W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-web-plugins@w3.org > August 2003

RE: IE Thread

From: Ryan A. Missman - RSM <ryan@roadshowmedia.com>
Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2003 16:32:39 -0500
To: "'W3C Public Web Plugins List'" <public-web-plugins@w3.org>
Message-ID: <000001c37007$67528890$2101000a@ramgam>

Ed,
The more I think about this problem, the more I completely agree with
your prediction.  Though I would bet Microsoft would deploy a short
series of 'updates' to baby step us all blindly into it, ultimately the
majority of Internet users will be expected to update to an IE thread
based browser or miss out.  Your prediction is as creepy as it is
possible.  

It may be irksome to intranet developers to recode legacy solutions, but
the prediction of forcing .Net and possibly a new MS-kluge Java package
to be used would roll all the marbles back into their court.  Much the
same way MSN is already collecting their marbles for MSN Messenger,
Microsoft is making it apparent that they love competition and new
rules.

Here's to hoping all this blows by,
	-=R=-

Ryan A. Missman
RoadShow Media - CTO
ryan@roadshowmedia.com


-----Original Message-----
From: public-web-plugins-request@w3.org
[mailto:public-web-plugins-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Ed Millard
Sent: Sunday, August 31, 2003 4:39 PM
To: W3C Public Web Plugins List
Subject: Re: What a prior art product must do


On Saturday 30 August 2003 09:09 pm, Jake Robb wrote:
> The Java Virtual Machine and the Common Language Runtime would count
as
> applications, which must be loaded in order for Java and .NET code to
run.
> I think that voids your loophole.
>

I'm curious, if Microsoft links the .NET VM into the next version of IE
and 
runs it as an IE thread do they stop infringing the patent?  If so I
imagine 
they may actually be quite happy about this ruling, behind closed doors,
and 
perhaps they aren't trying very hard to find prior art to overturn the 
patent.  If browser plugins are outlawed it does substantially more harm
to 
Microsoft's competitors than it does to Microsoft as long as Microsoft
builds 
the dominant browser.

Assuming they can switch to builtin's instead of plugin's it will mean
they 
can pick and choose which plugins will live and die following this
decision.   
.NET will be builtin and survive.  Java wont unless a court compells it.

This solution will lead to bloat in IE so they will plea they can't
build in 
every plugin so they will have to pick and choose.  Windows Media player
will 
be builtin and Real and Quicktime wont.   It would seem to be an ideal
way 
for Microsoft to dispose of some troublesome Internet competitors and
they 
can say "The judge made us do it".

Doing away with ActiveX plugins will certainly cause turmoil especially
for 
all the corprate Intranet users relying on custom ActiveX plugins but I 
imagine Microsoft would be overjoyed to have them compelled to move to
.NET 
anyway, with Eolas and the courts playing the heavy.  Getting rid of
ActiveX 
is a big plus form them for security reasons alone.

Microsoft and Macromedia could cut a deal to convert Flash to a builtin
if 
both were willing.  If they aren't Microsoft would presumabky push SVG
or 
some new proprietary vector graphics standard in .NET. 

With this approach Microsoft will also acquire a great deal more power
over 
the ISV's they vet for builtin's since they will set the release
schedule and 
can threaten to drop a builtin if, for example, an ISV becomes too
friendly 
to competing platforms.

-- Ed Millard
Received on Sunday, 31 August 2003 17:35:05 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 + w3c-0.29 : Thursday, 13 January 2005 12:07:55 GMT