3 ms·
That is not different from how most of Firefox's capabilities only work as part of Firefox.
by pekk 12y ago
That is not different from how most of Firefox's capabilities only work as part of Firefox.
- zanny 12y agoThe point is that NaCL is not browser portable at all. NPAPI is. Therefor, they are depreciating a cross browser plugin architecture for one that is Chrome-only. Which basically means no more plugins at all, unless Chrome captures a ridiculous 50%+ marketshare. Which is actually likely, because Google is doing some real seedy nonsense to get Chrome on every Windows preinstall and bundled with every other freeware program in the universe.
- justinschuh 12y agoIt's a myth that NPAPI is browser portable (at least in the sense that portability is not a massive undertaking). NPAPI doesn't work on mobile platforms and it requires a huge effort to add or even maintain support for a multi-process browser and a modern graphics stack. Even then, the support is a hack that is a constant source of bugs, crashes, and security vulnerabilities. The only thing that's kept it working this long is constant vigilance on the part of browser makers.
- pcwalton 12y agoThose capabilities (at least the new ones—old SpiderMonkey JS extensions notwithstanding) aren't exposed to Web content.
- gcp 12y agoThe ones exposed to the web (the API) is standardized, well documented, and implemented by several parties. (P)NaCL is none of those things.