Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Windows 8 Won't Support Plug-Ins; the End of Flash?

Posted by timothy on from the flash-always-seems-to-find-a-way dept.

An anonymous reader writes "The Microsoft Windows Engineering Team has announced that the Metro interface web browser in Windows 8 will not support plug-ins — Adobe Flash included. Users will still be able to open a traditional browser interface to make use of legacy sites that rely upon plug-ins. This news follows a recent blog post by the Internet Explorer 10 team pushing the use of HTML5 video as a replacement to Flash video. With Google, Apple, Mozilla, Opera and other major players already backing HTML5 — is Adobe Flash finally dead?"

18 of 661 comments (clear)

  1. Microsoft by ge7 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    And people are still saying Microsoft is evil? They just made HTML5 video reality. It wouldn't have happened without this.

    1. Re:Microsoft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Using patented shit formats. So yes, they are.

    2. Re:Microsoft by ge7 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      As opposed to what? All the formats are patented.

      H.264 is technically better format too. That's why it should be picked, not based on some religious free software views.

    3. Re:Microsoft by Mr_eX9 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      And the story has the DRM/Straitjacket icon? Seriously, WTF? The reporting on this story is just terrible, even by Slashdot standards.

      Headline: "Windows 8 Won't Support Plug-Ins ..."
      Reality: "... Metro interface web browser in Windows 8 will not support plug-ins ..."

      This announcement sounds perfectly reasonable to me--not having plugins in the Metro browser closes a lot of security holes and eliminates crap like Flash that's proprietary, hurts performance, etc. It's a competitive move that raises the bar for other browsers to become more secure and stop supporting things that people don't want.

      Microsoft is not the evil company that this site thinks it still is. Time to find a new whipping boy, Slashdot.

    4. Re:Microsoft by drinkypoo · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Microsoft is only going to support the codecs they want to support, so this is just another way of leveraging what's left of their monopoly position — it's just more evil. The real goal is to murder Flash which competes with Microsoft's own technologies, like the supposedly-soon-to-be-abandoned Silverlight. Silverlight is pure canned shit compared to Flash. You can't even sync video to vtrace on XP. Microsoft literally traded a seat on their board for Netflix using Silverlight instead of Flash. As a result, there is no Linux support.

      Fuck Microsoft, and fuck the horse that rode in on them.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    5. Re:Microsoft by wsxyz · · Score: 5, Funny

      Of course not. Silverlight is HTML5.

    6. Re:Microsoft by sinthetek · · Score: 5, Insightful

      H.264 is technically better format too. That's why it should be picked, not based on some religious free software views.

      Not all concerns about the Freedom to use a technology are matters of obsessive fanboyism or faith. There are plenty of pragmatic concerns associated with IP that only the most reckless would choose to ignore. A technology can be 1000x better than anything else that exists but still be effectively useless or a huge risk to end-users or business management. As an end user, I don't want my choices limited by how many technologies a prospective vendor can afford to employ. As a developer, I want to be able to create or fix technologies I encounter without much bureaucracy, being hindered by secrecy or risking having all of my hard work phased out through planned obsolescence strategies. As a business owner, I don't want the items purchased by my business to be hindered by cumbersome, nuanced, legal agreements. In my view, the diversity and innovation facilitated by Free software is almost always better even in cases where proprietary counterparts have a few more features or slightly better performance. Essentially, the freedom to do what you want has its own innate value that, while hard to quantify, should be thoroughly considered before making *any* important decisions, both technology-related and otherwise. It's not always easy to predict when and how those restrictions might hinder your opportunities in the future.

    7. Re:Microsoft by Pieroxy · · Score: 3, Interesting

      they aren't confident in the codebase being patent free.

      And how could they be? By reviewing the 1.5 trillion software patents already on record?

      --
      Write boring code, not shiny code!
    8. Re:Microsoft by neonmonk · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Just because it's Situation Normal, doesn't mean it's not All Fucked Up.

  2. That's what happens when you say no to Microsoft. by tomhudson · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Remember all those rumors of Microsoft wanting to buy Adobe?

    This is payback for saying "No" to Uncle Stevie. You can be sure that if the deal had gone through, flash would not only have been supported, but integrated into the next release of IE.

  3. The more important point here by elrous0 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The lack of Adobe Flash support shouldn't be the issue here. The real thing that should concern us is that it won't support *ANY* plug-in. It seems like everything is becoming a walled garden these days. For a long time, the trend for browsers was MORE "modability" and freedom, not less. Now we're going backwards.

    I just hope Mozilla doesn't get any ideas. Firefox is still the best browser out there for add-ons.

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    1. Re:The more important point here by Amouth · · Score: 3, Informative

      there is a big difference between add-ons & gadgets & plugins.

      if you look at FF & Chrome their extensions/add-ons work in a predefined and hopefully secure environment. IE"s "plug-ins" work at raw executable code level at the users permission level and there for can not easily be contained by the browser, hence how easy it is to use a hole in flash to infect the system.

      MS would be stupid not to allow extensions/add-ons in the same manner that FF and Chrome and i believe Opera does. But killing "plug-ins" is by far a great decision for security and overall long-term usage.

      --
      '...if only "Jumping to a Conclusion" was an event in the Olympics.'
  4. Re:That's what happens when you say no to Microsof by MightyMartian · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Maybe, or maybe, the IE team, like the Firefox team, is awfully tired of their software being used as a vector for Flash's seemingly infinite supply of vulnerabilities.

    --
    The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  5. Incoming money-quote: by Elbart · · Score: 4, Informative

    "the Metro style browser in Windows 8" METRO! Not the desktop-IE. Reading, guys, reading...

  6. Nope by russlar · · Score: 5, Informative
    FTFA:

    In Windows 8, IE 10 is available as a Metro style app and as a desktop app. The desktop app continues to fully support all plug-ins and extensions.

    --
    Anybody want my mod points?
  7. Stupid Title by neokushan · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Once again, this is a stupid title for an article.

    Here's the truth: Windows 8 supports everything Windows 7 supports. In Windows 8, there will be TWO IE browsers, though. The "regular", desktop browser which acts the same as IE9 does today (i.e. it will support plugins) and a "Metro-style" browser, which is more geared towards touch and tablet use. THIS is what won't support plugins. That's it!
    If you need to use a plugin, you can push a button and be taken to the desktop version of IE. Or, you know, use a different web browser.

    --
    +1 IDisagreeSoHeMustBeATrollOrAnAstroturferOrAShill
  8. How I see this... by killmenow · · Score: 5, Funny

    Adobe Flash: I'm not dead.
    The Internet: 'Ere, he says he's not dead.
    Google: Yes he is.
    Flash: I'm not.
    The Internet: He isn't.
    Opera Software: Well, he will be soon, he's very ill.
    Flash: I'm getting better.
    Mozilla: No you're not, you'll be stone dead in a moment.
    The Internet: Well, I can't take him like that. It's against regulations.
    Flash: I don't want to go on the cart.
    Apple: Oh, don't be such a baby.
    The Internet: I can't take him.
    Flash: I feel fine.
    W3C: Oh, do us a favor.
    The Internet: I can't.
    Google: Well, can you hang around for a couple of minutes? He won't be long.
    The Internet: I promised I'd be at the Robinsons'. They've lost nine today.
    Apple: Well, when's your next round?
    The Internet: Thursday.
    Flash: I think I'll go for a walk.
    Mozilla: You're not fooling anyone, you know. Isn't there anything you could do?
    Flash: I feel happy. I feel happy.
    [Microsoft glances up and down the street furtively, then silences Flash with his a whack of his club]
    W3C: Ah, thank you very much.
    The Internet: See you on Thursday.

  9. The only lawful response is Cancel by tepples · · Score: 4, Informative

    The counterparts that get automatically installed the first time you try to play an h264 file.

    The first time the user tries to play such a file, you get a warning to the effect "This media requires a non-free decoder. Installing and using this decoder may violate patent law or other restrictions in some countries. Click Install only if you have verified that these restrictions do not apply to you." If a computer is on United States soil, the only lawful response is Cancel. After the user has clicked Cancel, the dialog shows up again for every subsequent H.264 video.