Comments on: Native Client: Open ActiveX?

By: RawChocolate

RawChocolate — Thu, 30 Jul 2009 13:38:00 +0000

Oh yes we like this one

By: AndiSkater

AndiSkater — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 19:20:46 +0000

As already postet to the original Google blog post:
x86 native code is a bad idea, because it won’t run on ARM based mobile devices, which become more and more popular (iPhone,…). Adobe ports Flash 10 to ARM!

But, what come to my mind instantly: Webkit as a Google Native code Plugin for IE6,IE7,IE8. (One should be able to create something like this with ActiveX, too, but no one did so far…)

By: DarrenS

DarrenS — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 10:52:30 +0000

So we had the incorrect Gears vs BrowserPlus debate, where essentially it says, 'Gears is built for the back-end' and BP 'has amazing potential for the front-end'. So, as mentioned in the Native Client post, there's talk about an in-browser image editor, which is something that BP does, amongst other FE stuff. So can we now correctly say that NC is a BrowserPlus competitor? And if so, what are the ramifications?

By: Nosredna

Nosredna — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 06:56:19 +0000

I love this.
.
Waiting for MAME in the browser.

By: IvoLimmen

IvoLimmen — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 06:27:35 +0000

I though this sounded familiar so I googled on it. Seems I was right: I once read about a browser plugin that interpreted C++. The website is currently unavailable: http://ivm.sourceforge.net/. But the last release (of 2001) is still downloadable from SourceForge.net (http://sourceforge.net/projects/ivm).