Windows 8 will include a version of Internet Explorer 10 that uses Microsoft's "Metro" touch interface, and this new-age browser will not allow plugins – at all. The move is yet another blow to Adobe Flash, which is famously banned from Apple's iPhone and iPad. With Internet Explorer 9 and its successor IE10 – which is currently …
No way this can win.
Either Silverlight will be included as "native support" rather than a "plugin", which will show a huge level of hypocrisy and alienate much of the web community, or this move will kill Silverlight, resulting in the alienation of much of Microsoft's developer community.
RIP Silverlight - WPF/E - We hardly knew ye
Silverlight will be abandoned to third-class citizenship dispite the whole - "Don't worry" approach microsoft is taking. This is only too apparent from how it's been treated in the Build.
Silverlight already dying.
Judging by Microsoft's big IE9 HTML5 propaganda effort, MS is already slowly suffocating Silverlight. IE9's 'beauty of the web' malarkey is HTML5, the Windows Phone Mobile IE speed test demo was also an HTML5 rendering test. No mention of Silverlight.
I doubt it'll alienate 'much of Microsoft's developer community' – they're phasing down something that never really caught on big time. It's not like they're killing Visual Studio or C#.
Doesn't that remark beg the question
of whether it is even possible for MS to alienate their developer community?
Why has it got to do with Flash?
Flash ain't the only plugin people use you know. You can also call this a jihad against ad blockers. There are more reasons why these big boys want to ban ad blocks than Flash.
I brought an Android phone and tablet and will support Android over iOS partly because of Flash. Flash ain't dead. Stop making a fuss over it already. Talks about HTML5 WebGL are way too premature.
Show me a WebGL site that can outperform Flash that is written in a reasonable and fast way in a good IDE then I might think about changing my development choice.
Talks about not having Flash (or Silverlight for that matter) in a browser saves you battery power is also mostly BS. My android tablet's use of battery by the browser is miniscure even though I browse almost constantly.
Switching side as a consumer, I'd rather enjoy the rich experience Flash and other plugins have to offer me than be battery anal.
If you care about battery so much how about banning 3D games?
So much contradiction.
Flash is crap.
When you have a well behaved Flash animation, -- I mean, application -- it's ok and it won't waste a lot of resources. But you have to consider badly programmed Flash stuff: it will leak memory and waste CPU cycles doing nothing like there is no tomorrow.
Even the innocent Flash-based Gmail/Gtalk sound notification sometimes leaks more memory than Firefox.
> If you care about battery so much how about banning 3D games?
Usually when you finish playing, it stops draining battery. Flash animations (ads) usually keep playing while you're browsing and not having anything to do with the content. Remember, content over presentation.
Same way as when you stop browsing, Flash stops draining battery then? Your argument is flawed. It's like saying if part of the 3D animation stops in a game, the battery doesn't drain as much.
"Flash ain't the only plugin people use you know. You can also call this a jihad against ad blockers. There are more reasons why these big boys want to ban ad blocks than Flash."
You may be right. But then someone will come up with an adblocker that sits on the HTTP stream before it gets to the browser. Else implement the blacklists on your home router.
HTTPS is a bit more difficult, except at the home router.
"You may be right. But then someone will come up with an adblocker that sits on the HTTP stream before it gets to the browser. Else implement the blacklists on your home router."
I am running my own local copy of BIND, which has some special zone files to block known advert hosts and tracking devices. Shouldn't be too hard to implement similar functionality actually within a router, though.
you can still have an adblocker
the ad blocker doesn't need to be a plug-in, they work well as a proxy (in fact potentially better as they work equally well across all browsers you have installed)
there are a number of solutions of varying complexity (eg Privoxy or Polipo for instance) but I see a great opportunity for someone to take one of those and slap a nice metro front-end on it and do the world a huge favor (heck, add optional age based restrictions on it as well and make Metro kid friendly as well)
Quote "You may be right. But then someone will come up with an adblocker that sits on the HTTP stream before it gets to the browser."
That method has exited for years, including block list managers that automate the process.
Just check out www.bluetack.co.uk
So Metro doesn't support Silverlight?
Hasn't MS already said version 5 of Silverlight will be the last?
The best-case scenario for me as a user of "enterprise" software apps is that it will force the developers of those applications to stop using Flash to present data and use something more portable and extensible and less prone to crashing every five goddamn minutes.
WRT ad-blocking, etc.: those are not plugins, those are extensions. Ad-Block Plus will continue to work fine, even if Firefox stops supporting plugins too.
I know Microsoft wants to mimic Apple but...
this is probably the worst thing to copy.
Do you think Microsoft are stupid?
You see, software companies like Apple and Microsoft have a lot of knowledgeable people and lots of R&D teams. Their job is not to listen to customers and give them what they want now because if they did so they would be giving people what they wanted 18 months ago.
The job of Microsoft and Apple is to give people things they don't know they want yet or things they will want. It's also their intention to drive forward technology by taking risks and by jettisoning old technology that pollutes their relatively well structured and self sufficient products.
Flash, Java and Silverlight just hold back development of the web. They force people into creating code in proprietary languages that then launch plugins to run it. Such runtimes are a big security hole in browser land.
It took Apple saying no to Flash to get the HTML5 video tag into mainstream discussion.
Sorry but, the web IS where it is today PRECISELY because of plugins. Plugins made happen what W3C have taken over 10 years just to draft and approve.
Plugins made happen WebGL. Plugins shown the way it can be done. And it'll continue to do so in the future while political bickering carries on in W3C and related standards body.
> Their job is not to listen to customers and give them what they want
> now because if they did so they would be giving people what they
> wanted 18 months ago.
With Apple then the user is the customer.
With Microsoft the users are _not_ Microsoft's customers. Its customers are the OEMs, the retailers and resellers. What Microsoft's customers want is new shiney things that require users to buy new computers, new monitors (with touch), upgrades, and such.
And Apple doesn’t want you to buy "new shiny things"?? In fact Apple wants you to buy only its new shiny things, through its stores, and only use content that it has approved, in a way that locks you into only buying from it in the future. Oh and you pay a premium price to be a member of this club.
I'm betting that Silverlight isn't a plugin because it's an integral part of the operating system? Same with word, powerpoint and PDF viewers
Re: integral part of the OS
Dunno about Silverlight (it's dead in the water anyway) but word, powerpoint and PDF viewers are all ActiveX controls. If MS have blocked ActiveX from the Metro IE then that's all your intranet applications stuffed.
Of course, perhaps that's obvious. Got a poxy screen and no keyboard? Here's Metro. Got a proper computer? Here, have a proper UI that can run stuff. Microsoft's claim, from just a couple of days ago, that Metro was a full peer of the traditional desktop UI just strikes me as hogwash.
First Apple, now Microsoft. You'd think Adobe was a pariah bundling Gary Glitter's home movies with every install of Flash.
I'd love to know what they've done to warrant such loathing.....
I suggest that you install Flash and then you will find out.
Warning: If you use a laptop, you may have to wear ear-defenders to prevent the noise of the fan from causing deafness when Flash starts trying to calculate pi to an infinate number of decimal places, while also simulating the entire universe at the level of individual quarks.
Now that Microsoft have largely cleaned up their act regarding security, Flash is the No. 1 malware vector. That and the fact they still haven't released a 64bit version for Windows.
installing update 10.01 installing update 10.02 installing update 10.03....
that is all
It's a pain in the ass. Most days I switch on the work PC there's some update to Flash or Acrobat reader. It's fairly simple, it's archaic software that was designed in the time before Internet attacks were common.
"You'd think Adobe was a pariah bundling Gary Glitter's home movies with every install of Flash."
From the size of Flash I'm guessing his home movies are embedded in the binary.
Flash? I thought it was Reader.
Either way, it's Adobe. And the incessant updates that aren't easily managed from a central network point don't help matters either.
I need to upgrade my version of Flash...
For those who bought into the sensationalist reporting...
...read the bloody blog: '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....applications that require legacy ActiveX controls will continue to run in the desktop browser, and people can tap “Use Desktop View” in Metro style IE for these sites.'
> applications that require legacy ActiveX controls will continue to run
> in the desktop browser,
Note that it says 'desktop browser'. This is not for Tablets, Phones or ARM based machines.
That's not the point...
There are important issues to keep in mind here...
Microsoft pushes Metro forward as /the/ next big hit. Its /the/ platform for developers to reach "millions" of potential customers, its /the/ platform which makes application development easier than ever before ("you pick the language") and so on.
Yet this move clearly tells us that "Ok, we have the Metro interface but for the REAL user experience you've come to like so much use the desktop application". Office 2010? Its a desktop application. MS Expression web (for example)? Desktop application. And so on.
Where exactly does that leave Metro ? In order to start something I'm first taken /away/ from the desktop and if I want to experience the full deal (with Explorer for example) they'll put me right back onto that same desktop again...
Which then leaves me to wonder: Why do they take me away from said desktop in the first place?
/That/ is the main issue here. At least for us desktop users.
And as the previous responder also mentioned: Tablet users now seem to get the lesser end of the deal, because Metro is fully aimed at touch usage. So in order to use the fully enhanced touch interface they'll just have to cope with a trimmed down browser.
It just doesn't add up.
How dare you get in the way of sensationalism! Sir, you forget where you are!
The important bit in that quote you're using is "....applications that require LEGACY ActiveX controls will continue to run in the desktop browser" (my emphasis)
From that remark alone MS seem to have decreed all ActiveX controls to be legacy, old, obsolete, not long for this world etc etc.
If the Metro-style browser is at all popular you can guarantee that'll be the new format for future IE's both mobile and full-fat
What's the problem?
Ever since I changed from feature phones to smart phones I've run android, and never had a problem with flash crashing / using resources. I appreciate that it may not be the best, but it works fine, and is better than any alternative I've seen. The only reason I can see for doing this is that Microsoft / Apple both dislike Adobe, and want parts of the market it controls.
They've all got it in for me!
Why is everyone so concerned about Silverlight? What about WebM? Will this mean that IE10 will only support H.264 encoded video even though they announced that WebM support will be available via 3rd party plugins?
Does that mean...
You'll need a YouTube player app (or a different browser) to view videos?
Youtube supports HTML5 <video> with H.264 and works perfectly well. I use it every day with my flash-disabled browser.
Bye bye security & ease of use!
I actually use IE9 from time to time, most of all to browse Microsoft related websites which I either need for work / study (TechNet, MSDN) or personally (Windows Live). Yes, I actually enjoy the experience too at times, but obviously SeaMonkey is what I like best and use most.
Still, lets take a look at some its "Invoegtoepassingen" (plugins) shall we ?
- Java plugin.
- Spybot-SD IE Protection
- Spybot - Search and Destroy configuration
- Adobe PDF Link Helper
Even Microsoft distributed pdf files and why do they want me to browse the Net without extra malware protection ? (Granted; Avast runs in the background too, but still...).
Now here is where it gets really stupid:
- Windows Live ID Sign-in Helper.
- Office Document Cache handler.
- Send to OneNote.
- Linked OneNote notitions.
- Include in blog using Windows Live writer.
I actually /rely/ on those OneNote plugins. In short: OneNote is an Office program allowing me to collect lots of information. From photo's to (voice) recordings and even text it can get from pictures through means of OCR (IMO really impressive feature). Needless to say you can also easily sort all this info to find it all back again :-)
Like last evening; I go over the TechNet Win8 dev. preview forum and notice some interesting comments. I mark those, right click and can immediately use "Send to OneNote". Done. I don't have to worry about where it goes, saving work if the power fails, I'm immediately done.
And later I can easily, at my own pase, go over all of those snippets again and sort 'm out. Some I save as reference, others I'll simply remove after having checked them out further (also applies to programming examples).
Sure; it works in SeaMonkey too (and I heavily use it there as well) but not as easily as "click -> send". More like "copy, start OneNote, paste".
And the best for last:
- Translate with Bing.
This is actually quite an interesting plugin (accelerator). Don't use it that often but whenever I do I think it does a fairly good job.
You don't really expect me to believe that missing out on all of that functionality would actually be an advantage for me? Microsoft; maybe you think some of your end-users are stupid (and yes, some of them really are) but not THAT stupid.
Or maybe MS have been so busy flogging other crap,
that OneNote has as many avid users as HP's WebOS does.
@ Bye bye security & ease of use!
This was from a user of IE?
Less need for plugins <--> more security
The two extra security plugins will mostly be needed to protect from malicious use of the other plugins, including Flash and Java. I imagine the 'translate with Bing' shortcut will be built in anyway, in the same way Google Translate is integrated with Chrome (view a page in a foreign language, it brings up a bar saying 'this page is in German, translate into English?').
Quite why Adobe needs "help" opening a PDF link, I don't know; maybe it's related to their need to max out my CPU for the most trivial and irritating animations even when they're off-screen. I suspect the Live ID thing will work without needing a helper, and the 'office cache' can probably be done in IE10 without needing a plugin as well.
So the 'Metro mode' should give almost everything but more securely - and yes, to paste stuff into OneNote you'll probably need to do an actual cut and paste instead of having a special purpose shortcut. Not the end of the world - and if it cuts down Flash usage a bit more, I for one will celebrate with something cold and fizzy.
A first for Microsoft
A standards compliant browser.
That needs no plugs because it implements the yet unfinished HTML 5.
I guess they'll be fine if they implement their own MS-HTML5 and integrate it into windows 8 to close out the competiton... oh wait, that was 13 years ago and it was 98 not 8.
I don't use IE anyway (except to access my company's Sharepoint site, which doesn't play nice with other browsers... maybe MS should fix that first?), and I don't see that changing when I make the upgrade. I'd love to see Flash die, but I'd rather it wasn't this way.
This is a crazy move though. Undoubtedly ads and video will move to HTML5 but Flash is used for a whole lot more:
1)Games. Club Penguin has 10s of millions of users; Flash 11 will have access to accelerated proper 3D. HTML is not and is not designed as a replacement for 'hardcore' Flash in such cases.
a jihad against ad blockers
Ad blockers are not browser plugins. The terminology IS confusing but in browser-techy-speak a plugin is something like Flash that lets native code interact with the browser for stuff like 3D graphics or so on. Ad blockers fit the _normal_ software description of a plugin but are actually add-ons.
Probably both are blocked though... in fact when did IE ever support ad blockers?
No plugins - no use
No plugins ? then it has no chance of me ever using it.
RE: A standards compliant browser.
I thought that supporting plug-ins was part of supporting the html standards...
- Geek's Guide to Britain Kingston's aviation empire: From industry firsts to Airfix heroes
- Analysis Happy 2nd birthday, Windows 8 and Surface: Anatomy of a disaster
- Review Vulture trails claw across Lenovo's touchy N20p Chromebook
- Adobe spies on readers: EVERY DRM page turn leaked to base over SSL
- Analysis The future health of the internet comes down to ONE simple question…