7 ms·

As mentioned above, I hope you are correct, but Google's announcement and statements in the Google IO PNaCl talk seem to show otherwise. If there is a misunders

• dragonwriter 13y ago
  > If Google only enables PNaCl on the web if/when it is on track to become an industry-accepted standard, then everything is ok from my perspective - I think you agree to that? I don't see how I could disagree with your description of what would be okay from your perspective. I'm actually not particularly concerned one way or the other; it certainly isn't as if Google hasn't pivoted to whatever the standard solution is in the past even when they've previously embraced (and enabled-by-default) a solution that ended up failing to become the standard. If Google was trying to push developer-focussed tooling as a business model and so was invested in its proprietary solutions winning, that would be different, but AFAICT there business model around improving web performance is to enable people to do more in the browser without relying on external code for the underlying OS, and if asm.js addresses that problem its just as good for them as it would be if PNaCl did it.