You need to be logged in to post in the forums. If you do not have an account, please sign up first.
Active XAre there any plans to implement Active X, at any level, into the Opera browser? Active X commands are the single biggest barrier to non-IE browsers, and there are a great deal of websites that I use that require the use of Active X enabled browsers. Mainly:
http://softwarespectrum.com (to order software on State contract).
I would like to do these functions without having to startup IE and go throught that browser. What's the scoop?
No way in H....Well, at least I'm not the only one.
1. Active-X is a Microsoft sponsored entity for (mostly) web manipulation.
2 Active-X is predominately proprietary, meaning that it isnt a part of any international agreed-upon standard for web development.
3. Active-X is relatively widespread on Microsoft based sites like microsoft.com, msnbc and many others.
4. Active-X does have some potential for malicious abuse, lending to some security risks.
5. Active-X is NOT necessarily required to get updates from microsoft, but you might have to find alternative sources for some downloads.
6. Opera will most likely never support anything having to do with Active-X because of 3 basic reasons 1) Security risk, 2) Its not an internationally recognized standard, 3) allegedly too costly to implement.
Those are pretty much the facts. While my personal beliefs still maintain that a product should be market driven, not 100% standards driven, I am resigned to the fact that this wont change in the foreseeable future.
You are right that it is the market often drives development, but Opera tries to be slightly "different", although we also realize that it can be costly in the short term. I think in the long term, however, that standing one's ground will pay off.
Opera has already been spread by word of mouth because of its commitment towards certain ideals, rather than being purely market driven.
I disagreeI think that the best move for opera would be for them to try their best to implement active-x. I think that as long as opera's implementation of active-x is functional, it will convince more people to use opera. As more and more people start using opera, Microsoft will lose more of the browser market, which makes it harder for them to implement non-standard sh*t like active-x. But if opera continues its current plan, I won't be able to convince non-tech people like my friends to use opera, because they don't understand why not implementing active-x is an ideal. I know opera wants to shoot for certain ideals, but the greater good is served by fighting fire with fire. Not only does Opera make more money, but they ultimately make it harder for Microsoft to create its own standards. The security thing really isn't an issue either - just pop up a dialog that asks the user "Enable active-x? There might be security issues yadda yadda." So I really hope you guys change your mind. Thanks
YMMV, and everyone's entitled to an opinion, of course.
Originally posted by Blah
I'm not sure I understand what the problem is. I mean, if you can implement active-x on windows, you can implement it on the other systems, right? Even if you can't, just adding active-x to the windows version is fine. I mean, windows has the most users, so that's where you have to take the battle. I think you've already done something like this - I remember importing my bookmarks from IE, so that's windows-only, right? I just went and looked at some sites with active-x, and you have to admit that it's pretty cool. It might be costly to add active-x, but I think you will make your money back by the amount of new users that pour in. Until then, I simply can't switch completely to Opera, because my university uses active-x, which means IE is the only way to check my grades online.
Adding ActiveX capability to a browser means licensing the technology from Microsoft. It's a Microsoft technology that they haven't ported to the Macintosh, even though IE is the so-called "official Mac Browser".
This is due, in part, to the tight integration between COM (Component Object Model) and Internet Explorer behaviors that can come together and deliver functionality through ActiveX. This in turn is based upon proprietary technologies that Microsoft employs in IE to give it the "DHTML" "flavors" some developers like to play with.
And ActiveX is a client-side technology, which is why it's a Microsoft Windows product. Historically it was a way for MS to compete with Java. But Java is quite a bit more secure than ActiveX because Java doesn't have the green light from the OS the way ActiveX does. ActiveX code is downloaded to your computer and executed. Quite often, at least on MS sites, the little pop-up box that asks you if you want to install and run the software is actually an ActiveX control asking you permission to run itself. It's asking because ActiveX can be used to execute code that integrate with the Windows OS and do things like read what software you've installed (for windowsupdate) and whether or not your software install is registered and appears legitimate, and so on.
Finally, I question how long ActiveX will play a central role in MS technologies. If you look at .NET what you see is server side technology configuring the data layer through a presentation layer that is geared towards the device connecting to the server. So, for example: the same set of data (or web application like this message board) could be used to drive a site for a PocketPC, cell phone, desktop, and so on. Theoretically you could also take into account connection speed.
What this translates into is simple: MS is (smartly) moving away from client-side and into server side technologies with .NET. Of course, they're doing it in a way that discriminates against non-MS technologies, but that's another battle.
In the end, I'm glad Opera doesn't employ ActiveX. It is a tremendous security risk and there have been problems with malicious code executing on machines even though the warning message from Windows stated the code was secure and provided by Microsoft. Java doesn't do that and it runs on nearly any platform. Though you can certainly hack with Java and create havok on machines, it's much simpler with ActiveX.
Cogito, ergo doleo.
21. December 2001, 23:04:35 (edited)
I have Opera 6.0, Netscape 4.79 (junk, I only use the POP3 e-mail), Netscape/Mozilla 6.0/.8a (real buggy, and takes forever to open - over 3 minutes, so I dumped it), and Internet Explorer v5.5 SP2.
Internet Explorer v5.5 SP2 is faster and more stable than all of the others.
I am using Opera 6.0 more too now, however. It's the best Opera yet, but seems to be a bit of a resource hog.
However, if you want access to Windows Update, you must have ActiveX and the IE browser. I'm still running Windows 95 OSR2.5, and I've added all the Microsoft security and performance updates on my old (1996) computer. It's now very stable, much faster, and very secure (I use McAfee AV and Tiny Personal Firewall).
There's really not that much diference in size between IE v5.5 SP2 (about 11 Mbs.) and Opera with Java (about 10 Mbs.).