6 ms·

IE10 won't run Flash unless website is whitelisted by Microsoft

100 points by nitochi 14y ago

deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
DanielRibeiro 14y ago
Previous discussion: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4637845 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4637845
- justindocanto 14y ago
  The previous discussion was about Mobile IE10. This blog post is about IE10 on Windows 8, in general.. meaning desktop too.
  - manojlds 14y ago
    Both the discussions are about the same article and same topic.
    - justindocanto 14y ago
      Didn't think to check the link after i saw the title of 'Mobile Version...', but you're right. Sorry about that DanielRibeiro =)
micheljansen 14y ago
Big question is: will Silverlight run on websites not whitelisted by Microsoft? Otherwise it's a dirty trick.
- isani 14y ago
  No, Silverlight doesn't run on IE10 Metro. I just tested that it doesn't run on an arbitrary site, and I don't think it's possible to even whitelist it.
- manojlds 14y ago
  Silverlight is more dead than Flash and MS killed itby alienating Silverlight developers.
  - zapdrive 14y ago
    The only thing keeping silverlight alive is Netflix. I wonder why they use it in first place.
    - aidos 14y ago
      They use it for the DRM. In their case it's a necessary evil.
    - ttrashh 14y ago
      DRM, better streaming, C# and the .Net framework
      - 46Bit 14y ago
        I have to admit though: Netflix's (Silverlight) player is remarkably stable compared to anything I've ever tried in Flash.
      - adrr 14y ago
        Silverlight can enforce protected streams to the output devices. I couldn't play netflix streaming movies on my old monitor since it didn't support HDCP.
    - rythie 14y ago
      Some sort of deal with Microsoft I would assume.
    - fakeer 14y ago
      .NET. Almost everybody uses some version of Windows or other and so .NET is there more or less.
  - cooldeal 14y ago
    No, they had to kill it because the iPad wouldn't run browser plugins. They then transitioned to a plugin free HTML5 mobile web to help all developers.
justindocanto 14y ago
As questionable of a move that is, this kind of excites the 'omg, is flash finally going to die' moment i've been waiting for, for years.
- Father 14y ago
  Why is that? Flash seems pretty logical to me. If you were giving the choice to either design with a single language that compiles to bytecode and runs in a vm(jit), or an array of interpretive scripts that's heavily submitted to fragmentation, which would you choose? You'd probably go for the first, as would I. Flash may be a bad implementation of good idea, but alternatives have not exactly wooed me either. To be quite honest; they all seem equally flawed to me. The fact that jQuery, Bootstrap, and others originated out of overcoming fragmentation pretty much proofs that point. Also different JavaScript engines give you different performances and have different bottlenecks. At least with flash you had the guarantee it would crash the same on all platforms.
  - iSnow 14y ago
    >At least with flash you had the guarantee it would crash the same on all platforms. Uhm no. The Mac-version usually was both slower and less stable than the Windows-version. And the situation in JavaScript-land is getting better too. jQuery was developed years ago and while it still does paper over some implementation gotchas, it's main focus has shifted towards providing a nicer DOM-API. Since ES5, I started migrating away from jQuery for some more leisurely projects.
  - wladimir 14y ago
    I agree that the idea of a cross-browser, cross-OS bytecode platform is really nice. Every time I hear of "X-to-javascript" compilers I cringe a bit. But with flash the fatal problem is, and always was, that the only viable implementation of the interpreter is a proprietary and buggy blob, not even available for all platforms. Apart from that being a plugin also made it clunky, too much like a "java applet" (it never integrated into a page as well as javascript does). If it had been based on an open specification (like HTML5 is now) then it could have been successful. Different browsers could have competed for the fastest and most secure JIT, like they do with javascript now. The end result would probably have been great. Alas... Even non-technical people I hear complaining almost daily about what a piece of crapware the Adobe Flash plugin is, after it crashed for the zillionth time. Everyone wants flash to die, as the last sites that still require it either move to HTML5 or are replaced.
BonoboBoner 14y ago
So I cant use e.g. Flowplayer on my site to show IE people a video?
- ygra 14y ago
  Flowplayer seems to be HTML5 by now, so it should work.
- Veus 14y ago
  Yes you can. The new version of Flowplayer is HTML5 and then falls back to Flash if HTML5 isn't supported.
hayksaakian 14y ago
By the time ie10 becomes the majority of ie market share, flash will have not mattered for many years
- camus 14y ago
  > By the time ie10 becomes the majority of ie market share it will never happen.
acedeathkill 14y ago
The whitelisting is on the IE10 thats embedded in the Windows 8 ui (those fancy tiles). The normal IE10 browser that you use to browse the web with has no such limitations. Nothing to see here...
devsatish 14y ago
Interesting. Flash is not just video and ads. Flex is a powerful and rich application stack on Flash platform. There are numerous sites out there using Flex.
- VeejayRampay 14y ago
  Let's get real, very few websites use Flex, it's kind of a dead technology.
andrewcooke 14y ago
doesn't the significance of this depend on the roles of the two browsers in windows 8? is that explained anywhere? how can you understand or comment usefully on this without knowing what the difference in uses for the two is?
devsatish 14y ago
reading the lines, It seems this is only in the Metro version of IE. But still an hassle, where the desktop IE pops-up when non white-listed Flash content is on the page. Submitting your site for consideration for Internet Explorer compatibility As stated previously, developers who have sites that require Flash Player can mark the page with a META tag (or serve a header) indicating that the site requires a plug-in. This causes Internet Explorer 10 to prompt the end user to open the site in Internet Explorer 10 for the desktop. If a site is on the CV list as compatible with Internet Explorer 10, Internet Explorer 10 will always open it with Flash Player enabled and the user won't be prompted to open in Internet Explorer 10 for the desktop.
zapdrive 14y ago
Is M$ trying the Apple approach? To be in control of everything? Is this the beginning of another walled garden? Will M$ succeed at it?
isani 14y ago
Earlier, the plan was to have no plugin support at all in IE10 Metro. Microsoft is positioning the whitelist approach as a backwards compatibility shim for high-profile sites that won't or can't give up Flash.
- buro9 14y ago
  And if this is controlled by group policy, then this allows them to increase security for end consumers whilst allowing business customers the ability to carry on supporting the internal use of Flash that they may (feel that they) require.
marshray 14y ago
When we data security advocates discuss things like promiscuous trust among SSL certificate authorities and one-click scary page bypass features with browser vendors, inevitably the old adage comes up "no vendor is willing to lose market share by making its security policies more restrictive than the others". Perhaps this is a test case trying to break out of the old status quo? Disclaimer: I recently accepted a position at the big M itself.
- michaelt 14y ago
  The iphone/ipad web browsers already don't support flash, so dropping flash support isn't entirely a new thing. I for one am looking forward to its death on more platforms.
  - marshray 14y ago
    Hmm. Reading the linked MS document, it sounds more like they're desupporting plugins more for user experience consistency reasons than security or anything else.
  - drhowarddrfine 14y ago
    Adobe themselves don't support Flash on mobile.
- dspillett 14y ago
  Apple broke that status quo by not allowing flash on iDevices at all. They had the advantage of the Steve/Apple "the people like it because we say they should and they think we a cool" super-power though, which MS do not currently poses, and they had both the performance (much Flash code is badly written and would devour battery life) and UI (much flash code that is out there won't work well on a touch-screen interface) caveats which are easier for the user-on-the-street (at least those I've talked to) to get their head around than security & stability problems. This is though the first test of kicking flash in the teeth in a less restricted environment than the iDevice ecosystem, so it is still a brave move to be the first to do so (time will tell whether it is a brave move in the Yes Minister use of the word "brave"!). One key fact that will help is that there is a growing perception amongst people who don't even know what Flash is that Flash is an out-dated technology, mainly because of the iDevice thing (if your site/app won't run on my iPad because of this "flash" thing, your flash thing is wrong not my shiny shiny). This will help MS and other browser makers as it reduces the uphill struggle convincing people that losing the feature is not too much to pay for the potential security and stability benefits. Of course the other key factor will be what sites are on the white-list and how they address not being if they aren't (do they change tech, do they follow what-ever procedure is needed to get on the whitelist, or do they just tell their users "IE10 doesn't work here"?). I can name many video sites that MS won't want to be seen to support and won't want to make changes or pay for certification (or what-ever is needed) in order to get on the white list. A great many people use those sites regularly while pretending they don't know they exist - if those sites don't move to HTML5-video (with the problems that still exist there) or somehow get on the white-list those people might find some reason to switch to Chrome/Firefox/other (or stick with IE9) rather than upgrade to IE10.
rangibaby 14y ago
I remember reading this and thinking "nice", back when there were a lot of sites where video couldn't be viewed on an iPhone: https://www.apple.com/hotnews/thoughts-on-flash/ https://www.apple.com/hotnews/thoughts-on-flash/ Two years later, and I can even comfortably disable the Flash plugin in my desktop browser. It seems (thankfully) that Flash is fast turning into a relic of last decade. Not a bad move by MS.
- sageikosa 14y ago
  I uninstalled Flash from my machine, got tired of it constantly patching/updating/hardening itself. If I want to view Flash-content I use Chrome.
kayoone 14y ago
thats bad news for 3D games in the browser where HTML5 isnt an option yet.
- Skrekkpus 14y ago
  True, but Unity is even better. The same regime might still apply though.
  - adrr 14y ago
    Reading the MSDN page posted on a previous comment, it looks like they are deprecating activex interface for IE. Flash, Silverlight and any other plugin using activex to interface more directly with hardware will be affected.
easternmonk 14y ago
Well, we have come to a point where no one actually cares about IE. Everyone wishes this browser wouldn't exist and most of the people use it as a tool to download Chrome and Firefox. Having said that Microsoft's new policy is either aimed at discouraging Flash altogether OR this is just a test. They want to test users are willing accept this kind of feature where MS white-listed websites are given more power than the normal websites. Expect more to happen on this front.
- fakeer 14y ago
  >most of the people use it as a tool to download Chrome and Firefox. Not true. A lot of people still use it as in use. I was alarmingly surprised to find the number of users using IE as their main browser in my office, other than mandatory use to access company portal. And oh, my company's entire mail/issue-tracking suite works on this piece of art.
  - Hovertruck 14y ago
    Chartbeat can speak to this a bit: http://chartbeat.com/labs/totaltotal/ http://chartbeat.com/labs/totaltotal/ You'll need a big monitor, as this was a quick hack and doesn't function very well on small screens, but you can see the number of people using IE across all of the sites our JS is loaded on in real-time.
    - fakeer 14y ago
      Good source. Yes I can see and it shows IE at number 2 spot consistently. >>doesn't function very well on small screens Works just fine with "CTRL -"
- hieronymusN 14y ago
  Developers, myself included, may not care about IE as a browser, but the vast majority of the people using my web applications most certainly do as they are using IE. So I care about IE in that I have to field a lot of support requests for it and ensure that the JavaScript I wrote doesn't bomb out on a dangling comma. Those IE users also pay my employer a lot of money to use those web applications to get their jobs done. So yes, people, as in civilian non-developers, do care about IE, quite a bit in fact.
belorn 14y ago
The keyword is lockdown. I am all for giving hate to flash. It is commonly found vulnerable. It produce slow websites which eats memory and cpu. It has poor history in non-windows systems. But in all, I have serious doubt this call was made for any reason beyond pushing users to their app-store. games? online experience? chat? By forbidding flash, companies are bit more forced to turn to apps with their products. Sure, things can still use javascript, html5 and web-sockets, but I would not trust web-sockets to be left alone if they seriously would start to threaten the app world. Maybe I am just cynical, but follow the money argument looks to support it.
- brudgers 14y ago
  "Lockdown" is not the correct term. 1. Flash isn't prohibited on Windows RT devices. This is distinctly different from Apple's approach with iOS, and Google has removed Flash from Android. [1] 2. Existing Flash websites will run on Windows RT devices. Windows RT will ship with the desktop version of IE10. [2] Microsoft has made explicit what we all know. There are some websites that use Flash appropriately and in a way which benefits the person browsing, and there are websites whose use of Flash makes the web suck. Having browsed the web for two years with Flash disabled by default, I'd add that here are a lot of sites which just use Flash for the sake of using Flash. When I don't see it, I still get the content I was seeking. [1] http://www.readwriteweb.com/mobile/2012/08/adobe-flash-on-android-rip.php http://www.readwriteweb.com/mobile/2012/08/adobe-flash-on-an... [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_on_ARM#Limitations http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_on_ARM#Limitations
  - Karunamon 14y ago
    What bugs me is the fact that we are forced (not a default list, not an opt out list, forced with no alternative if you want to use IE) to defer to Microsoft's judgement on what is a "flash appropriate" site and what is not. Did Newgrounds make their list? Shockwave? Pogo? Quite frankly, I don't trust them with that power. This is the company that just got off of "monopoly probation". I'm starting to really tire of this trend where developers lock away even power user settings (like the ability to decide what fucking plugins run in your browser) in the name of "security".
Quarrelsome 14y ago
I'm becoming confused as to who Microsoft are anymore. They continue to disappoint by chasing other people's customers while alienating their existing ones. I've been here before with WindowsCE and WinMobile. :(
magoon 14y ago
It'll run flash, it won't run flash, it'll run flash, now it will only run some flash. Headspin. Alienating developers.
Revisor 14y ago
Also an interesting information: there are two versions of IE. How and why should the user choose which one is more appropriate? Will the locked down version be default?
- rst 14y ago
  It's coupled to the "split personality" of the Windows 8 UI. If you start IE from desktop mode, you get "desktop IE", with desktop UI conventions, and web sites with flash will still work. If you select IE off the browser tile in the formerly-Metro "start screen", you get mobile-style UI conventions, and flash breaks unless you're on the whitelist. Either they're expecting everyone who uses flash in a significant way to get whitelist approvals (and how many people do they have vetting those, anyway?), or they don't mind a period where, from the user's perspective, stuff randomly breaks for reasons that are not likely to be apparent. (Even if you tell them "well, it's how you started the browser fifteen minutes ago", they'll ask, "and why should that matter?" They have a point.)
libido 14y ago
"First they took away Flash, but I didn't care because I was not a Flash developer..." Whatever your stance is on Flash, this is a scary development if you don't like walled gardens.
- wccrawford 14y ago
  There was recently a big furor over Notch's statement that he refuses to let Microsoft certify his games for Win8. Many people felt he was being childish and throwing a tantrum, while others think he's a visionary and working to prevent MS from walling off Windows like the 360. Personally, I think it's a fight worth fighting, since they really could go that route if they got enough buy-in on it. And I don't doubt they would, if they thought it was in their best interests. That's what corporations do. Luckily, Linux has recently gotten a lot of support from indie developers via Kickstarter (and the players' demands for a Linux version) and it's starting to look more viable as a platform for commercial games. We can hope.
  - cooldeal 14y ago
    The problem with Notch was that it was impossible to find out exactly what he was ranting about when he is fine with accelerating the demise of the PC by having his game run on the locked down iOS but not releasing it in the Windows 8 desktop store which is open. Read this three part article about the confusion. http://www.withinwindows.com/2012/09/28/notch-doesnt-hate-windows-8-hes-just-confused/ http://www.withinwindows.com/2012/09/28/notch-doesnt-hate-wi...
Zenst 14y ago
My initial reaction was oh noo how dare they take something away from me, I then realised I have chrome. I then got thinking, as a default for a browser that will end up in corporate desktops and home users that this is actualy a realy nice move. I'm sure there will be some registry hack to negate this, but for the common user who lacks the ability to do that are perhaps best left with there internet L plates attached. In summary, big fat +1 from me on this as anybody who is able to bypass this hurdle will be alot less likely to fall foul of this safty net. Less infected PC's, less spam, less crap in general. Lets not also forget the big benefit this betowes upon us, less calls from friends who's PC's/Internet seems to be running a little slower and after 15 minutes on the phone you realise it will be easier to see them.
- aristidb 14y ago
  Except the desktop version of the browser still has Flash. It's only the Metro, pardon me, Windows 8-style UI version that has no Flash.
PaulHoule 14y ago
Microsoft is being like Apple; like Apple, they know Flash isn't a good answer for tablets and mobile and they're guiding people towards something that is. In fact, Microsoft is pushing developers towards HTML 5. Note that desktop IE 10 supports Flash and other plug-ins just fine. I run Windows 8 preview on the computer in my ham shack and I find that do almost all my browsing with the desktop IE anyway. I just use the Metro IE to visit QRZ, which is a web application for looking up call signs and logging contacts.
mcpoulet 14y ago
How is this news ? We know this since last May ( http://www.withinwindows.com/2012/05/23/windows-8-secrets-internet-explorer-10-will-ship-with-adobe-flash/ http://www.withinwindows.com/2012/05/23/windows-8-secrets-in... ).
jzs 14y ago
Personally i think this is great news. And i would very much like to see Java ending up in the same boat. Having a language that is not inherently designed to be run in a sandboxed environment should not be allowed to run in a browser.
guilloche 14y ago
Horay for the death of flash and IE.
AbraKdabra 14y ago
I wish that Google doesn't whitelist YouTube with MS so everyone migrates to Chrome, I want IE10 dead.

100 points by nitochi 14y ago

deleted 14y ago

[deleted]

DanielRibeiro 14y ago

Previous discussion: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4637845 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4637845

justindocanto 14y ago
The previous discussion was about Mobile IE10. This blog post is about IE10 on Windows 8, in general.. meaning desktop too.
- manojlds 14y ago
  Both the discussions are about the same article and same topic.
  - justindocanto 14y ago
    Didn't think to check the link after i saw the title of 'Mobile Version...', but you're right. Sorry about that DanielRibeiro =)

micheljansen 14y ago

Big question is: will Silverlight run on websites not whitelisted by Microsoft? Otherwise it's a dirty trick.

isani 14y ago
No, Silverlight doesn't run on IE10 Metro. I just tested that it doesn't run on an arbitrary site, and I don't think it's possible to even whitelist it.
manojlds 14y ago
Silverlight is more dead than Flash and MS killed itby alienating Silverlight developers.
- zapdrive 14y ago
  The only thing keeping silverlight alive is Netflix. I wonder why they use it in first place.
  - aidos 14y ago
    They use it for the DRM. In their case it's a necessary evil.
  - ttrashh 14y ago
    DRM, better streaming, C# and the .Net framework
    - 46Bit 14y ago
      I have to admit though: Netflix's (Silverlight) player is remarkably stable compared to anything I've ever tried in Flash.
    - adrr 14y ago
      Silverlight can enforce protected streams to the output devices. I couldn't play netflix streaming movies on my old monitor since it didn't support HDCP.
  - rythie 14y ago
    Some sort of deal with Microsoft I would assume.
  - fakeer 14y ago
    .NET. Almost everybody uses some version of Windows or other and so .NET is there more or less.
- cooldeal 14y ago
  No, they had to kill it because the iPad wouldn't run browser plugins. They then transitioned to a plugin free HTML5 mobile web to help all developers.

justindocanto 14y ago

As questionable of a move that is, this kind of excites the 'omg, is flash finally going to die' moment i've been waiting for, for years.

Father 14y ago
Why is that? Flash seems pretty logical to me. If you were giving the choice to either design with a single language that compiles to bytecode and runs in a vm(jit), or an array of interpretive scripts that's heavily submitted to fragmentation, which would you choose? You'd probably go for the first, as would I. Flash may be a bad implementation of good idea, but alternatives have not exactly wooed me either. To be quite honest; they all seem equally flawed to me. The fact that jQuery, Bootstrap, and others originated out of overcoming fragmentation pretty much proofs that point. Also different JavaScript engines give you different performances and have different bottlenecks. At least with flash you had the guarantee it would crash the same on all platforms.
- iSnow 14y ago
  >At least with flash you had the guarantee it would crash the same on all platforms. Uhm no. The Mac-version usually was both slower and less stable than the Windows-version. And the situation in JavaScript-land is getting better too. jQuery was developed years ago and while it still does paper over some implementation gotchas, it's main focus has shifted towards providing a nicer DOM-API. Since ES5, I started migrating away from jQuery for some more leisurely projects.
- wladimir 14y ago
  I agree that the idea of a cross-browser, cross-OS bytecode platform is really nice. Every time I hear of "X-to-javascript" compilers I cringe a bit. But with flash the fatal problem is, and always was, that the only viable implementation of the interpreter is a proprietary and buggy blob, not even available for all platforms. Apart from that being a plugin also made it clunky, too much like a "java applet" (it never integrated into a page as well as javascript does). If it had been based on an open specification (like HTML5 is now) then it could have been successful. Different browsers could have competed for the fastest and most secure JIT, like they do with javascript now. The end result would probably have been great. Alas... Even non-technical people I hear complaining almost daily about what a piece of crapware the Adobe Flash plugin is, after it crashed for the zillionth time. Everyone wants flash to die, as the last sites that still require it either move to HTML5 or are replaced.

BonoboBoner 14y ago

So I cant use e.g. Flowplayer on my site to show IE people a video?

ygra 14y ago
Flowplayer seems to be HTML5 by now, so it should work.
Veus 14y ago
Yes you can. The new version of Flowplayer is HTML5 and then falls back to Flash if HTML5 isn't supported.

hayksaakian 14y ago

By the time ie10 becomes the majority of ie market share, flash will have not mattered for many years

camus 14y ago
> By the time ie10 becomes the majority of ie market share it will never happen.

acedeathkill 14y ago

The whitelisting is on the IE10 thats embedded in the Windows 8 ui (those fancy tiles). The normal IE10 browser that you use to browse the web with has no such limitations. Nothing to see here...

devsatish 14y ago

Interesting. Flash is not just video and ads. Flex is a powerful and rich application stack on Flash platform. There are numerous sites out there using Flex.

VeejayRampay 14y ago
Let's get real, very few websites use Flex, it's kind of a dead technology.

andrewcooke 14y ago

doesn't the significance of this depend on the roles of the two browsers in windows 8? is that explained anywhere? how can you understand or comment usefully on this without knowing what the difference in uses for the two is?

devsatish 14y ago

reading the lines, It seems this is only in the Metro version of IE. But still an hassle, where the desktop IE pops-up when non white-listed Flash content is on the page. Submitting your site for consideration for Internet Explorer compatibility As stated previously, developers who have sites that require Flash Player can mark the page with a META tag (or serve a header) indicating that the site requires a plug-in. This causes Internet Explorer 10 to prompt the end user to open the site in Internet Explorer 10 for the desktop. If a site is on the CV list as compatible with Internet Explorer 10, Internet Explorer 10 will always open it with Flash Player enabled and the user won't be prompted to open in Internet Explorer 10 for the desktop.

zapdrive 14y ago

Is M$ trying the Apple approach? To be in control of everything? Is this the beginning of another walled garden? Will M$ succeed at it?

isani 14y ago

Earlier, the plan was to have no plugin support at all in IE10 Metro. Microsoft is positioning the whitelist approach as a backwards compatibility shim for high-profile sites that won't or can't give up Flash.

buro9 14y ago
And if this is controlled by group policy, then this allows them to increase security for end consumers whilst allowing business customers the ability to carry on supporting the internal use of Flash that they may (feel that they) require.

marshray 14y ago

When we data security advocates discuss things like promiscuous trust among SSL certificate authorities and one-click scary page bypass features with browser vendors, inevitably the old adage comes up "no vendor is willing to lose market share by making its security policies more restrictive than the others". Perhaps this is a test case trying to break out of the old status quo? Disclaimer: I recently accepted a position at the big M itself.

michaelt 14y ago
The iphone/ipad web browsers already don't support flash, so dropping flash support isn't entirely a new thing. I for one am looking forward to its death on more platforms.
- marshray 14y ago
  Hmm. Reading the linked MS document, it sounds more like they're desupporting plugins more for user experience consistency reasons than security or anything else.
- drhowarddrfine 14y ago
  Adobe themselves don't support Flash on mobile.
dspillett 14y ago
Apple broke that status quo by not allowing flash on iDevices at all. They had the advantage of the Steve/Apple "the people like it because we say they should and they think we a cool" super-power though, which MS do not currently poses, and they had both the performance (much Flash code is badly written and would devour battery life) and UI (much flash code that is out there won't work well on a touch-screen interface) caveats which are easier for the user-on-the-street (at least those I've talked to) to get their head around than security & stability problems. This is though the first test of kicking flash in the teeth in a less restricted environment than the iDevice ecosystem, so it is still a brave move to be the first to do so (time will tell whether it is a brave move in the Yes Minister use of the word "brave"!). One key fact that will help is that there is a growing perception amongst people who don't even know what Flash is that Flash is an out-dated technology, mainly because of the iDevice thing (if your site/app won't run on my iPad because of this "flash" thing, your flash thing is wrong not my shiny shiny). This will help MS and other browser makers as it reduces the uphill struggle convincing people that losing the feature is not too much to pay for the potential security and stability benefits. Of course the other key factor will be what sites are on the white-list and how they address not being if they aren't (do they change tech, do they follow what-ever procedure is needed to get on the whitelist, or do they just tell their users "IE10 doesn't work here"?). I can name many video sites that MS won't want to be seen to support and won't want to make changes or pay for certification (or what-ever is needed) in order to get on the white list. A great many people use those sites regularly while pretending they don't know they exist - if those sites don't move to HTML5-video (with the problems that still exist there) or somehow get on the white-list those people might find some reason to switch to Chrome/Firefox/other (or stick with IE9) rather than upgrade to IE10.

rangibaby 14y ago

I remember reading this and thinking "nice", back when there were a lot of sites where video couldn't be viewed on an iPhone: https://www.apple.com/hotnews/thoughts-on-flash/ https://www.apple.com/hotnews/thoughts-on-flash/ Two years later, and I can even comfortably disable the Flash plugin in my desktop browser. It seems (thankfully) that Flash is fast turning into a relic of last decade. Not a bad move by MS.

sageikosa 14y ago
I uninstalled Flash from my machine, got tired of it constantly patching/updating/hardening itself. If I want to view Flash-content I use Chrome.

kayoone 14y ago

thats bad news for 3D games in the browser where HTML5 isnt an option yet.

Skrekkpus 14y ago
True, but Unity is even better. The same regime might still apply though.
- adrr 14y ago
  Reading the MSDN page posted on a previous comment, it looks like they are deprecating activex interface for IE. Flash, Silverlight and any other plugin using activex to interface more directly with hardware will be affected.

easternmonk 14y ago

Well, we have come to a point where no one actually cares about IE. Everyone wishes this browser wouldn't exist and most of the people use it as a tool to download Chrome and Firefox. Having said that Microsoft's new policy is either aimed at discouraging Flash altogether OR this is just a test. They want to test users are willing accept this kind of feature where MS white-listed websites are given more power than the normal websites. Expect more to happen on this front.

fakeer 14y ago
>most of the people use it as a tool to download Chrome and Firefox. Not true. A lot of people still use it as in use. I was alarmingly surprised to find the number of users using IE as their main browser in my office, other than mandatory use to access company portal. And oh, my company's entire mail/issue-tracking suite works on this piece of art.
- Hovertruck 14y ago
  Chartbeat can speak to this a bit: http://chartbeat.com/labs/totaltotal/ http://chartbeat.com/labs/totaltotal/ You'll need a big monitor, as this was a quick hack and doesn't function very well on small screens, but you can see the number of people using IE across all of the sites our JS is loaded on in real-time.
  - fakeer 14y ago
    Good source. Yes I can see and it shows IE at number 2 spot consistently. >>doesn't function very well on small screens Works just fine with "CTRL -"
hieronymusN 14y ago
Developers, myself included, may not care about IE as a browser, but the vast majority of the people using my web applications most certainly do as they are using IE. So I care about IE in that I have to field a lot of support requests for it and ensure that the JavaScript I wrote doesn't bomb out on a dangling comma. Those IE users also pay my employer a lot of money to use those web applications to get their jobs done. So yes, people, as in civilian non-developers, do care about IE, quite a bit in fact.

belorn 14y ago

The keyword is lockdown. I am all for giving hate to flash. It is commonly found vulnerable. It produce slow websites which eats memory and cpu. It has poor history in non-windows systems. But in all, I have serious doubt this call was made for any reason beyond pushing users to their app-store. games? online experience? chat? By forbidding flash, companies are bit more forced to turn to apps with their products. Sure, things can still use javascript, html5 and web-sockets, but I would not trust web-sockets to be left alone if they seriously would start to threaten the app world. Maybe I am just cynical, but follow the money argument looks to support it.

brudgers 14y ago
"Lockdown" is not the correct term. 1. Flash isn't prohibited on Windows RT devices. This is distinctly different from Apple's approach with iOS, and Google has removed Flash from Android. [1] 2. Existing Flash websites will run on Windows RT devices. Windows RT will ship with the desktop version of IE10. [2] Microsoft has made explicit what we all know. There are some websites that use Flash appropriately and in a way which benefits the person browsing, and there are websites whose use of Flash makes the web suck. Having browsed the web for two years with Flash disabled by default, I'd add that here are a lot of sites which just use Flash for the sake of using Flash. When I don't see it, I still get the content I was seeking. [1] http://www.readwriteweb.com/mobile/2012/08/adobe-flash-on-android-rip.php http://www.readwriteweb.com/mobile/2012/08/adobe-flash-on-an... [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_on_ARM#Limitations http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_on_ARM#Limitations
- Karunamon 14y ago
  What bugs me is the fact that we are forced (not a default list, not an opt out list, forced with no alternative if you want to use IE) to defer to Microsoft's judgement on what is a "flash appropriate" site and what is not. Did Newgrounds make their list? Shockwave? Pogo? Quite frankly, I don't trust them with that power. This is the company that just got off of "monopoly probation". I'm starting to really tire of this trend where developers lock away even power user settings (like the ability to decide what fucking plugins run in your browser) in the name of "security".

Quarrelsome 14y ago

I'm becoming confused as to who Microsoft are anymore. They continue to disappoint by chasing other people's customers while alienating their existing ones. I've been here before with WindowsCE and WinMobile. :(

magoon 14y ago

It'll run flash, it won't run flash, it'll run flash, now it will only run some flash. Headspin. Alienating developers.

Revisor 14y ago

Also an interesting information: there are two versions of IE. How and why should the user choose which one is more appropriate? Will the locked down version be default?

rst 14y ago
It's coupled to the "split personality" of the Windows 8 UI. If you start IE from desktop mode, you get "desktop IE", with desktop UI conventions, and web sites with flash will still work. If you select IE off the browser tile in the formerly-Metro "start screen", you get mobile-style UI conventions, and flash breaks unless you're on the whitelist. Either they're expecting everyone who uses flash in a significant way to get whitelist approvals (and how many people do they have vetting those, anyway?), or they don't mind a period where, from the user's perspective, stuff randomly breaks for reasons that are not likely to be apparent. (Even if you tell them "well, it's how you started the browser fifteen minutes ago", they'll ask, "and why should that matter?" They have a point.)

libido 14y ago

"First they took away Flash, but I didn't care because I was not a Flash developer..." Whatever your stance is on Flash, this is a scary development if you don't like walled gardens.

wccrawford 14y ago
There was recently a big furor over Notch's statement that he refuses to let Microsoft certify his games for Win8. Many people felt he was being childish and throwing a tantrum, while others think he's a visionary and working to prevent MS from walling off Windows like the 360. Personally, I think it's a fight worth fighting, since they really could go that route if they got enough buy-in on it. And I don't doubt they would, if they thought it was in their best interests. That's what corporations do. Luckily, Linux has recently gotten a lot of support from indie developers via Kickstarter (and the players' demands for a Linux version) and it's starting to look more viable as a platform for commercial games. We can hope.
- cooldeal 14y ago
  The problem with Notch was that it was impossible to find out exactly what he was ranting about when he is fine with accelerating the demise of the PC by having his game run on the locked down iOS but not releasing it in the Windows 8 desktop store which is open. Read this three part article about the confusion. http://www.withinwindows.com/2012/09/28/notch-doesnt-hate-windows-8-hes-just-confused/ http://www.withinwindows.com/2012/09/28/notch-doesnt-hate-wi...

Zenst 14y ago

My initial reaction was oh noo how dare they take something away from me, I then realised I have chrome. I then got thinking, as a default for a browser that will end up in corporate desktops and home users that this is actualy a realy nice move. I'm sure there will be some registry hack to negate this, but for the common user who lacks the ability to do that are perhaps best left with there internet L plates attached. In summary, big fat +1 from me on this as anybody who is able to bypass this hurdle will be alot less likely to fall foul of this safty net. Less infected PC's, less spam, less crap in general. Lets not also forget the big benefit this betowes upon us, less calls from friends who's PC's/Internet seems to be running a little slower and after 15 minutes on the phone you realise it will be easier to see them.

aristidb 14y ago
Except the desktop version of the browser still has Flash. It's only the Metro, pardon me, Windows 8-style UI version that has no Flash.

PaulHoule 14y ago

Microsoft is being like Apple; like Apple, they know Flash isn't a good answer for tablets and mobile and they're guiding people towards something that is. In fact, Microsoft is pushing developers towards HTML 5. Note that desktop IE 10 supports Flash and other plug-ins just fine. I run Windows 8 preview on the computer in my ham shack and I find that do almost all my browsing with the desktop IE anyway. I just use the Metro IE to visit QRZ, which is a web application for looking up call signs and logging contacts.

mcpoulet 14y ago

How is this news ? We know this since last May ( http://www.withinwindows.com/2012/05/23/windows-8-secrets-internet-explorer-10-will-ship-with-adobe-flash/ http://www.withinwindows.com/2012/05/23/windows-8-secrets-in... ).

jzs 14y ago

Personally i think this is great news. And i would very much like to see Java ending up in the same boat. Having a language that is not inherently designed to be run in a sandboxed environment should not be allowed to run in a browser.

guilloche 14y ago

Horay for the death of flash and IE.

AbraKdabra 14y ago

I wish that Google doesn't whitelist YouTube with MS so everyone migrates to Chrome, I want IE10 dead.