This move from Mozilla foundation is consistent with what we have seen happening with Chrome, Edge. It has been initiated long by Apple which decided to drop flash support on their mobile device.
The motivation of these move are well known: less battery usage, more security. For general public it is justified.
However there are a whole range of corporate application that relied and still rely on plug-ins. Not just flash. So deep down, by not providing at least a supported version of browser with plugin, the industry is building a monolithic platform
The argument that HTML5 is now mature enough does not fly very far. Mature enough for common web app sure. But it you start using advanced feature such as WebRTC, you'll start seeing glitches and incompatibilities that pushes some service to advertize "please use Chrome"
The fact is that now people in general (users, developers and software editors) are techno racists. They want security and despite technology that is not 'like them'. So the prefer to slam the door and drop the plugins and by decree ban any foreign technology from our beloved HTML / JS free platform.
This is unfortunately consistent with the behavior of the political world of today
It may create a new life form. And possibily human extinction as a minor side effect!
Apple Computer announced last year that starting from June 1, 2016, they would not accept any application that would not support IP V6 only networks. This is a good move from a major player that could increase the acceptance of IP V6. We understand that this protocol is also the preferred choice for telco operator that are getting headeache dealing with IP V4 exhausion.
[rant on] It strikes me that Google hires probably the brightest minds and do not grasp basics of IT: different people have different needs!
While it is acceptable to start restricting an securing web browser by disabling some features and external plugins for general public, it is quite unacceptable NOT to leave any option but not to upgrade for specialized use. I still did not get over NPAPI deprecation. Companies like mine have built specialized solutions around plugins and/or flash and with Google ecosystem (and with Apple one) we have NO choice.
As they represents a sizeable chunk of the market. It's a PROBLEM.
We had to basically rebuild our own web browser with NPAPI support to continue our business.
https://github.com/operationiv... (for those interested)
I can imagine how flash based solutions companies are thrilled about this announcement. And then - the question: what is the procedure to make it into the 'whitelist'. Google is turning into nanny state organization. Seems that they upgraded their motto as well
'Don't do evil' -> 'We do you good (even against your wish)
At least, the reviled Microsoft is doing a fine job ensuing good compatibility with their decade old WIn32 API. The perfect example is ActiveX support that has been removed from WIn10 / EDGE browser. But Win10 ships with Internet Explorer that HAS kept the active X support.
I can here teams of young (male virgin?) bright devs shrieking and getting excited by the newest JS bla bla framework and sighting when having to support legacy code. What a turn off for them !
To me, plugins where not only 'small add-ons'. They represented a web compound documents model, open toward other technologies.
Pure HTML5 is a 'la pensée unique', 'there is no alternative' way.
It reflects in the code how insecure people feel about 'foreign' things more generally and it is sad.
Several programming frameworks and languages provides very good ways to implement actor based software. Three of them come in mind:
Erlang and Scala merge functional programming with actor model and that has a solid consequence: developpers can only assign variables once and cannot change the value. The only way to change a variable is to send a new messsage (or to call a function) with new arguments. This is a radical way to prevent any use of memory sharing but this breaks most of the classical programming techniques: loops needs to be implemented by recursive function calls or can be replaced with more functional equivalents.
Let's focus now on server side application development, especially in telecommunication field where protocol exchange is the main purpose. Intuitively the actor model fits perfectly . However the majority of telecommunication apps are still developped in classical C/C++ with scripting languages or in Java (SIP servlet). But Actors make four important promises:
Its because it requires major cultural changes and telco world is a bit conservative.
All this is much more radical than moving from init scripts to systemd on Linux. And this transition is costly: training developers, software redesign and reimplementation.
Is it worth it ? That is a question we are asking ourselves
That has been attempted several times. One attempt is compact HTML
I remember when apple rolled out iOS 8 and our web app broke (it was a simple form with buttons !)
Also when you are using advanced feature such as webrtc, then you have to block users for loading the page with Safari or Internet Explorer. I am sorry but while on paper HTML5 is the best approach, it does not yet offer the uniform API an behavior that web developper need to save time and money.
I am all for HTML5 improved support and standard but our experence with various HTML5 implementation is that developpers actually spend a LOT of time accomodating the differences between browsers and browser versions.
Not only between mobile and desktop but between different browsers and different version of the SAME browser.
Different implementations of the same standards are almost always breaking the code.
So on the contrary using HTML5 increases the development time and maintenance cost as web sites or web apps have to be "corrected" to follow browser support or interpretation of HTML5.
In comparison, such maintenance for flash applications is close to nil even flash was upgraded from version 5 to version 11.
However, I agree that flash beiing proprietary, it is not the way to go now.
Préambule : tout ce qui suit ne peut pas être considéré comme enseignement. Il s'agit simplement de réflexions personelles sur la vie en générale et sur ma compréhension limitée du Dharma. Je suis un simple pratiquant et je m'excuse par avance des erreurs et imprécisions qui pourraient figurer dans ce texte.
It is probable that you can break down your algorithm -(I do not mean code) into a pipeline of elementary processing and find implementations (IP) for each of them.
to give out an estimate:
- subdivise your algorithm into simpler pieces
- find for each simple piece how it can or could be implemented in hardware and the complexity of each piece.
- do the sum.
Indeed an hardware designer or consultant would be of a great help here.
Things are not as simple as they seems at first. - Edward Thorp