Slashdot Mirror


MS Gives 60-Day Deadline to Web Devs

capt turnpike writes "Since losing the patent case filed by Eolas, Microsoft has to change radically the way IE works with a lot of content, especially video and other ActiveX controls. eWEEK is reporting that Microsoft has gotten a one-time, 60-day extension in which developers and companies can try to re-engineer their Web pages and ads to work with the new regime. If devs don't make that deadline, users could face pages asking them to activate much of the content, plus ads."

17 of 375 comments (clear)

  1. Good Riddance by OverlordQ · · Score: 5, Funny

    You mean ActiveX websites will break? . . . And that's a *bad* thing?

    --
    Your hair look like poop, Bob! - Wanker.
    1. Re:Good Riddance by Tackhead · · Score: 5, Funny
      > You mean ActiveX websites will break? . . . And that's a *bad* thing?

      They're going to fucking bury that technology. They have done it before, and they will do it again. They're going to fucking kill ActiveX.

      Microsoft has gotten a one-time, 60-day extension in which developers and companies can try to re-engineer their Web pages and ads to work with the new regime. If devs don't make that deadline, users could face pages asking them to activate much of the content, plus ads.

      And someone, somewhere, will get an ActiveChair flung at them.

    2. Re:Good Riddance by Syberghost · · Score: 5, Funny

      And someone, somewhere, will get an ActiveChair flung at them.

      Now that I've stopped laughing at this line, I can reply with who that will be:

      Developers, developers, developers, developers.

    3. Re:Good Riddance by sydb · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No it's not like that at all. It's like saying it's not the Network Administrator's responsibility to resource the work required in light of support being dropped for Token Ring. It is his responsibility to provide advice to management and to provide technical resource in any projects which are initiated off the back of the event. It his not his place to protect the business from the effects of an external influence beyond his contractual duties. In IT we are not gods and cannot work magic, only long hours, and if we're not getting paid for them, why should we? And if we are, why are we complaining? And if we feel the balance between work hours and non-work hours is wrong, why did we accept our contract of employment which allows such abuse of employees? And if it isn't in the contract, we don't have to.

      At least that is how it works in civilised countries.

      --
      Yours Sincerely, Michael.
  2. A good reason to dump ActiveX by jimmyhat3939 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    My guess is that Microsoft actually doesn't mind this one bit. ActiveX was a mistake from the get-go, with its permissions-based scheme which is dramatically more hackable than Java's sandbox-based scheme.

    There are other technologies that can plug the hole. For some applications, an Ajax page could provide the same level of interactivity as ActiveX. For stuff like Flash, they can have a plugin architecture more line Firefox's.

    Bottom line is Microsoft will use this to "encourage" websites to move away from ActiveX and toward their next annoying proprietary technology.

    --
    Free Conference Call -- No Spam, High Quality
    1. Re:A good reason to dump ActiveX by Kaellenn · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I highly doubt MS is going to shun their own proprietary technology (especially since they've already said it would be present and "enhanced" in IE7 and Vista.

      Wishful thinking; but nothing more I'm afraid.

  3. One-Click Activation by gregarican · · Score: 5, Insightful
    From TFA: However, sources tell eWEEK that the situation could be chaotic when the IE patch ships as an automatic update to users of IE 6 on Windows XP SP2 and Windows Server 2003.

    Each page a user visits will require them to click a button to activate the underlying ActiveX control. Wow. BFD. And that is just for those websites that haven't updated their content by June. Chaotic? Far from it.

  4. Re:That doesn't hurt Microsoft! by Eccles · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Just goes to show Microsoft shouldn't copy other people's designs and make their own to prevent this kind of problem.

    Tim Berners-Lee wrote the USPTO calling for this patent to be overturned due to prior art. A broad embedded content patent in 1998? Pu-lease. It's as bogus as a $3 bill.

    --
    Ooh, a sarcasm detector. Oh, that's a real useful invention.
  5. This will be a disaster! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Users will be forced to click once before punching the monkey.

  6. Re:Tell me about what /really/ matters for me... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If ActiveX is screwed to the point that some heavy engineering is needed to get the websites back into normal operation, some developers might start moving towards open standards that the non-IE browsers support pretty well.

  7. Re:Maybe by mingot · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Lastly, what I dont understand beyond the above question is... why arent Firefox, Opera, Safari etc... also affected?

    Because the guy who owns the patent has stated that he is only going to sue microsoft.

  8. Microsoft Umbrella? by MyDixieWrecked · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I thought one of microsoft's main anti-linux FUD points was that if you use M$ technologies that you'll be protected against patent troubles like this...

    wtf happened?

    --



    ...spike
    Ewwwwww, coconut...
  9. Re:Not just ActiveX... by gstoddart · · Score: 5, Insightful
    For all those .\ users who say "ActiveX good riddance" - yes, EXCEPT that QuickTime, Flash, and all the other IE plugins are guess way - ActiveX plugins.

    Wait, we can get rid of ActiveX, Flash and quicktime all in one shot?

    So, umm, what's the downside again?
    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.
  10. How to update your pages by raju1kabir · · Score: 5, Informative

    Apple has a helpful page detailing what to do in order to get your pages to continue working as usual with IE.

    --
    "Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it." -- GBS
  11. Won't disable "non-interactive" ActiveX by zsazsa · · Score: 5, Informative

    Before everybody says "good riddance," note that the upcoming IE update will simply mean you have to click first to enable interaction with the embedded object. This means that things like Flash ads and streaming video will still run automatically -- a user would need to click on them to be able to interact with them, i.e. find the tiny little "mute" or "close" button to make them go away. This page previews the update and shows exactly how it will change things.

  12. You can already test this with Windows Update by Bloodwine · · Score: 5, Informative

    There is an optional update at Windows Update that says something to the effect of "This update changes the way Internet Explorer handles ActiveX ... blah blah blah".

    I figure they'll move it from optional to required when the deadline is reached.

    I've already installed the update so I can get my sites ready.

    ActiveX controls cause a little dialog box to appear that makes you hit either "Ok" or "Yes" in order to use an ActiveX control. Honestly this is fairly rare occurance when browsing most sites.

    The big thing that is going to trip people up are flash movies. All flash movies now have a border around them when you mouse over them with a tooltip that says "click to activate and use this control".

    The good news is that non-interactive flash movies work regardless of whether or not you activate the controls. Not sure why that is, but that has been my expeience. The bad news is that flash menus (unfortunately some clients want that junk) no longer work until you click on the flash movie to activate the control. This also goes for interactive flash movies that track mouse movement and whatnot.

    The workaround is to write the flash movie using javascript.

    you can do something simple like document.write() each line of the object tag or use something like UFO (http://osflash.org/ufo) that is XHTML compliant.

  13. It's good and bad by zogger · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Maybe your senior devs and management might want to take a look at GPL code now. This and many other reasons make it attractive, no vendor lock in (don't you think bill gates and MS are rich enough now?), helps to avoid future patent disputes, etc. It's as good as time as any,and you have 60 days, besides the one demo. Avoid future FUBARs like this, or at least minimise the chances. MS has a clear track record of shady deals and monopolistic abusive tendencies. It is their *business model*. Why be associated with people like that? And something to throw at senior management-where is the fat check from MS to pay for all the stuff you have to change because they were thieves and lost in court and people got sucked into using their stolen code? Aren't they the straight suits dream business? Where's this idemnification action?

    The old saying fits, "sleep with the dogs, wake up with fleas"