- From: Bill McCoy <bmccoy@adobe.com>
- Date: Sun, 02 Jan 2005 16:22:18 -0800
Message: 1 Date: Sun, 2 Jan 2005 14:43:38 +0200 On Sun, 2 Jan 2005 14:43:38 +0200 Henri Sivonen wrote: ... > Macromedia Flash is a special case. ... > The Adobe Reader PDF plug-in is not a good example of the willingness of the users to install plug-ins, either. Henri, I am simply trying to counter the argument that somehow HTC-based extensions are so much more useful than plug-ins for IE as to warrant making HTML language extension decisions based on the distinction of legacy implementation options. I am well aware that it is difficult to get users to install browser plug-ins. I was only trying to point out that technical viability of 3rd-party browser plug-ins has been demonstrated and that there are existence proofs of widespread adoption (special cases though they may be). 3rd-party browser HTCs to my knowledge have demonstrated neither large-scale technical viability (to the contrary, numerous issues and instabilities have been reported, to the point of being declared not ready for prime-time) nor widespread adoption (and with increased security concerns, and Microsoft's shift to a new Internet security model for XAML/.NET, the outlook for document-based extensions to IE is likely to get worse). --Bill McCoy Adobe Systems Incorporated bmccoy at adobe.com
Received on Sunday, 2 January 2005 16:22:18 UTC