3 ms·
I would agree, but watching the NativeClient talk at Google IO this year made me much less certain about the commitment. The presenter's answers to questions j
by equark 15y ago
I would agree, but watching the NativeClient talk at Google IO this year made me much less certain about the commitment. The presenter's answers to questions just seemed to suggest nobody was using it and Google/the developer didn't really care or expect anybody to actually adopt it.
Hopefully this was an inaccurate impression, because NaCl could have a huge impact on both the client and server
The best path to adoption would be for Google to very aggressively push NaCL as a Flash-like plugin. If they could get adoption -- through Unity3d on Facebook or something like that -- perhaps they'd win in the long run. If they just keep it part of Chrome it seems rather hopeless.
- Lerc 15y agoI think it may be a bit of a problem being a project from Google. Making the system totally secure is a difficult task. That is true for all sandboxes. People find vulnerabilities, people fix the holes. The problem is not that NaCl is insufficiently secure, but any vulnerability will be spun as "Google making your system insecure". I think an independent group doing the same thing would be no more or less secure, but wouldn't have the baggage that would come from being seen as a component of a much bigger entity.