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.

17 of 534 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Does anybody use it. by Kenyaman · · Score: 2, Informative

    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.

  2. Re:In favour of active x by _xeno_ · · Score: 3, Informative
    ActiveX used as a plugin architecture is just as secure as Netscape's plugin architecture was. What you're thinking about is ActiveX being used in the Java Applet sense.

    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.
  3. Once again, what about the JCP? by SuperKendall · · Score: 5, Informative

    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
    1. Re:Once again, what about the JCP? by throx · · Score: 3, Informative

      It is controlled by a standards body called the Java Community Process, plain and simple.

      Java(tm) is owned, specified and trademarked by Sun. Regardless of how Sun develops this specification you cannot deny that basic fact. If Sun went crazy tomorrow they could dissolve the JCP, make incompatible changes to Java and screw the rest of the industry. This is highly unlikely however (about as likely as Microsoft dropping Windows as a product).

      There was a point where Sun was going to release the spec to be developed by an independant standards organisation (ironically the same one that is now controlling .NET) but for some reason they decided that this was not in their own best interests and pulled it back to themselves.

      If Java really is closed, how can projects like Kaffe exists? (GNU JVM).

      Kaffe isn't Java. It's an implementation of the Java Virtual Machine and runtime libraries. If it was called Java then they'd be violating Sun's trademark or would have to pay licensing to Sun.

      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?

      Actually, a lot more like the support is the same level as Flash, Shockwave, Acrobat, Quicktime, RealAudio and others. Many users happily download them and it certainly hasn't hindered development on those platforms.

      I think right now I'd say that XP comes with better support for Code Red than Java.

      Code Red never ran on XP. Java does run on XP. Get your trolls right.

      XP really has shot itself in the foot by not including Java ... Microsoft could have kept Applets mired in the old Java 1.1 world ... we're pretty sure to move on to using the Java Plugin for external applets

      So you are saying that by XP not including a crappy JVM and giving web sites the ability to run better and smoother applets that it will hurt it's installed base? I don't think so. Basically MS has cut Java loose, which is what Sun always wanted them to do. By not supplying the 1.1.4 version they were restricted to in the court agreement they are freeing XP from a cruddy JVM and freeing Sun to find a way to get their own JVM onto all of those machines.

      Of course, given that .NET is a better platform (though younger) it may be an interesting battle.

      Why do most posters here insist on furthering group-think that's patently wrong? Who knows.

      Most, like you and probably me, are just misinformed, don't post what they mean, or read things into the posts of others that aren't really there.

      Go figure.

      --

      Fear: When you see B8 00 4C CD 21 and know what it means

  4. Re:Cringely got one thing backwards. by RacerX69 · · Score: 3, Informative

    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 claim Sun's Community Source Licensing (SCSL) is open source, because we understand that it isn't. Our choices for Java technology were made to protect a technology from some well-known industry predators, and we have stated that we can see a day when it will be sufficiently unprofitable to write incompatible clones of Java technology. When that happens, we will be able to make it fully open source. We will open Java technology when it's possible for us to do so. We've said that before, and we're saying it now.

    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?

  5. New way to get karma on /. by mlknowle · · Score: 2, Informative

    GO MICROSOFT! and everyone stop picking on them. (although this technique will expire in a month, when everyone decides to jump on MS again...)

  6. Re:You can't run IE plugins in NETSCAPE either by Lars+T. · · Score: 2, Informative
    What the problem is, you ask? Well, most browsers can use Netscape plug-ins, including those for Linux and Mac (though those for the Mac need to be ported to PPC code). IOW if somebody wrote a Netscape PI, you could run it an almost all machines.

    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

  7. Article name misnomer [2] by belg4mit · · Score: 3, Informative

    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?
  8. I Don't Understand by Hacker+Cracker · · Score: 3, Informative

    ... 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!

  9. Re:I won't miss <EMBED> by gehrehmee · · Score: 2, Informative

    IFRAME has been adopted by the W3C as part of the HTML 4.01 standard.
    Information on how to use IFRAME.

    --
    "You know, Hobbes, some days even my lucky rocketship underpants don't help" -- Calvin
  10. Re:I won't miss <EMBED> by tbmaddux · · Score: 2, Informative
    Actually it appears more complicated than that, as Microsoft states the following in support article Q303401:

    "The Internet Explorer versions that are listed above continue to support the Embed tag. Content creators can continue to use the Embed tag for components that are built on ActiveX technologies..."

    EMBED was never part of the HTML standard anyway, which Microsoft claims to be compliant with. So it would be good to see a migration to the OBJECT tag, which would also work for Java (W3C classifies APPLET as deprecated). But then why does MS continue to support EMBED for only ActiveX? They ought to drop it completely if they're going to be as standards-based as they claim, particularly if they nitpick Sun about submitted Java to a standards body.

    Pot, kettle, black.

    --
    Can't you see that everyone is buying station wagons?
  11. Re:So? by jedwards · · Score: 3, Informative

    Obviously site specific, but only 18% of people use a browser that admits to being non-IE for google

  12. Re:Please everyone by SilentChris · · Score: 2, Informative
    You've GOT to be kidding me? Do you have any idea how many times Quicktime has taken over/crashed my browser upon opening a .mov file? Even Quicktime on the Mac side is full of bugs.

    Ever since they started positioning Quicktime as an entertainment medium, instead of a simple software movie player, I've stopped paying heed to them (Same thing with the new Microsoft Media Player. I use it to play movies and MP3's, but I don't even touch their media guide.)

  13. Re:Does anybody use it. by pogopogo · · Score: 5, Informative
    My company uses a Netscape-stlye plugin to display interactive weather data in the browser. Other applications include music notation (Coda Finale), TIFF viewing (AlternaTIFF) and the previously mentioned QuickTime.

    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."

  14. A new way to say "knife the baby" by jvmatthe · · Score: 5, Informative

    It's not like Microsoft was been bothered by Quicktime before and told Apple where they could stick it.

  15. Microsoft's stance on the Java VM by PCM2 · · Score: 5, Informative

    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":

    -------[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 .NET, where we have submitted the underlying specifications to
    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 .NET supports over 20 languages from Microsoft and third parties
    and Java too will be supported as a full-fledged language for the .NET
    platform.

    --
    Breakfast served all day!
  16. Hey..heres an idea... by Electrawn · · Score: 2, Informative

    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.