaded to switch to OS-X if it were available for x86. I would even pay $200 for an x86 OS-X if I thought it had the staying power that Windows has had. Maybe Palm will keep going with Desktop Be, but that doesn't have the huge app base that a *NIX based OS does, and quite frankly I'm reluctant to go with any small market "alternative" OS.
I'm seeing a lot of disinformation here about the plugin API. It is currently possible to write a plugin DLL that will work with both Netscape Navigator and IE. There are a few places where the two browsers do things differently, but the intersection of functionality is sufficient to make writing compatable plugins a reasonable thing to do. So, at the very least it will still be possible to use most of your plugins with Netscape, and developers of IE plugins will just have to tweak their code a little bit, unless they were stupid enough to commit to features not supported by Netscape.
So, what will my solution be? Probably not to abandon Windows. I may actually haul out my old Netscape CD and install it. Who knows, the Mozilla project could actually get a big shot in the arm from this. I think MS is seriously shooting themselves in the foot with this... I mean, they've got me re-thinking Mozilla now, and if you had asked me about it yesterday I would have said something like "why would I want to run that? IE is so more stable".
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
microsoft gets to piss on netscape AND apple at the same time? Wow, what a happy day in Redmond.
IIRC nCompass's plugin actually allowed did the opposite - it allowed ActiveX plugins to run in Netscape. Microsoft do seem to have buried the product tho.
That's the text of the patent mentioned from Cringely's article. Depending on how one spins the definition of "hypermedia" document (ergo, why didn't they just say hypertext? or HTML / XML / SGML?) this thing has enormous implications. Many content-related applications (word processing, drafting, streaming media, etc.) today support different types of object embedding.
Consider MS Word, Macromedia Flash and say ... AutoDesk AutoCAD; are they "hypermedia" documents? They can reference other unrelated works and they can include embedded objects that automatically launch other applications. I'm honestly not sure what constitutes hypermedia. However, I am certain that court rulings like this have solidified my opposition to all software patents.
Thanks for your thoughts,
-- RLJ
So Apple will always be playing catch up with a MS product that already works. What's your point?
Now that Netscape is essentially out of the picture, MS doesn't need to worry about consumers going to alternative browsers for software support. MS can now attack competitors' file formats by ensuring that they don't work with the dominant browser on the market (IE.) MS doesn't like Apple interfering with their multimedia formats, so they just render Apple obsolete. It's perfet.
-- Minds are like parachutes... they work best when open.
I was trying to get a decent browser to run on my Linux desktop.
I tried Opera 5 for Linux and its indeed a very neat browser.
However if i open www.microsoft.com and move my mouse over the
download button, the well-known pull-down menu does not appear.
This turns out to be some ActiveX feature that only the microsoft
browsers like Internet Explorer 5 support, and only when run on
a Microsoft desktop. As far as i can see, there is at the moment no
browser for the Linux desktop which supports this feature.
Even more it seems like its a closed feature.
Perhaps that is one reason why many give up with Linux,
and return to windows. Just do it the easy way and just take
that microsoft desktop. Saves you from all those nasty tricks.
Now the opera developers could make them selves real angry and
develop a opera 6 for Linux which would have a reversed engineered
embedded ActiveX inside the browser. But i bet that wouldn't last long
because, when Microsoft releases a new Service Pack for IIS, immediately
opera's ActiveX would stop to function. This is the dirty trick game
which Microsoft plays. Just ask the samba developers what happened
on their journey to reverse engineer a full functioning Domain Controller
for UNIX.
If the US government don't do something against these Microsoft monopoly
tricks, we are doomed. Its all tricks to tie the Internet into a
microsoft controlled environment. A organization like W3C or IETF
or even IANA should stand up and say : "The Internet is a public place
where all public accessible services like web, multimedia sites etc.
should obey public standards, and not the closed standards of Microsoft."
Microsoft is earning loads of money in a very easy way, like they
have never done before. If one looks inside some magazine for hardware
and software, what do I see ? office 2000 prof costs $500.- US dollar,
a matrox G450 dual-head costs only $ 100.- . Its absolutely stupid that a
software package costs way more as a high quality video card. Well if you
look at the actual production costs of reproducing both items.
It should not be this way.
So what can we do to stop this illegal monopoly? I don't think much,
We now really need an honest independent Referee to get this straight.
I wanted to hear about roll your own DSL, I don't use that plugin crap anyway.
You stated that MS owns part of Apple. This is incorrect.
MS bought some non-voting stock and promised to continue developing MS Office for Mac if Apple made OE and Exploder the default internet tools for Macintosh.
This settled the MS-Apple lawsuit and gave Apple some much need cash at the time. They aren't owned in any real sense by MS.
It is by design, the Cringely article explains why.
How is this not going to absolutely convince the judges deciding the penalty phase of the MS trial that the company must be broken up into at least two, if not three separate companies?
.NET in the form it is currently designed? I think the answer has to be 'no', since the function of a post break-up Windows operating system would serve nobody's apps except un-upgraded MS Office etc...
The alternative is that, for any other competing browser provider (btw, there is no telling how many other browser providing companies were scared off from competing when they saw what happened to Netscape) to achieve support for its product in the future, it also must develop its own operating system!
I'm convinced that the OS folks need to be broken off from the apps folks by dint of this action - which can only be considered 'smart' because it shows arrogance and confidence in MS political clout, unless I don't get all their strategy - now what does it take for judges to understand this?
Also, think of this: if there were a break-up, do you think that the OS side would continue to push
SDMI: Finally! Music that won't rip or burn! Brought to you by the fine folks at RIAA.
Obviously site specific, but only 18% of people use a browser that admits to being non-IE for google
Also, i wouldn't be sitting here after 20 solid hours coding trying to explain to some knob at Cisco why IE is giving them security errors about the Flash ActiveX control while the Netscape Plug-In displays the content perfectly.
As a former webmaster, I would have purposely avoided satisfying your request just because you were being such a bitch. Satisfying users is important... satisfying you isn't.
What I understand (which admittedly isn't much!) is that Msft licenses Java from Sun, and violates the agreement, doing something that wasn't in the contract, even if that something actually does improve the user experience by integrating it with Windows proprietary specialsauce, which already tantamount to proprietary 'embrace, extent, make incompatible, extinguish or appropriate'. The fact remains it's Sun's property, not Msft's. What seems belligerent to me is OTHER companies have to follow Msft's license agreements but Msft doesn't, and do whatever they want with other companies products??? Sure, Sun may have 'laid a trap' for Msft, but wtf has Msft been doing for the last 25 years that's any different?? It certainly hasn't been producing quality software!!
try { do() || do_not(); } catch (JediException err) { yoda(err); }
why I'm going to be using netscape 4.76 - 128 for the next 10 years.....
7 November 2006: The day Americans realized corruption and incompetence weren't addressing 11 September 2001
But of course they're just INNOVATING.
No, no. Microsoft is just trying to improve security.
Of course, it's all the third party browser plug-ins that make their operating systems insecure. Outlook and buffer overflows have nothing to do with it.
[sigh]
Fire and Meat. Yummy.
Every Web browser you can name currently supports embedded applets, and is therefore in violation of the Eolas patent.
Is this guy for real? Has he really never heard of Lynx?
Just because a few of us can read write and do a little math, doesn't mean we deserve to conquer the universe
Click here or here.
> MS looses on both counts I'd have to say you're not on the right track if you can't distinguish between the words "loose" and "lose."
Do you have debug information we don't have that shows it was microsoft software that caused your browser to crash and not quicktime?
MICROSOFT, what corner would you prefer being forced into today?
This sig isn't original enough, it's time to come up with something witty...
...quite correct. My bad... :)
It looks like if they lose the patent suit, M$ will have to remove support too. XML and .NET won't help them at all. .NET is based on ActiveX, so that will be covered by the patent too.
It's clear that the only reason they're doing this now is to have an excuse to make a blatantly anticompetitve move at a time when they can blame it on someone else.
I've always preferred to view Quicktime media (or any other) in a separate player window, and now with the QuickTime 5 media skins the old plug-ins are even less compelling. The Flash-based skin gives the author complete control over the entire window used to view the Quicktime content, not just what's framed within the browser pane (if done with a plug-in).
Can't you see that everyone is buying station wagons?
If you can write a plugin to use the Netscape API on Windows, it's kind of easy to port that plugin to other platforms.
If four out of five desktops use one API (ActiveX) and the other one uses a completely different API (NS), are you going to bother writing two completely different plugins, or are you going to direct all your efforts to pleasing the 4 out of 5 that can be handled by writing to just one API?
Maybe this will make IE more stable. Personally I wish they'd get rid of the ActiveX plugins too. I'm so damn sick of it opening Word and PDF document IN the browser when I'd rather download them or at least spawn the actual application they were meant for.
but I'm sick of him bitching about his love life. He needs to face the fact that he's a computer dork and with that label comes the fact that he will never get any.
And you think ISPs are going to be diligent enough to actually do such filtering?
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
If Microsoft would spend less time trying to make other software NOT work they could make there OWN software WORK.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_U.S._Election_c
Actually, ActiveX is NOT a gaping security hole, assuming you're not setup to arbitrarily download and install code on your system WITHOUT knowing where it comes from and what it does. If your browser is downloading and installing controls and whatnot without your permission, change your browser settings in Tools->Internet Options->Security.
ActiveX is just a manner of encapsulating functionality with a user interface into a COM-based component. It's a whole LOT more functional than the silly Netscape Plugin API, and it's useful for more than just a browser extension (as you said). For instance, look at MSXML, do you see any XML functionality in a Netscape plugin that is usable in your own applications, merely by obeying a few binary standards and making some interface calls? Not unless you're interested in writing your own Netscape browser.
I'm not a Microsoft employee, nor do I think everything out of Redmond is gold, but as a programmer, I have to admit COM rocks.
What'dya mean there's no BLINK tag!?
Hmm, kinda like saying, "If you don't want your server broken into, install all the patches." Uhm, ya.. We all know how well that works.
You'll have to assume the normal Win9x/IE user can figure things out more easily that NT admins... Oh.. well, maybe we can assume that.. =)
Look and how Microsoft responded to the DoD's over the issue of POSIX. The DoD said that any OS they bought had to be Posix compatible. So Microsoft built Windows NT a (crappy, vestigal) POSIX subsystem.
Given that the military uses Java (one example, pdf file), they could easily put the kibosh on any plans to remove Java support from XP. And, being that the DoD is one of Microsoft's best customers (I can't find numbers, but that is a quote), Microsoft will listen to them. Given that Sun and (I believe) HP have JVM's ready for use, they have little room to back out.
-- "I am disrespectful to dirt. Can you not see that I am serious!"
I wonder if this means that the BackOrifice(tm) plugin won't work anymore?
-- Shamus
Bleah!
It's pretty simple. "Hooks" refer to API linkage. Not mindshare... At least on the planet I come from. Heh. I get your drift tho. Nice chatting with ya.
This change by Microsoft means that anyone who upgrades to Service Pack 2 for IE 5.5 breaks our product. And the best part is Microsoft's KB article describing the status as, "This behavior is by design."
got to get i t can't c o n t r o l m y s e l f......
Raklet
...an ActiveX wrapper for the plug-ins?
pr0n - keeping monitor glass spotless since 1981.
--Fesh
Kill -9 'em all, let root@localhost sort 'em out.
As I understand it, Microsoft owns a large portion of Apple, so I really don't expect any legal action to take place.
Also, Netscape and Sun don't have legal legs to stand upon. RealMedia Networks, however, may have the ability and motive to bring Microsoft to court over this one, but their legal resources are no match for Microsoft, and I do not expect them to win.
I predict this will become a part of the antitrust case that is already in progress.
Too busy staying alive... ~ R.A.
A company holds a patent on embedded apps. If Microsoft keeps letting you use the plug-ins they'll have to pay...so they will stop. That just happens to also be good news for .NET.
Blame the company with the patent, which is usually the case here on Slashdot anyway. This time the "victim" is Microsoft. Should be an interesting battle to see which one Slashdotters hate more... Microsoft or Patents.
Netscape will be seen as a sexual aid for lonely men.
photosMy Photostream
Heres an mpeg of it in German.
lansville.com/pr0n/30sekdt01.mpeg
It's funny that when linux progs segfault that it's not linux's fault.
If there was a "-1 Not Funny", that'd be my most used mod.
True, and I know the Microsoft KB article says to switch to ActiveX, but Cringly said ActiveX infringes on the Patent, and I can't see where he's wrong on that point (without looking at the patent, and even then IANAL).
On the other hand, Cringly says .Net is the "solution", but I'm not sure .Net won't violate the patent, either. Well, .Net may not violate it, but .Net won't be able to "embed program objects or applets in the browser", or implement "dynamic, bi-directional communications between Web browsers and external applications" (i.e., .Net apps running on a server). I'm not sure how .Net is supposed to get around this patent.
If all this should have a reason, we would be the last to know.
So Microsoft owned a lot of apple but they also owed rather a lot of apple shares. Smart move.
Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
EVERYTHING that is happening in software engineering, everything new and bold and adventurous, is happening in Java
That is really funny.
Java is no longer Sun's alone. Java is the industry's
No it isn't. It's Sun's. They refuse to let it go, refuse to let it be an open standard, and they never will allow it.
By crippling XP so that it can't run Java
Ugh, this is getting so tired. XP CAN run Java. In fact, in can run the MS JVM if you download and install it. It can run any JVM you want that you download and install.
Why do people insist on writing long comments trying to look smart, without actually bothering to know what they are talking about?
This is not a Fugazi
My question is: when will microsoft be removing ActiveX support from IE?
Thank you, have a nice day,
-- RLJ
It appears that the plug-in support has changed because Microsoft is wanting to use Active-X to handle content. In one way the change makes sense as they want IE to be more integrated with the desktop. In theory, with Active X any program can act as an embedded media viewer.
On the other hand wasn't active-x meant to be one of the gapping security holes in IE? I often find active-x allowing websites to install software on my computer without even asking me.
Jumpstart the tartan drive.
How could C# have its place in the SE field? It doesn't even exist yet in any capable form.
Do you need further proof that there are too many moderation points out in the world? When this troll gets modded up to +4? Shit.
I already dropped Katz articles via my preferences - WooHoo! But I'd like to see more Slashdot articles/editorials ala Cringley, Petreley, Proffit, etc. Oooo Oooo - I got it: Maybe Taco could get that Signal_11 guy to write a weekly rant about Karma! Siggy - come back ... we miss you .....
They call me the working man. I guess that's what I am.
Just trimming down the legacy support. Not news
Microsoft is getting sued by Eolas for patent infringment. Microsoft (while also litigating with Eolas) is also removing the infringing code from their product. It just happens to be (according to the article) support for the APPLET and EMBED tags. So it seems that Quicktime needs EMBED tags to function. I'm sure someone will find a way to write a plug-in to fix that.
O'Brien or Barbarian?
Apparently most offending plugins can be rewritten to use ActiveX (which still violates the patent but remains supported?) For Java this means that not only is Java no longer included by default on Windows systems, but the plugin used for adding Java capabilities is (probably) no longer compatible with IE at all. Just as it appeared that most people would be happy having Sun's version of Java widely available as a plugin instead of MS's corrupted version, MS has thrown another wrench in the plans.
.NET and breaks compatibility with everyone else. We really do need a standard cheap way to make universally acceptable plugins/embedded code. The alternative is to code two or three times or see viable browsers and other software unable to compete because of patents on the means of compatibility. A standard could increase both productivity and competition.
It's really about time for W3C to step in and standardize APIs for embeddable web content. I know Eolas has the patent, but it's not unusual to see companies licensing at no or reduced cost for patents that are involved in standards on condition that the standard is properly followed. Eolas will get little or nothing if MS circumvents the patent with
I must say I like the quote from Cringely- "Almost the same thing happened during the anti-trust trial when Microsoft offered to create a deliberately retarded version of Windows without Internet Explorer, essentially threatening the court with really bad software if Redmond didn't get its way." You mean Windows hasn't always been "really bad software"?!? Hmm... and "deliberately retarded" too....
Besides MS has to make room for default hooks needed by .Net so it only makes sense that they jettisoned Java.
Hahahahha. You're not very familiar with computer science are you? Because what you said makes absolutely no sense.
"Foolish Windows user! Nevermind that you may be at work and given only a single choice of browser. Or that you might actually like IE better than Netscape. Or that you may be at someone else's computer. Or a whole host or reasons that one might be using IE rather than Netscape, et al. You are forbidden to post here because you are a Microsoft Lover! Yes, you betray your lust for the vile software maker via your choice of browser! You obviously hate Linux and all free software and thus we expell thee from our midst!"
I can only imagine what kind of uproar would be generated if Microsoft were to block all non-MS browsers from www.microsoft.com...
If you couldn't tell I thought so, it's a pretty dumb idea, Nicky. (Research project: Kant's Categorical Imperative)
PS: HIBT?
-- "I am disrespectful to dirt. Can you not see that I am serious!"
Ok, so I've seen a lot of posts on here on the lines of "what do you expect - MS are trying to monopolise something else". I'd guess that there are a fair few programmers here with the skills to sort this one out instead of just moaning about it. I'm a software dev myself, and I can't see any reason why we couldn't come up with an ActiveX plugin for IE that could host Netscape API plugins. In fact, why not just put an ActiveX wrapper around Mozilla's Netscape plugin support? If it's done right, Microsoft's monopolistic actions would be completely circumvented and Quicktime would be available to everyone that wants it again. Can anyone think of any reasons why this couldn't\shouldn't be done?
It's not like Microsoft was been bothered by Quicktime before and told Apple where they could stick it.
Curmudgeon Gamer: Not happy
Microsoft's stated reason for no longer supporting Netscape format plugins is that they prefer using ActiveX components for that purpose. That's really nothing new. Some third-party companies are going that route already. For example, as I understand it, Macromedia's Flash plugin is available as both a Netscape plugin for Netscape, and as an ActiveX control for IE. Other plugin makers need only follow suit.
In other words: Big whoop.
Breakfast served all day!
IE and active-X use the object tag which works *exactly* the same way. Active-X as it's currently used would fall under this patent too, yet you don't see MS removing that tag. ;-)
I've brought issues up like this before, but you're going to be considered trolling anyway. Be prepared. :) (What's funny, is that no matter where you go, even the "rebel individuals" Open Source, there is still some measure of conformity).
.. You know - I used slashdot for a long time - can see by my user number. I think I will forget about it - current moderation system does not work, period. I had a normal, technical question - why moderating down. I bet this post - also quite an on topic rambling will get moderated down as well. So to all the Slashdot user - have fun in the company of "Jew Haters" and "Goat Fuckers"...
<^>_<(ô ô)>_<^>
This last sentence pretty much says it all.
The whole pissing match between Sun, MS, and every other fscking co. does nothing but insure that we all have software and hardware that sucks. Isn't about time that these a-holes start showing concern for their customers by working on making decent products instead of worrying about their stock prices, IP, and market dominance.
I digress....
/*drunk.. fix later*/
Furthermore, when was the last time you saw an applet doing anything other than a chat. Based on my browsing, certainly not a formal study, Java Applets are gone, almost entirely replaced by Macromedia flavors.
Microsoft sure as hell isn't going to drop support of these either flavor of controls.
How does this make any sense: "It would require the adoption of an entirely new architecture for modular programs using XML. It would require .NET."
Create an ActiveX wrapper that can play plugins properly
Not sure too many people would be interested in this, but the Kerberos authentication clients used by CMU to verify the ID of people also breaks with this update. We were provided with detailed instructions on how to remove the IE 5.5 update until modifications to the plugins (called KClient) were made.
Looking at Eolas, on the one hand, it's kind of funny to see the degree to which Eolas is beating Microsoft in Court, and the ridiculous hoops that Microsoft has jumped though in the process (Microsoft attempt to claim inventorship of Eolas invention-pdf). But on the other hand Eolas patent is sort of the worst kind of patent-squatting - thinking of something, patenting it, and then hoping others will pay you to license it, because you don't plan on developing it.
If you look at Eolas's website you don't get the impression that they're generating too many "algorithms that implement dynamic, bi-directional communications between Web browsers and external applications," to quote Cringely. Granted they developed the first plugin - in 1993! - for Mosaic! but they don't seem to be doing much else these days, in the hey day of the interactive internet. In fact, as near as I can figure they don't generate anything except law suits (right now only against MS, but what's to stop them from going after Netscape, Mozilla, Sun, etc. should they decide to do so.)
You really have to wonder about how far this sort of thing will be taken in the future - that is how many people will patent ideas and not act on them until that fundamental idea has made many companies tremendously successful. After all what if Turing had pattened the idea of "stored information, which can be utilized to control an electronic machine in the preformance of actions determined by the information" - the stored program executable. Morris and Eckert would have had to pay him to write the code for the ENIAC and we'd be paying his heirs everytime we wrote an executable (assuming his heirs renewed the patent).
credo quia absurdum
Snagged from google's excellent cache "Netscape: We're in media, not browser business now By Reshma Kapadia NEW YORK, June 6 (Reuters) - AOL Time Warner Inc (NYSE:AOL - news) is remaking its pioneering Netscape software business into an Internet media hub brimming with Time Warner artists and publications, aimed at office workers and Web purists not already using AOL services. ``The browser is a crown jewel. However, six months from now, you won't consider Netscape to be a browser company,'' Netscape President Jim Bankoff told Reuters in an interview, referring to its early role in creating the first popular tool for surfing the Web. The shift recognises the overwhelming dominance of the Internet Explorer (IE) browser produced by arch-rival Microsoft Corp (NasdaqNM:MSFT - news), and frees AOL to focus on new media markets now taking shape on computers, phones and television. The revved-up Netscape media strategy signals that AOL Time Warner is stepping up the integration of its varied business units following the completion of AOL's $106.2 billion purchase of Time Warner Inc in January. Netscape, which plans to embark on a brand advertising campaign later this year, wants to act as a hub for the wide array of core Time Warner media properties -- such as Fortune and Time magazines and the 24-hour cable news network CNN. So far about 18 Time Warner publication and programming sites, including CNNfn financial news and CNN.com, have been embedded in the toolbar that runs along the top of the Netscape media site. NETSCAPE SOFTWARE TO ACT AS COMPONENTS FOR MEDIA SERVICES Netscape is by no means a rejection of its software legacy, as components of its browser technology will continue to power new features of Netscape's media services aimed at office workers, small businesses and sophisticated Web users. ``We have all been waiting to see if they stake the crown on the technology, on the name, or on the parent and it become more of an extension of a grander thing,'' said Lydia Loizides, analyst at Internet research firm Jupiter Media Metrix. ``It's not going to be Netscape, but rather Netscape.com,'' Loizides said. AOL Time Warner's retreat from creating distinct Netscape browsing software figures in the on-again, off-again talks the company is holding with Microsoft to renegotiate its licence to embed the Internet Explorer in its AOL service. The talks, which broke down last week but are said to have since resumed, would extend a five-year AOL-Microsoft browser deal that expired in January of this year, among other topics. But in an industry that does not know how to stand still, the rivalry has shifted to instant-messaging services that incorporate browser-like Web surfing features with the capacity to swap messages rapidly among friends and colleagues. Microsoft is incorporating an instant-message service it calls Windows Messenger into the next version of its operating system software known as Windows XP that offers audio and video conferencing, file transfers and text messaging. This change means customers of alternative instant messaging and Web browsers would have to go to extra effort to use such systems. The expired Microsoft pact had allowed AOL's software to feature on the desktops of many Windows PCs, helping fuel the growth of AOL services. AOL still relies on Internet Explorer as the built-in browser for its now 29 million subscribers. Bankoff said Netscape's strategy will not be altered regardless of which way the talks with Microsoft are resolved. He confirmed that AOL has been testing ``Komodo'' software, which would let AOL and CompuServe Internet services support multiple Web browsers, including Netscape, as well as perform various other functions. Netscape is also trying to increase the reach of its technology platform and has struck recent deals for its browser to be used in Sony Corp's PlayStation 2 and direct computer seller Gateway Inc's (NYSE:GTW - news) Touchpad. ``We are finding demand for more than the Internet browser in the marketplace,'' Bankoff said, contrasting Netscape's partnering moves to what he considers Microsoft's winner-take-all model. ``You will see more pacts like the one struck with PlayStation.'' NETSCAPE, THE ALTERNATIVE MEDIA BRAND IN THE AOL STABLE The historic transformation of Netscape into media property has been underway since AOL bought Netscape in 1999 and Time Warner in 2000 to form the world's largest media company, with interests ranging from music to film and across the Internet. Netscape.com's base of registered users has grown 37 percent to more than 40 million worldwide from 15 million in February 2000, the company said. The Netscape target user typically surfs the Web at work, often on high-speed connections, and resists the packaged online experience AOL creates to draw mainstream audiences who find wide-open Web surfing confusing or overly complex. ``We call them the 'a la carte' crowd. (Netscape users) have a perceived interest in finding their own things,'' Bankoff said. Bruce Kasrel, a Forrester Research analyst who had yet to be briefed on the new Netscape plans, said ahead of the announcement last week that Netscape needed to pursue a hybrid media and software akin to that of Microsoft's MSN Explorer. MSN allows users to custom design the mix of Web searching, news updates, communication features and other services using Internet Explorer technology. Similarly, he predicted AOL Time Warner would fold Netscape software into its media properties. The media hub strategy gives Netscape a chance to sell advertising across its many properties -- something AOL Time Warner is well known for doing -- and to test the waters for subscriptions rather than just free services, Loizides said. ``Because they are repositioning themselves, they are a bit freer to experiment than Yahoo! or other services,'' she added. ``Things they could test include subscriptions services'' for unique Time Warner programming or special Web software. The formula of using Netscape to create a central Internet meeting place for Time Warner magazine readers and broadcast viewers echoes in certain respects the push by Time Warner in the first half of the 1990s to draw users to a single site. That site, known as Pathfinder, failed to keep Time Warner readers within the site and eventually closed. Netscape can tap an unprecedented wealth of exclusive media content ranging from music pop star Madonna to the hit crime-family drama ``The Sopranos'' now running on U.S. cable television, Loizides said. Email this story - Most-emailed articles - Most-viewed articles "
I have noticed that this Service Pack must break more then that! My MIME types are all fouled up and don't at ALL match what is in the OS (Folder Options, File Types tab). I do notice a HUGE amount of so what replies in here. Maybe this is because Apple has yet to release a Quicktime player for Linux?? :) Can we say Sorenson Codec? :) I personally think Microsoft is at fault here. They may have the market,but they have no right to foul things up. My bet is in ten years you will see a book by titled "How to Drive a Monopoly Into the Ground!", by Bill Gates! :)
Gorkman
Too bad IE is about the only browser that actually works. Netscape on Windows never ran right (1...2...3...crash!) and Opera just never up to snuff.
According to an article I read recently (if anyone has the link please post) Microsoft is working with Apple to make Quicktime work with IE6, probably as an ActiveX component. So the line about it "disabling Quicktime" is not entirely accurate.
I am running XP and it downloaded MS's Java Machine for a favourite chat site of mine. Hardly abandoning it?? Have any of these hack's actually used the software?? DM
My take on things:
If Microsoft is "forced" to drop EMBED/APPLET style plug-in support for IE 5.5 SP2, and IE6, it's not "their" fault that Java can't be shipped...
As I stated to cringely in an email... ActiveX is probably untainted by that patent... ActiveX is only a marketing blurb for COM, which was a
re-name from OLE, and we all remember the acronym "object linking & embedding"....
I'm sure Microsoft can prove OLE working in software such as Word, with live Excel document embedding prior to 1993... If the linked sub-components resided on differing network shares...booom, isn't that by definition a
"hypermedia" document? ActiveX support in IE relies on (correct me if I'm wrong), the OBJECT tag, which is Microsoft's own...
By being "forced" to drop Netscape plug-in style support, not only can Microsoft claim "plausible deniability" for java removal, but they can
strike blows against other competing technologies:
- QuickTime, RealAudio/Video (use Windows Media formats instead)
- PDF (use Microsoft Reader w/eBooks instead)
- SVG (Even though it's on it's way to recomended status by the W3C, we have
yet to see any rumblings from Redmond on native support within IE... so...
the Adobe plug-in stops working? use Microsoft's Vector Markup Language
(VML) instead, we support it right in the browser....)
I'm sure there are more than a few "cheshire cat" style grins in Redmond in the last little bit....
Much of Cringeley's argument seems to be that Microsoft will soon issue a "real" rationale why they are removing support for the JVM and Netscape plugins. This seems unlikely to me, given the following release from Wagged PR, Microsoft's agency, recently distributed to some industry media outlets. I'm blanking out the names because I'm not sure if this is supposed to be a general-public release or not. But it states pretty plainly their reasons for dropping Java -- and in direct opposition to Cringely's theory, it pretty much amounts to "Sun made us do it":
.NET, where we have submitted the underlying specifications to
.NET supports over 20 languages from Microsoft and third parties
.NET
-------[cut here]-------
To: xxxxxx
From: xxxxxx@Wagged.com
Date: 08/16/2001 01:50 PM
Dear xxxxxx,
There is a considerable amount of confusion surrounding Microsoft position
regarding the virtual machine in Windows XP. Wanted to make sure you have
the most accurate information from Microsoft as to the events leading to and
the consequences resulting from this decision. From Microsoft's perspective,
Sun Microsystems has turned its marketing machine into high gear about
Windows XP, claiming that Microsoft has hurt Sun, Java and customers by not
including the Microsoft virtual machine in Windows XP.
It's time to set the facts straight.
First, this is unparalleled hypocrisy on Sun's part. Sun has taken every
step possible to prevent Microsoft from shipping its award winning Java
virtual machine. They spent several years suing to stop Microsoft from
shipping a high performance Java virtual machine that took advantage of
Windows. Rather than pursue a new licensing arrangement, Sun settled its
lawsuit with Microsoft by offering a phase out of Microsoft's Java
implementation. Since the settlement a Federal Appeals Courts has upheld
Microsoft's development of a high-performance, well-integrated virtual
machine for Windows as pro-competitive.
Moreover, when Microsoft and Sun settled their litigation earlier this year,
Sun was quick to pronounce the settlement a great victory. Sun's CEO said,
"It's pretty simple: This is a victory for our licensees and consumers. The
community wants one Java technology: one brand, one process and one great
platform. We've accomplished that, and this agreement further protects the
authenticity and value of Sun's Java technology."1 Sun got what they said
they wanted: the termination of the existing Java license and an agreement
that Microsoft would phase out its Java virtual machine. Now they are
either unhappy with what they got or simply being disingenuous. Analysts
such as Bob Sutherland with Technology Business Research say: "Sun can't
have it both ways. They don't want Microsoft to have monopolistic control,
but at the same time they want them to control their Java. No matter what
Microsoft does, Sun is going to try to demonize them."2
Sun is also being disingenuous about the impact on customers. Microsoft has
taken multiple steps to make its Java implementation available to Windows XP
customers while adhering to the settlement agreement and protecting Windows
users from any future litigation by Sun. While the Microsoft virtual
machine is not on the Windows XP CD, it is still an integrated part of the
product. Customers who upgrade to Windows XP from recent prior versions of
Windows can easily and automatically take advantage of their existing
virtual machine. Customers with new machines or who perform a clean
installation of Windows XP can automatically do a one-time download of the
virtual machine the first time they browse a web page containing a Java
applet. This download is then available for any subsequent applet a user
may encounter. Finally, Microsoft has made its virtual machine available to
any PC manufacturer to ship with new Windows XP systems so as to save
customers even the one-time download.
The Microsoft virtual machine has a long history of outperforming other
virtual machines and offers the best real world compatibility of any virtual
machine. It is also the only virtual machine that offers an integrated
applet browsing experience with Internet Explorer. But if desired, Windows
XP also runs other third party virtual machines.
Sun wraps itself in a mantle of openness and choice. The idea that Java is
open is laughable, particularly after Sun submitted Java to a standards body
and then broke its promise not just once but twice. Contrast this to
Microsoft
ECMA and are following through on our commitment. Moreover, Sun's idea of
choice is you can have any language you want, as long as it is Java.
Microsoft
and Java too will be supported as a full-fledged language for the
platform.
Breakfast served all day!
Um, can't you play all these things from your registered quicktime program?
People are crying, but you know many of these apps work standalone.
Last week I tried to look at the "Microsoft Bra" ad on adcritic. Even though I already have Quicktime installed, it wanted me to install it, again. I figured maybe my Quicktime was downlevel, so I got another.
Restarted Netscape, went back. Wants me to get Quicktime installed.
One of these days I'll look for the ad in mpeg, if I have spare time.
The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.
Scary shit!
Top Most Bizarre/Disturbing Error Messages
Then why do ActiveX controls still work?
Or Outlook?
Sarcasm.
Fire and Meat. Yummy.
Naw, it must be me.
Dear diary, today I wrote many pages of standards-compliant HTML and ECMAScript. Yes, it won't work on the majority of browsers that people use. But I must hold true to standards, even if they're not deployed.
Of course part of the reason for that is that it's been so easy to just write your own plugin if you wanted to do anything fancy. But if the "standard" way of attaching plugins suddenly goes away, I expect people to move to Java or ActiveX pretty quickly.
If someone other than Microsoft can get the marketing going to convince average users to install a decent JVM, Java has a chance on the desktop. If not, I expect to see ActiveX-based attacks more virulent and more destructive than anything yet within three months after XP ships.
Nope, no sig
And your favorite desktop environment might contain a hot-key sequence to automatically invoke it. (KDE uses Ctrl-Alt-Escape).
Truly, you have a dizzying intellect....It's one of the classic blunders. Like trying to win a land war in Asia.
Truly, you have a dizzying intellect.
I'm having a vision...
VezziniMicrosoft sits laughing at the Dread Pirate Roberts Java developers:
"That's what's so funny! I switched glasses plugin technologies while your back was turned! [...] Never go in against a SicilianMonopoly when DEATHMARKET SHARE is on the line! HA HA HA HA! HA HA HA...(Microsoft keels over...)
Yah, I know, wishful thinking. I've been staring at this computer screen for too long...
Hacker Public Radio is our Friend
why they are in court over the anti-trust battle?
Bad business ethics, non-competitive business, bad Micro$oft!
Causing Chaos Everywhere,
Nik J.
The strange world of a loner, in a populous city, drowning in society
Its helluva better by a LONG shot.
Anyone else have any pointers to current browser usage statistics?
I like paying taxes. With them I buy civilization -- Oliver Wendell Holmes
First off, it seems that slashdot
has learned to live with US patents.
Nobody is talking about how ridiculus
the patent is.
BTW, what's the Patent No. for
the US constition?
Then there's the absolutely wrong
statement it the article:
>
Such nonsense! is what made Java
popular put that's not all there is to Java.
Put short, that article is trash.
-emo-
Here's my favorite quote:
But earlier in the article (cnet one)
You mean that MS own's REAL, Adobe and Macromedia? So it disables quicktime, BFD... MS doesn't disable Quicktime on *nix so who cares! (yes I know that there is no IE for linux, but still.. IE for whatever flavor of *nux that it runs on doesn't support quicktime does it?) furthermore:
So before all of you anti-ms fsckers get all up in arms, read the damn story first. Apple is working WITH MS to fix it.
Its like when microsoft is mentioned on slashdot everyone goes nuts saying that MS is anti-(fill in the blank for whatever your supporting this week).
"It's not like your minds are as open as the source you love..." - Me to the majority of Slashdot.
Wow, a post #1 with a legit question!
You mean I won't be able to watch QuickTime videos with IE on Linux anymore?
Of course I'm kidding: I always immediately leave any site that *requires* a plugin of any kind. If you can't take a picture of it, write some words about it or (in a rare case) make a video of it in a format everybody can read, I'm not interested.
324006
I wonder if anyone has patented time travel...
coupled with the USAs nearly indefinite IP laws it would only be a matter of a generation or two before my ancestors make Bill Gates look like a pauper...
-- www.globaltics.net
Political discussion for a new world
"Apple is aware of the compatibility issue between QuickTime and the beta of Internet Explorer 6 and Internet Explorer 5.5 SP2, and we are working with Microsoft to resolve the issue," an Apple representative said in a statement. "There will be a fix for which more information will be made available shortly."
No matter what Apple does, it for sure will reflect poorly on their PR. I wonder if Apple can sue MS for damages?
You can't handle the truth.
Face it - Bill Gates is a white Persian cat and a monocle away from being a Bond villain. -- Dennis Miller
All movements for social change begin as missions, evolve into businesses, and end up as rackets.
Eolas is doing a damn fine job of protecting its patents from the pirating thieves at MS. One thing Cap'n Billy isn't too happy about is that MS .NET is *also* covered by the EOLAS patents (it's based on ActiveX).
I'm afraid that browsing, as Mr. Gates-of-Hell has come to define it, has ceased to exist. The good news is that people at Eolas are wearing the white hats. Don't fool yourselves into lumping them with the dirtbags at MS. This suit represents a major victory for the rest of the world.
Truly, you have a dizzying intellect.
Slashdot - News for Herds. Stuff that Splatters.
Java is Sun's?
That's funny, I dont need Sun licensed software or IP to compile this here java program with GCJ. True I dont know of any unencumbered virtual machines, but last I heard, GNU was working on a reverse engineered one (them not even being able to look at SUN's java headers for fear of conamination). *checks gnu pages for java activity*
obviously if you're running java on a server or a database you're gonna want one of the beastly VMs from IBM or SUN.
Microsoft leaving Java out of XP doesn't hurt Java.
;)
It hurts Microsoft.
EVERYTHING that is happening in software engineering, everything new and bold and adventurous, is happening in Java. From where I sit here in San Diego, Java is simply taking over. The problem is this: Java isn't just a web page scripting language any more. And because of its structure, it's very easy to write compiler tools for it. As a result, all kinds of nifty new extensions (such as AspectJ) are being applied to it. Even the hardware industry -- including the embedded hardware industry -- is going all over it.
The reason for the above craziness is simple -- Java has features people have been trying to put into languages for years, but unlike those languages, it actually had a marketing push behind it.
Java is no longer Sun's alone. Java is the industry's. And Microsoft's abandoning Java just means that Microsoft has further detached themselves from everything innovative happening in the industry.
Even Apple figured this out. Witness OS X.
By crippling XP so that it can't run Java, they're making the same mistake IBM made when they crippled the PS/2 so that it couldn't use ISA cards, or when GM installed "planned obsolesence" and got waxed by the Japanese in the 80's, or when DEC's president decided he'd rather fly his plane than talk to IBM execs about an OS for their new "PC" dealy-bopper.
DEC is gone. GM is still suffering (although the new attitude at Cadillac shows hope). IBM had to reinvent themselves.
Microsoft is shooting themselves in the foot, and in the same way others have done in the past. They've forgotten that they only succeed as long as they serve their customers, and that their customers do not exist to serve them.
It's one of the classic blunders. Like trying to win a land war in Asia.
and apply it carefully on Scotts Butt
..
carefully insert your finger to test moisture levels
step back.
ehehehe.. nice view eh
NO NO NO NO
These are not "Netscape style plugins"
They are , yes Netscape probably
was the major force getting them into HTML
but they are legal HTML (3.2 I believe)
Now IE has dropped support for this tag and is breaking HTML 3.2 support (surprise surprise).
What people are calling "IE style plugins"
are which are part of HTML 4.0.
Were that I say, pancakes?
Since Robert Cringley seems to end up on /. often and his ideas often can be modded +1 insightful or intresting, why doesn't slashdot just try and pick up a cheap distribution license.
And to stir the flies...drop Katz.
Netscape's plugin API is their equivelent to ActiveX on Microsoft's side. Why does anyone complain about this? If Microsoft should be forced to support Netscape APIs, should Netscape be forced to support ActiveX? Seriously, the plugin API is losing support. Why would a developer create a Netscape plugin on the Windows platform? Sure, it would make sense to develop as plugin for other platforms, but on Windows, it simply makes more sense to create an ActiveX control because not only could the object be used in a web page, but in any activeX container (very common on teh windows platform). And if you even mention security issues in regards to what I just discussed, you don't know what you are talking about: they are both running native code and have the same vulnerabilities, therefore you don't run either one from untrusted sources. I'm not trolling, I would like intelligent discussion on this, really!
I use www.statmarket.com
Then why do ActiveX controls still work?
It helps. Honest.
As for who uses Netscape -- the good thing about the Netscape-style plugin was that it provided a cross-platform/cross-browser solution with one product. The user got to choose which browser to use instead of it being mandated by an embedded application. With ActiveX, it's pretty much IE on Windows only.
Netscape couldn't support ActiveX, even if they wanted to.
Microsoft didn't develop ActiveX, it was developed by NCompass Labs (www.ncompass.com) and licensed to Microsoft.
NCompass Labs reserved the right to license ActiveX support for Netscape as a separate product. This product was apparently aimed at corporate intranets and was therefore so outrageously priced that it died.
Since then, Microsoft has bought NCompass Labs and the documentation about NCompass Labs developing ActiveX has vanished.
microsoft should be writing a plugin so that explorer can render html.
The main theme I can't help but latch onto here is the simple fact that, in my book (and many others) software patents are BAD BAD BAD. Yes, there is a certain measure of sick irony in the fact that Microsoft looks to be in the clear with this, but let's think about it.
This would seem to affect QuickTime, ShockWave, Flash, and generic java applets pretty much equally (read: as nastily). Had software patents not been figured into this mix, we wouldn't even be reading about this.
Ok, so now we have the test: where's the Evil here? Is it Microsoft for "making lemonade" (maybe in part, since they'll be happily screwing a great many customers and coders over), or Eolas (darn that pesky patent for making such a mess)? Maybe a bit of both?
Maybe the answer to the "test" doesn't really matter anyhow (in the long run at least), and maybe what WILL be implemented, namely
Yes, Microsoft has "told their customers where they'll be going today", but where do WE go from here? Maybe I *should* start teaching my grandmother Linux (not a joke, she's a smart lady)...
Oh wait, Microsoft makes one.....go figure.
D
The first, last, and only tech news site on the net
Why would one use Netscape plugins in I.E. ??
<^>_<(ô ô)>_<^>
But of course they're just INNOVATING.
...but that doesn't take into account the hundreds of 'minor' plugins written by small companies for their specific needs and customers. Again, look around this discussion and you'll see all the developers who are seriously annoyed by this. They will have to now commit twice the resources that they had to before. Now multiply that by the number of people not participating in this discussion and you see the scope of the problem.
Many of these small companies/developers don't have the resources to develop plugins for Netscape and IE, so what do they do? Given the market share, of course they'll choose to develop for IE.
Now you see the real problem: this makes it impossible to run these particular plugins on anything but Windows with IE. You also perhaps see the real reason why Microsoft is doing this.
Why is this a surprise to anyone? Microsoft was planning this back when .Net was first being formed. C# would be used as the internet language for Microsoft's vision of the future. But how to get rid of Java? They saw this opportunity and took it!
Surprise, surprise...
I espeially like that part of his show that has him jump on the desk and scream "I am BIG and MANLY and not a skinny ass pasty Mick!"
wow... its late on friday...
... hi bingo
So instead of opening my media in quicktime, which sucks horribly, it'll now open it in MediaPlayer, which sucks just as bad? There's no way to win! Couldn't it just put up a picture saying 'imagine movie here'? Or maybe just poke my eyes out while they're at it. Better than having to deal with either of them.
What what WHAT? As an uncircumcised and quite civil man, I take the tiniest little bit of offense to that remark!
(Hmmmm... Mentioning both "circumcision" and the phrase "tiniest little" in the same sentence is probably a bad idea...)
The upshot of this change is that Apple, Real, and everyone else will *have* to package their technologies in ActiveX form in order to be compatible with Internet Explorer under Windows XP. If Apple and Real and everyone else do this, maybe they won't bother to continue providing a Netscape-style plugin, and maybe Netscape 4.x users will be screwed out of access to any modern media formats, and maybe Netscape 6.x will have to have a lot of engineering work put in in order to support ActiveX.
This is absolutely textbook Embrace, Extend, and Extinguish. This is simply the Extinguish phase, and shouldn't we have all seen this coming?
- jon
Ganymede, a GPL'ed metadirectory for UNIX
The feeling I'm getting from Microsoft is something along the lines of "doesn't work or play well with others."
I mean, sure, "It's their product and they can limit it as much as they want... they can choose to not include Java support... ad nauseum" But if you view the Microsoft present in combination with their past, it's easy to make the conclusion that their purpose for dropping support for various APIs and languages (Java and more) is more motivated to damaging the ubiquity of the market than anything else.
So first, they earn market share by embracing the standards in a way that makes the consumer comfortable. Next, they kill the competition. finally, they drop the "standards" they used to attract people with in the first place! Now since they own the market (effectively removed consumer choice) they can drop support for the things people wanted most.
Following the time line from beginning to end shows the pattern clearly. So while it is "their choice" to support this feature or that, especially when it isn't theirs to begin with, I have to question the motivation behind it. Further, it would seem like a clear example of further monopoly power abuse. The move seems rather deliberate and further, it also feels as if Microsoft's "true" goals are coming to fruition.
"Microsoft Conspiracy?" Well, yeah, maybe...
What else proves it better that Microsoft is holding a monopoly than removing features users depend on? How comes that they can do some many anti-consumer steps without an eyebrow raised of the regulatory organizations?
If programs would be read like poetry, most programmers would be Vogons.
Extinguish. 1. 2. 3.
Textbook.
Perfect.
HEY! DoJ - PAY ATTENTION! Fucking Amazing.
Last I knew, Outlook wasn't part of IE. Of course, the way MS has been "integrating" things, who knows how long that'll remain true.
Well, beyond that, I was suggesting that this might be another PR move so that people feel like M$ is attempting to fill all their security holes. Of course, that's what they'll claim and get good press for, though of course the underlying reason to kill Netscape plug-ins is to move towards the seeming Microsoft goal of preventing any code that they didn't write from running on your machine.
Carrying along with the M$ line that IE is a core and inextricable part of the operating system, then they can even claim that they're promoting operating system security. And, in fact, they probably are; however, the problem is that their code always seems to have more holes than third-party developers.
Since Outlook is included with every edition of Windows since Windows 95, I'd also argue that because it's burned to the CD, it's also a part of the operating system. Not a core part, but since it's part of the default install, it's fair game when we're making fun of M$ security track record.
And we all know that the only thing with more security holes than IIS is Outlook.
Ergo, if they really cared about security, Outlook would be gone, or substantially re-written. But by disabling third-party Netscape-style browser plug-ins, they get to control the market even more, claim that it's in the interests of security, and keep the Evil Empire looking shiny and nice.
It's kinda like a Roto-Rooter truck in fresh clean orange paint. No matter how pretty it may be, you still know it's full of shit.
(Moderators: Pardon the cussword, but I think it had a place here...)
Fire and Meat. Yummy.
Nobody forced Microsoft to support the damn plug-ins to begin with. Microsoft adopted a defacto standard because they needed to bump Netscape. Now they have taken Netscape out of the picture and have subsequently dropped the plug-in support.
Monopoly could not be spelled out any clearer
Life is the leading cause of death in America.
MSIE is too user friendly, write bad code, it displays in MSIE. MSIE displays what it thinks you meant. NETSCAPE displays what you wrote.
Post-Nuke 0.61 left out a closing tag on the user.php file, in Netscape its broke, I bet it works in MSIE, probably where all of those cntrl M's came from. Post-Nuke brags about HTML 4 compliance too, but I notice all of the verify icon's are gone!
Actualy a Amaya is real good for checking your HTML with W3C has it and lots of good info, browser tests and tools for writing good HTML. take a look at W3C.org.
Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
Since sites like, CNN, eBay, Yahoo, my Credit Union have invested capital into building their sites, which run on great-freaking-huge Un*x servers, it's rather unlikely they'd switch to a Windows XP server model and eat all the cost because Microsoft doesn't want to play Java anymore. Since Microsofts party lines are so often "We give the customers value" or "We give people the technology they want", it's contradictory to deny the access to significant sites on the internet. If it were my choice, I'd stay away from XP based upon that feature, or lack thereof, alone.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
Eolas is a non-issue--they are leeches, but they won't kill Microsoft or Sun--they just want to suck some blood. And the only victory that they have won so far is to keep Microsoft from claiming the same technology with a later patent filing. The Eolas patent should get killed based on prior art, but if it isn't, it won't be the end of the world. (The founder of Eolas believes he invented all sorts of widely-used technology. The term "ignorance is bliss" comes to mind. Too bad our patent system encourages these kinds of misfilings.)
Dropping Java support from XP was something Microsoft had to do--they couldn't continue shipping their completely outdated version. This is good for Microsoft and it is good for users. Contrary to what Cringely is saying, Sun didn't just start writing Java for Windows, they've always had it--and a good ipmlementation, too.
Sun really can't expect Microsoft to ship Java after all the legal fights. Sun should stop whining and complaining, make Java an ActiveX component, and distribute Java widely through PC vendors and on CDs that ship with computer magazines. Writing and including some Java applications end-users actually want to run might give end users the incentive to stick the CD into the drive. Just about every CD in the world forces me to install the latest version of IE and DirectX--why can't Sun do the same with Java?
There may not be an RFC number for Netscape plugins, but ask any developer of plugins if they mind having to create 2 kinds of plugins (one for Netscape and one for IE) instead of just one?
Even though all previous versions of IE supported the Netscape interface, the *only* major plug-in that doesn't run under ActiveX is QuickTime. Flash, Real, etc have all long supported ActiveX -- the installation is far smoother.
Perhaps Slashdot should add some code in their CGI to check the browser type and deny access to post if the browser is MS-IE.
/. again!
This would force those folks that LOVE MS Windoze to never be able to post on
Anyone else like this idea?
Causing Chaos Everywhere,
Nik J.
The strange world of a loner, in a populous city, drowning in society
Secondly, use of the term monopoly to the extreme that is employed around here (even when the specific application is tenuous, like your stellar eaxmple) does little but make you look like a whiney child. Assuming that you're a Linux user, it's probably not far off.
Did Microsoft know that they would break functionality when they made this change? Of course.
Did they do a good job in making customers aware of the upcoming change? No, they hid it in a patch which was pushed as security fixes.
Do they care about the negative effect the change has had and will have on their customers? Yeah, they care, but in a perverted way. The real engineering in that company happens behind a door labeled Marketing. This change was engineered by the marketeers to gain even more share of the desktop.
Does Microsoft suck?
I haven't seen this mentioned in the replies so far, so I'll bring it up:
Later versions of Konqueror run Netscape plugins
pretty damn well, let you choose your own jvm, and a whole host of other nifty features that are lacking in other browsers.
So it's a linux application, so it needs at least the KDE base system to run, so you'd better have a reasonable amount of disk and memory to run it. It's great and wonderful nonetheless. But "nobody" seems to know about
it. And even those that DO know about it don't
seem to realize the huge improvements that have been made just since 2.1, like, in the last 2 weeks.
-fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
...the difference between:
What MS can't do is use their currently held monopoly in OS's to FORCE competitors into using their standard. For example, if they didn't allow ANY RFC 822 compatible client to run on Windows (therefore forcing their standard on all Windows users) then they'd be in trouble.
...and making it so that Netscape plugins don't run under IE? Aren't they forcing people to use their API if they want their plugins to work under the most popular browser which just so happens to come automatically in the OS that has been ruled a monopoly unanimously by the most conservative and business-friendly appeals court in the US?
There may not be an RFC number for Netscape plugins, but ask any developer of plugins if they mind having to create 2 kinds of plugins (one for Netscape and one for IE) instead of just one?
Look around at the responses in this discussion and you'll see that there are several people here that are already very annoyed about this. Multiply that by all the people who (obviously) aren't a part of this particular discussion and you see that MS has created a significant difficulty for developers and users alike.
And don't kid yourself that this is "for security purposes", this is purely another monopoly play by a confirmed monopolist.
"NETSCAPE displays what you wrote"
That's a fucking laugh and a half. Trying making some tables or use stylesheets and get back to us on that one, smart guy.
Hello, Loki, are you still there.. nope, they are not...
Guess I HAVE TO get my OS from Microsoft, unless miracle happens and applications get ported for free..
<^>_<(ô ô)>_<^>
That still doesn't mean it's NOT your browser.
That is true, I got to karma cap in 50 posts and I am a veteran member of the MIT AI lab UNIX-Haters list. And that ran long before Windows NT 3.5 came out.
Actually it is hilarious to see items from the Unix haters list getting recycled as anti-Microsoft items. Security in particular, Richie and co barely had a clue and as for Eric Allman (author of Sendmail) his software still holds the all time record for CERT advisories of any application.
There is actually a significant difference between active-x and plug ins. The default security settings for the browsers are to require active-x code to be signed. Plug-ins are just another executable to download off the net and install, most are unsigned and because there is no built in download proceedure there is nothing to guide the user to require them to be signed.
Both active-x and a Netscape plug-in have unlimited ability to screw up your machine to the full extent of your user privs - which on a Windows 98 box is root. A signed active-x control does at least come with an assurance that the signer has been authenticated and has undertaken not to include malicious code and that the control has not been modified since. That is not perfect security, but it is a lot better than you get without the signature. If the signer does screw you up you have evidence that proves what he did and a contractual undertaking from him to wave about in court.
Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
Interestingly enough. I think what will make this difficult, is the large number of old I.E. browsers out there (not to mention the 5-10% of users who use other browsers). These browsers won't have the capability to do what I.E. 6 supports. Who I feel really bad for are designers of web pages who are caught in the middle.
Moreover, what's most impressive about this goes back to why Microsoft entered the browser war. Netscape + Java was a device that allowed programs to be run on a Windows machine that were not designed exclusively for Windows. Now, Microsoft is in position to control the delivery of these programs to Windows machines. This means they once again control the barrier to entry that they were worried would erode 6 years ago.
Near perfect execution by Microsoft - too bad for the rest of us.
There's plenty of stuff to berate Microsoft for...let's at least try to limit it to criticisms that hold water.
Andrew
microsoft is creating it's own audio, html, image, tcp/ip, and video formats that will be incompatible with all non m$ operating systems
The plugin developers need only rewrite their API code for XPCOM and (yes, unfortunately) COM. Competent programmers will not find that an unreasonable burden.
I don't think Cringely is aware of this.
Don't get me wrong, I love NS/Mozilla, hate IE.
If the reason for Netscape plug-in disabling is security, then asking why ActiveX (which is also a security hole to the same degree) is still enabled is a perfectly valid question. Any native code is by definition going to be insecure. IE runs as the logged in user on NT/2K and there aren't security checks on 9x, so how the hell can it be otherwise?
seems like microsoft would want to disable quicktime, after all they have the windows media player format. Just as microsoft pushed their browser by foricing users to use this that don't know alot about computers, they're doing the same thing with movies. Now my grandma isn't going to want to download some movie that she has to find where she saved it and open it up. She would rather have the movie play right in the browser. And this is true for most people. I think this is a way for microsoft to gain a stronghold in the media player sector.
Do you have any idea how many times Quicktime has taken over/crashed my browser upon opening a .mov file?
Isn't it the browser's fault then?
Do you have debug information we don't have that shows it was quicktime that caused your browser to crash?
Why is it that when an MS OS based computer crashes, it's never Microsoft's software that caused the crash?
Let me clue everyone in. It's always Microsoft's software that causes it.
A great many people think they are thinking when they are merely rearranging their prejudices. -- William James
As multiple people in this thread ahve said. Micorsoft does charge for IE, it is bundledinto the price fo the operating system. So, that $99 you paid for your Win98 Upgrade, or the $1200 you paid for your computer which includes Windows 98, ME, ... Includes $5 for IE. So, if you compare pricing. All other browsers cost $0. IE then costs $5, which would be monopolistic pricing, which demonstrates that the MS monopoly is not good for consumers, it costs us money.
Hey joe_w_morse@yahoo.com,
Is it funny to suggest bombing and killing people?
Save that stuff for f*ckedcompany.com and lets keep this on topic.
I had an experience with the "I'll protect you from bad drivers!" syndrome in Windows ME. A dialog box showed up on startup and said something in the line of "This device driver is not certified by Microsoft and will not be installed." There were 2 buttons: "OK" and "Advanced...", clicking Advanced opened a dialog box that had an option of allowing the driver to be installed anyway. And they couldn't put the option in the main dialog box? I was glad I still had that choice, I have a feeling they are going to remove it in Windows XP. I read once that the "official" device drivers for CD-Writers are going to be crippled to prevent "backup copies" of some CDs, and cracked DivX drivers are going to break too.
Great, upgrade to XP and lose some ability to copy CDs and watch (pirated, I admit) movies.
Along with Microsoft's strategy comes this removal of QT support. And I just upgraded to SP2 yesterday, damn I shouldn't have. I haven't upgraded Outlook 2000 with the patch that prevents the opening of executable attachment (no, they don't open itself automatically, you have to double-click it).
I don't see Microsoft software moving anywhere but downhill from here in terms of flexibility. They're making it more idiot friendly and only idiots would want to use it. And yes, I'm a Windows user, but I think I'll stop upgrading to anything "better" from Microsoft now, and slowly move myself to Linux.
I wonder though if Microsoft can get away with this. It maybe walling itself in limited usability, but it seems most users are willing to follow them into that "jail". One can only hope people stop using their products because they got too proprietary, look at Apple dammit. On the browser-side, Mozilla might be able to emerge as the saviour in this problem.
What time is it/will be over there? Check with my iPhone app!
Language is a fragile adaptation that arose in kin-based societies. Any attempt to create large-scale civilizations in which the lawful appeal of last resort is a contest of words will result in the destruction of language's communicative utility, followed by the downfall of such civilizations as are built up. By mining this precious genetic legacy of man for short term gains, those more capable of abusing non-kin via word-abuse than others can displace those who use words to build things rather than manipulate and confuse others.
Seastead this.
Maybe it would cost around $20-$30, or maybe it would be a free download/$10 CD. Anyway, you get the idea.
One of the things that had been keeping me using Windows at all was IE - It really was so far ahead of Netscape on Linux. At least the default install of Netscape 4.73 that seemed to ship with every version that I installed.
Over at Linux World Tokyo, I picked up a copy of Mozilla 0.7 from a little table of geeks called the "Mojira Gumi" (In Japan, Godzilla is called Gojira - Gumi means syndicate.)
Mozilla is fantastic. In most ways it's as good as IE - in some ways better.
The most important part for me was that it made browsing the web on Linux just as good as on Windows. It got rid of that feeling that I was missing out when I browsed - No more ugly fonts and trashy CSS rendering.
I also trusted it more. Better control of cookies.
Sylpheed for email is very Outlook Express-ish, without all of the scripting dangers. I never liked having HTML rendered in my mail anyway.
My recommendation - Set up a spare partition for Linux - Get the Latest Mandrake or RedHat from LinuxISO.org. Try Mozilla. Try Sylpheed. Get VMWare for the Windows stuff.
Cheers,
Jim in Tokyo
-- My Weblog.
Effective web sites don't have flash as a regular page component. 'Web Designers' don't know better, but lots of 'Webmasters' do.
As to HTML corruption, it stems largely from:
1. Browser misinterpretation of HTML
2. HTML being a deficient standard for what it was being used for. Tables are used for page layout because there wasn't anything better at time.
3. Crappy 'extensions' of HTML by MS and Netscape.
Actually you can. Ever wondered why Neutrasweet is still under patent after all these years? Their lawyers bought enough congressmen to get a bill passed to extend the life of their patent.
The drug companies bought a similar extension while the GOP had the Senate. They might not have sold anything as wicked as pardons to tax dodgers but they certainly sold legislation.
Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
(I jotted down this filk a couple weeks ago, waiting for the right "Microsoft and Browser Plugins" thread for it.)
Drag Me Drop Me
--to the tune of Savage Garden's "Break Me Shake Me"
I never thought I'd change my browser again,
To play movies in a format I've never known.
To play movies in a format I've never known.
But straight away you dominate the market again,
You abused me in a way that I've never known.
You abused me in a way that I've never known.
So drag me, drop me, treat me like an object,
With a mouse click here, you will start to load.
Just drag me, drop me, treat me like an object,
With a mouse click here, you will start to load.
So here's the file that deals with the games on the web,
But it's compressing in a way that I've never known,
It's compressing in a way that I've never known.
So drag me, drop me, treat me like an object,
With a mouse click here, you will start to load.
Won't you drag me, drop me, treat me like an object,
With a mouse click here, you will start to load.
"Support... I can help you, but what do you say?
Oh, it's not free baby, you'll have to pay."
You just keep me registering, watching upgrade costs recurring,
God, don't you make more than our national debt?
'Cause I used to copy in a way that you've never known,
So then you accuse to the feds that you've never known,
Watching profits grow in a way that I've never known.
So drag me, drop me, treat me like an object,
With a mouse click here, you will start to load.
Just drag me, drop me, treat me like an object,
With a mouse click here, you will start to load.
Loading, baby, leave me, leave me alone...
Drag me, drop me, treat me like an object,
Make me, shake me, charge me for a late fee,
Update me.
[
Not that Netscape ever played the standards game honestly. Their idea of a standards submission was to fax a copy of the spec to MIT a few hours before they released the code (yes it was a fax, not even an email!).
Netscape spent a lot of PR bucks claiming that Marc Andressen was the inventor of the Web, they even had a PR flack write a book 'Archotects of the Web' that gave Tim Berners-Lee (the true inventor) less than four paragraphs. W3C and MIT set up Microsoft to screw Netscape in return.
By the way Sun did not 'win' the Java suit, they accepted Microsoft's offer of a settlement. Clearly Microsoft understood the consequences of the settlement better than Sun. Like be carefull what you ask for, you might get it.
Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
If anyone thinks this is such a big deal, then maybe someone can just write an ActiveX component that implements the plugin API?
Example: browser detects Flash content. Wrapper component is listed in the prefs as being what gets run whenever Flash content is detected. Wrapper ActiveX component loads, sees the content is Flash, and then loads Flash plugin.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
IE has always been more W3C HTML compliant then Netscrape.
More like "had always been." Mozilla 0.9.x, aka Netscape 6.1, does quite a bit more CSS than 4.x did. IE's CSS engine has a nasty problem: it inserts three extra pixels of whitespace on both sides of a floating object, even when its margin-left and margin-right are set to zero. This creates problems when creating cute little rounded corners on web pages, especially when CSS itself can only do one corner per box (fine for Slashdot's design but not for that of Misunderestimated).
Will I retire or break 10K?
Comment removed based on user account deletion
to ensure the user can only hear the clip twice
You better not allow SBLive owners to take the test, as they can turn on What-U-Hear and record everything played through waveOut. In other words, you need a solution that goes through Windows's Secure Audio Path.
Will I retire or break 10K?
You -can- do this. Right click on the link and choose "Save Target As."
What if the designer of the page has turned off right-click for that page? "Sorry, you're not allowed to right-click. However, this does not truly protect my copyright because anybody with wget can just go in and leech me."
Will I retire or break 10K?
Also. I don't have a problem with IE dropping the EMBED tag.
But what it do have a problem with is the way they are dropping it. These things need to be gradualy worked out. Not dropped without telling anyone in advanced, giving noone time to prepare for it (1-2 years IMHO). It's just a cheap way to try and damage Quicktime as far as I can see it.
MS still alow non-closed <P> tags in IE6. That's not alowed in HTML 4. But it makes sence to still alow it for now while people start to support it HTML 4 better.
The alternative to EMBED isn't as easy as slapping another closing tag on the end. So one would think that it would be phased out over 1-3 years. But no, MS have whacked it out, just like that.
If Opera had a user base in the double digits, I might do a but more research, and try to work around the problems. But it doesn't, so it just isn't worth it.
Also, as far a s I'm concerned, it's not IE and Netscape, it's IE and Mozilla. In terms of HTML 4 and CSS 2, Mozilla hasn't let me down yet. Does everything just the way it's descibed in the W3C standards. IMHO, Mozilla doesn't have far to go, to being on par with IE. And infact, it beats IE on alot of things (standards support, handy features etc) already.
Too bad I'm not going to submit a comment to them so they can track me down and kill me.
As soon as I went to that page my hotmail address was sitting in the first form field.
The sad, sick, and cruel thing is: I'm using Mozilla! I'm sure I know how they did this [compared the IP addresses] but I still don't like it one bit.
This is worse than hotmail.com opening my MSN mess-ang-err when I login. [I never could figure out why it was sitting there next to my clock... I blocked it from running on start up, and why the hell would I run it]
Get your Unix fortune now!
Let's get one thing straight here. Using the EMBED tag in a page rendered by IE does not mean that you are using IE's support for the NS plugin API. You can EMBED an ActiveX control that's a MIME player or an ActiveDoc server and it's just a nicer way of writing an OBJECT tag.
The NS plugin API support in IE has never worked correctly and always taken hacking to use satisfactorily.
In fact, some versions of IE have a bug where a if you have installed on your system an NS plugin in Netscape and a Mime Player in IE for a given data type, if the Url in an EMBED tag for that data is greater than 60-something characters, IE will ignore its installed mime player and try to use its broken NS api support to load your NS plugin. The ugly mess that follows is, well, ugly.
So let's try to keep things straight on what's going on here, because everything since (and including) the original article is lumping EMBED and NS Plugins together, which just isn't true.
Michael J.
Root, God, what is difference?
Other ports are a little iffy as far as plugin support goes.
Disabling quicktime ? Since when ?
Ìm running ie6. (Version: 6.0.2479.0006 to be exact). I have quicktime plugin. Both, browser and plugin works. Where's the catch ?
Btw, getting rid of embed is actually i good thing. it might make few sites more "compatible".
yush
MSIE and Mozilla are only browsers really supporting Internet standards to some measure. Opera's working in non-Latin languages is crap (yes, Virginia, there are countries besides US and some of the still use their crappy languages and alphabets instead of using a human language like Americans do). They drop the ball here and there on CSS and HTML 4 ("we don't support this because we couldn't do it for release time").
So here I have a choice - use small fast browser that shows pages wrong or doesn't show them at all - or use bigger fatter one that does show them. I would usually choose the latter.
-- Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes.
I, for one, won't miss the EMBED tag. I'd also
be willing to go without IFRAME, MARQUEE, and
BLINK.
The blink element is already gone.
Blog Ho
Why not just use Opera? It supports the features of both major browsers and can with only minor tweaking accurately simulate either. Plus, it's far more customizable and a better UI (everything in one window, low footprint plus won't crowd up your taskbar).
The EMBED tag has never been inmpimented in any form of HTML so it's not a W3C standard element in the first place ... so in a way IE is just conforming to standards comlpiant browser rules anyway, even if MS did it for alterior motives like law suits or monopolistic practices.
If everyone would just stick to W3C guidlines when creating web pages and browsers there wouldn't be all the troubles with compatibility and usability that we have now.
MoRe...
LaTeR...
-=PJK=-
MoRe... LaTeR... -=PJK=-
I couldn't follow Cringely's logic that APPLET, EMBED, and Java would have to be dropped by MS to avoid infringing on the Eolas patent, but OBJECT, C#, and .NET could be retained.
Cringely states that Eolas has a patent (5,838,906) that covers "automatically invoking external application providing interaction and display of embedded objects within a hypermedia documents" and so EMBED, APPLET, and Java would have to be dropped to avoid infringement. By the same logic, OBJECT and C# would have to be dropped, too, right? (which would kill Active X, including Sun's Java Plug-In, which uses the OBJECT tag, not the EMBED tag, and works fine w/ IE 5.5 SP2, see Plug-In HTML page)
He also states the patent covers "the use of any algorithm that implements dynamic, bi-directional communications between Web browsers and external applications" which seems like a pretty good description of what a SOAP-enabled Web browser does... so .NET would have to be thrown out, too.
That blasted KB article is IE-only! If you open it in konqueror, it redirects you to a page entitled "unsupported.asp", which has a "cyclical link"...now call me paranoid, but does that not sound like something intended to send a poor browser into a tailspin? Of course, use Opera (which pretends to be IE5), and you get the article, in all it's galling arrogance ("we've dumped all these plugins, go stick it"). I try to keep an open mind, I really do, but MS are crossing all the boundaries, plus a couple I didn't know existed.
Then turn off the option in acroread that integrates it as a plugin. It will then spawn happily