5 ms·

They probably won't ever support WebGL, because it conflicts with their DirectX-on-Windows strategy which they've invested huge resources in to. The security s

They probably won't ever support WebGL, because it conflicts with their DirectX-on-Windows strategy which they've invested huge resources in to. The security scares are just to whitewash over the real issue - people are more likely to accept security as a reason than some strategy thing. (It's actually a very clever move - everyone's talking about WebGL security rather than Microsoft's strategy, so it's working. Them be smart folk at MS!)

nextparadigms 15y ago
It may have been smart, but I don't think it's working. I see more and more developers working on WebGL, and I think it will become an important standard that all browsers will adopt and promote this year, with the exception of IE. So Microsoft will be the one looking bad ultimately, because they will be once again behind in supporting standards. Also, I want to know how other browsers can work in the tile-based interface in Windows 8, hearing how its interface is based on IE10? Will they even allow other browsers in there, or will they risk an anti-trust lawsuit over the browser, again? For all the talk about supporting the cross-platform web, Microsoft is still trying to lock it down to their own OS.
uriel 15y ago
The security concerns about WebGL are not "whitewash". John Carmack: "I agree with Microsoft’s assessment that WebGL is a severe security risk. The gfx driver culture is not the culture of security." http://twitter.com/#!/ID_AA_Carmack/status/81732190949486592 http://twitter.com/#!/ID_AA_Carmack/status/81732190949486592
- maercsrats 15y ago
  A google engineer says that the security reason is bullshit: http://games.greggman.com/game/webgl-security-and-microsoft-bullshit/ http://games.greggman.com/game/webgl-security-and-microsoft-...
- AshleysBrain 15y ago
  It is true it is a security risk, and it is true the gfx driver culture is not a culture of security. Security risks can be overcome. The implementation can overcome risk, as Chrome and Firefox's secure implementations prove. So the fact the risk exists is not a complete justification for not supporting the feature at all. Given that it conflicts with Microsoft's strategy anyway, the conclusion is the security concerns are used as an excuse rather than a reason.
  - chc 15y ago
    Secure implementations? Firefox had a security bug exposed just last week: http://wahlers.com.br/claus/blog/talking-about-webgl-and-security/ http://wahlers.com.br/claus/blog/talking-about-webgl-and-sec... And it doesn't even seem like a lot of people are actively leaning on Chrome and Firefox's WebGL implementations, so calling them "secure" seems a little premature.

nextparadigms 15y ago

It may have been smart, but I don't think it's working. I see more and more developers working on WebGL, and I think it will become an important standard that all browsers will adopt and promote this year, with the exception of IE. So Microsoft will be the one looking bad ultimately, because they will be once again behind in supporting standards. Also, I want to know how other browsers can work in the tile-based interface in Windows 8, hearing how its interface is based on IE10? Will they even allow other browsers in there, or will they risk an anti-trust lawsuit over the browser, again? For all the talk about supporting the cross-platform web, Microsoft is still trying to lock it down to their own OS.

uriel 15y ago

The security concerns about WebGL are not "whitewash". John Carmack: "I agree with Microsoft’s assessment that WebGL is a severe security risk. The gfx driver culture is not the culture of security." http://twitter.com/#!/ID_AA_Carmack/status/81732190949486592 http://twitter.com/#!/ID_AA_Carmack/status/81732190949486592

maercsrats 15y ago
A google engineer says that the security reason is bullshit: http://games.greggman.com/game/webgl-security-and-microsoft-bullshit/ http://games.greggman.com/game/webgl-security-and-microsoft-...
AshleysBrain 15y ago
It is true it is a security risk, and it is true the gfx driver culture is not a culture of security. Security risks can be overcome. The implementation can overcome risk, as Chrome and Firefox's secure implementations prove. So the fact the risk exists is not a complete justification for not supporting the feature at all. Given that it conflicts with Microsoft's strategy anyway, the conclusion is the security concerns are used as an excuse rather than a reason.
- chc 15y ago
  Secure implementations? Firefox had a security bug exposed just last week: http://wahlers.com.br/claus/blog/talking-about-webgl-and-security/ http://wahlers.com.br/claus/blog/talking-about-webgl-and-sec... And it doesn't even seem like a lot of people are actively leaning on Chrome and Firefox's WebGL implementations, so calling them "secure" seems a little premature.