> That would be asinine. No, absolutely not. That would mark a real position, and maintain a competitive advantage for Mozilla in enterprise environments (wher

> That would be asinine. No, absolutely not. That would mark a real position, and maintain a competitive advantage for Mozilla in enterprise environments (where browsers are used for more than playing games and watching videos, and plugins are not substituted from one day to the other). Apart from that there is nothing wrong with npapi. It's about how it is used, how stable the plugin is, and how trustworthy the vendor of a plugin is. The risks that are involved are the same as for any software, mostly less with sandboxed plugins. I think, taking away NPAPI is taking away a piece of freedom from the user - the freedom to use plugins. And freedom is just what Mozilla was standing for, a long time. Instead of taking away NPAPI, they should implement a mechanism for trusted plugins, e.g. to load/execute them only when they are cert signed.