This question is unlikely to help any future visitors; it is only relevant to a small geographic area, a specific moment in time, or an extraordinarily narrow situation that is not generally applicable to the worldwide audience of the internet. For help making this question more broadly applicable, visit the help center.
Closed 10 years ago.
Will IE9 support WebGL and/or WebSockets?
Most answers to the question "When will browser X support HTML5 feature Y?" are answered by When Can I Use. In addition to list past, current and future support each item also generally has links to relevant news.
WebSockets
WebGL
Update:
Microsoft has been actively participating in the IETF HyBi working group (WebSockets protocol) and also participating in W3C work on the WebSockets API. The IE 10 preview release has WebSocket support built-in so it looks very likely that we will soon see a official release version of IE with WebSockets.
WebGL in IE still looks pretty uncertain. Microsoft claims fundamental security issues with the design of WebGL, but I suspect it has more to do with the fact that Microsoft has a vested interest in promoting their own DirectX framework rather than OpenGL (which is what WebGL is based on).
As of a few months ago, the IE9 team hadn't made a decision about supporting WebSockets, and they didn't seem to see the point to WebGL.
WebGL seems not to be include in IE's strategy because of DirectX.
Anyway google already worked on that with the ANGLE project.
http://code.google.com/p/angleproject/
The IE team added a WebSocket implementation at HTML5 Labs which is their testing ground for new implementations. Chances are high that WebSockets will make it in IE9
You can look at the current release notes for the platform demo - there is no mention of either WebSockets or WebGL.
There are many discussions of the security issues of WebGL. I first heard of it on one of Steve Gibson's podcasts. Since it gives much lower level access to both the operating system and the hardware any flaw can be exploited much more severely. A quick Google search found this article with descriptions and video of some of the flaws: http://www.contextis.com/research/blog/webgl2/
Microsoft seems quite reluctant to implement WebGL in IE, since OpenGL is a competitor to DirectX. So I think it's unlikely we'll see WebGL in IE in the near future.
I’ve started an Open Source project called JebGL that can serve as a fallback for IE users. It’s a Java applet that when finished will serve as a plugin replacement for a WebGL canvas. It’s still in the early stages of development, but you can check out the demos at http://jebgl.googlecode.com
Right now, the Microsoft IE team is struggling to get HTML 5 and SVG (2D graphics) into Internet Explorer 9. Other web browser makers have been shipping with those standards built in for years.
Apple Safari, Google Chrome, and Mozilla Firefox all run fine on Windows. Takes one mouse click to launch a different browser. Takes a year or two to see what Microsoft might do.
IE progress has consistently been glacially slow this whole decade.
No, IE does not have WebGL support now and betas from other browser makers already run it. IE9 will not catch up with contemporary web standards like WebGL, just ones that have been out for several years or more.
IE9 is not a cross platform web browser either. It will only run on certain specific versions of Microsoft Windows. Just run one of the standard web browsers and you can see what WebGL can do. Their current betas are running some impressive WebGL demos now.
As a fallback until Microsoft adds WebGL support, the Google Chrome Frame beta currently supports WebGL.
RE: WebSockets: No. The target was websocket support in IE10. Tests show that it only has partial support.
Related
Most people say webGl is not slow, but it is really slow in my browsers IE 11, and Google Chrome 37.
I have also suddenly that almost all WebGL applications on the Internet does not work in google chrome anymore. I didn't change anything on my computer. I think it's an update or something.
Each time when I visit a webGl application, the site says that webGl is not supported. But when i create a little simple webGl app by myself and visit it with Google Chrome, it starts correctly.
But I've always had that WebGL so slow is that there's nothing you have.
What can I do to fix my Chrome problem? And are there any solutions to increate speed?
It's possible.
it is necessary that WebGL supported sites also support browsers. as you said some sites are not working properly in google chrome and IE it is only because sites doesn't have support for that browser any more, vice versa is also true.
it is undergoing development when they don't support each other, this type of problem arise.
I have a question about ActiveX. From what I've read and found on the internet, ActiveX is diminishing today and is seen less and less use. My question is, why is that? And what technology is taking over ActiveX?
Thanks
ActiveX only runs in Internet Explorer thus it is not a good platform for applications that want to reach a wide variety of browsers. It is definately on the decline for public facing websites. I'd say it is still somewhat common for Corporate internal apps that need access to API's that normal web technologies simply can not reach.
Now a days, you can acheive much of the same behavior with Html, CSS and Javascript. Especially HTML5.
Also: There are So many browsers out there now. Firefox, Chrome, Safari, Opera, SkyFire, and all the various slimmed-down browsers that are now on mobile devices. You don't stand a chance if your users are using ANY of these browsers if you have an ActiveX Application
Much of what one could do with ActiveX can be done using some AJAX techniques, and what is commonly called HTML5 (you youngsters and your acronyms) where HTML5 = HTML, CSS, Javascript. Search for AJAX and HTML5 and you will come across millions of entries.
As Chris Kooken indicated, ActiveX is limited to IE and Windows platforms, and one has no hope of getting ActiveX to run on any of the current mobile platforms.
Even Microsoft has given up on ActiveX, they came up with Silverlight to replace it. And there are indications that Silverlight is being phased out too, in favor of HTML5.
Here's just one recent article demonstrating Microsoft's leanings: http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2010/11/silverlight-html5-and-microsofts-opaque-development-strategy.ars
Regarding to the immature situation and the somewhat bright feature of WebGL, I decide to use it to build an online application. For those users who have Firefox 4 or Chrome, there is no problem. But what should I do for the users of Firefox 3.* or even IE 6, 7, etc.?
So I'd like to ask that if there is any possible to write a plugin/addon. And when my codes detect the incompatibility, it can alert the user to download/install this extra component to enable them using the WebGL contents.
I noticed that nearly all instructions of WebGL only ask you to install the new, modern browsers to access WebGL contents, but none of them tell you how to handle the old browsers. Will there be a way for the survival of old school browsers?
Thanks very much.
As far as IE goes you should be able to use google chrome frame when webgl hits chrome(you can already hack it to get it working). And since you don't need admin rights to install it anymore it shouldn't be that much of a hurdle. As far as FF3 goes, I don't think that's much
of a long term issue, FF users are sensible and upgrade ;-)
To the best of my knowledge there is no easy answer to this.
If you want to write WebGL code that - without change - will also run on old browsers, then I can only think of Google's O3D project. Here you won't be directly writing WebGL code though. O3D is being implemented on top of WebGL, but its previous implementation was plugin based. So you can write your game or 3D app in O3D and prompt your users with old browser to install the plugin.
A much harder solution that I implement in my project 3DTin, is when WebGL is not available I do some 3D math in software and render it on Canvas 2D. It works if your 3D app is not very complicated. My app runs on all major browsers, including IE 7,8 with the help of excanvas. However this approach is not an option if your 3D scenes are complicated. You may want to look at following 3D javascript libraries that render on top of Canvas 2D:
pre3d
three.js
I want to develop Safari plugin using xCode, What API should I use? Someone can give me some documents or sample codes ,Thanks very much!
The answer is rather complicated i'm afraid.
Unfortunately, Safari the web browser does not have a plugin API. That means you technically cannot extend Safari's user interface or features using plugins.
However, WebKit the web rendering engine (which powers Safari and many other browsers/apps) does have a plugin API (actually it has 2) which allows you to create plugins for rendering web content inside webkit webviews.
You can find documentation on developing WebKit plugins in Apple's docs here. (PDF Link!)
Also note: Safari's lack of a true plugin API has not stopped lots of developers from developing various pieces of software which they call "Safari plugins" even tho they are technically not Safari plugins. They are usually something called an "Input Manager" which are widely viewed as rather questionable pieces of software. Input Managers always seem to be on the cusp of becoming unsupported or broken by Apple. It's not really clear whether Input Managers are kosher with Apple or not.
Then again, several "Safari plugin" Input Managers are quite popular, so....
Input Managers are a whole other topic. I'm sure if you google it you can find a lot of information on them. However, personally I would advise against developing an Input Manager due to their questionable status in the Mac software world and their constant danger of becoming unsupported or badly broken.
Update: A few years after I originally answered this question, Apple did provide a sort of plug-in API for the Safari browser itself. However, they are called "Extensions", not plug-ins.
See the Apple Safari Extension Programming Guide for details.
Check out Rentzsch's ClickToFlash, it's a plug-in that is fairly well documented, along with neat source code.
As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 10 years ago.
Ajax, Flex and Silverlight are a few ways to make more interactive web applications. What kinds of factors would you consider when deciding which to use for a new web application?
Does any one of them offer better cross-platform compatibility, performance, developer tools or community support?
Here's a quick rundown of each area (with lots of helpful links):
Cross-platform compatibility
Ajax works in any modern browser that can run JavaScript. Flex requires Flash or anything else that can handle SWFs but, once that's installed, it's a total freeride as far as compatibility. Silverlight is tricky and misunderstood so carefully consider your userbase before going with this MS foray into the rich web applications arms race. Also keep in mind that Silverlight is still in Beta, so it may become more widely used and installed in the future as it is developed.
Performance
I'm fearful of making too many statements about performance because it really depends on how much you are willing to optimize and the exact nature of your application. Also, some technology stacks are just never going to be very fast. Some people out there have been making comparisons, but again, it depends on a great many factors (even the version of the browser from which you are testing!). It's probably best to choose based on other factors and optimize once you've started to develop.
Developer tools
There are the "golden standard" dev tools for each of the three:
Ajax has basically unlimited options, depending on the rest of your technology and architecture choices. The big questions you're actually faced with are which libraries to rely upon, and Google has voiced a pretty well adopted answer with things like Web Toolkit. When you get right down to it, it's just XML and JavaScript, right?
Flex is from Adobe and, just like with Flash development, you'd better stick with their homegrown tools because--well--they're making the standards as they go along.
Microsoft has positioned Microsoft Expression Blend versions 2.0 and 2.5 for designing the UI of Silverlight 1.0 and 2 applications respectively. Visual Studio 2008 can be used to develop and debug Silverlight applications (from Wikipedia).
Community support
There is both official and unofficial community, corporate, and open-source support for all three options. Whichever you are already integrated with and which makes you feel most at home are very individual things, but I'll offer this advice: stick with what you know. If you are a MS developer and have MSDN as your homepage, you are probably going to think the Silverlight documentation and forums are really helpful. Flex has a very similar story; the forums are pretty good and if you're a Flash person already, you're going to be right at home with their documentation and user community.
On the other hand, Ajax is basically all over the place because you can implement so many different ways and use so many widely-varied libraries. Each library can have it's own forums to visit and mailing lists to lurk within for answers.
Once again, all three have corporate giants trying to foster their communities and to get the best support possible to the developers that will give them greater market share in the future.
The choice should in my opinion be mostly based on the nature of the application you'll be building (for example, if you need to manipulate vector graphics, Ajax is pretty much out), but here are some general guidelines:
Ubiquity
Ajax -- Supported by all modern browsers across platforms
Flex -- Runtime (Flash Player) has very wide installed base for Windows, Mac OS, Linux. Linux version was a bit buggy the last time I checked, though
Silverlight -- Runtime has quite low installed base (and no Linux support) at the moment
Choice of programming language
(Unordeded because of subjectivity, but note that Silverlight offers the most choice. Also note that the existing language experience of developers in your team should be taken into account.)
Silverlight: Any .NET language (C#, Visual Basic, IronPython(?), IronRuby(?)) (and XAML for UI definition)
Ajax: JavaScript (and XHTML for UI definition)
Flex: ActionScript 3 (and MXML for UI definition)
API Stability and compatibility
Flex -- Runtime is the same across platforms and browsers, more mature and stable at the moment than Silverlight
Silverlight -- Runtime is the same across platforms and browsers, less mature than Flex/Flash, v2.0 is still in beta
Ajax -- Compatibility problems across browsers (may be mitigated via Ajax libraries, though)
Web/Browser Integration
Ajax -- Content is native inside browser, based on standards: searchable by browser and search engine crawlers, subject to any standard UI practices the browser and operating system have established
Flex and Silverlight -- Content not native to browser (i.e. runs in its own little "sandbox/rectangle"): not necessarily subject to established UI practices for the given platform
Developer Tools
Ajax -- Your favorite code editor, browser and debugging toolkit for the browser
Flex -- Flex SDK is available for Windows, Mac OS and Linux for free and can be used with your favorite code editor. A Command-line debugger is included, but the Adobe-provided profiler is only available in the commercial Flex Builder IDE
Silverlight -- AFAIK, The SDK is available for Windows for free and can be used with your favorite .NET development tools
The web runtimes like Flex and Silverlight all offer enticing things, but come with two big costs:
They run only within a rectangle on the page, and don't interact with normal web widgets
They are only available to people who have that plug-in installed
Even the nearly-ubiquitous Flash isn't installed on every web browser, so by choosing to use a plug-in runtime you're excluding part of your audience.
In contrast, JavaScript (or Ajax) is available on pretty much every browser, and interacts better with normal web pages, but is a more primitive and restricting language. Using it for complex animations can be tricky, and you'll need to test your applications in more versions on more platforms to make sure it works.
Cross-platform compatibility isn't the issue it used to be, so the issue is this: Will you gain more in the features of a plug-in library than you'll lose in the audience you exclude?
My own answer has so far always been JavaScript/Ajax, but I'd re-evaluate that in any new project.
What is your audience: public web site or an intranet business app? Adoption rates are not relevant if you have a controlled audience who will install what is needed to run your app. However, if you need the largest possible audience to make your web startup a success then it may be critical.
What is your goal? Building something for the lowest cost? Learning new technology?
Can you leverage your existing skills? If you already know .NET then Silverlight gets a boost. Learning Flex may be interesting and useful, but is it more useful to you than more experience with .NET technologies? Remember to consider the opportunity cost of learning something totally new.
I don't see a clear technology winner at this point, and likely there won't be one for a long time, so the choice will come down to fairly subjective factors.
Other than what's already been mentioned here, another huge thing to consider is what your UI is going to be.
If you're going to be using a lot of advanced UI controls like trees, lists, tab controls, etc then consider the following:
JavaScript/HTML - No native support for anything beyond things basic drop down boxes, buttons, and text fields. If you want something like a tree control or tab control then you'll have to roll your own or find a third party library.
Adobe ActionScript - Native support for a wide array of advanced UI controls
Silverlight - 1.0 had very limited UI controls, but 2.0 will be adding many more and I'm sure we'll continue to see controls added in future releases.