Google Puts Chrome NPAPI Support On Final Countdown

[phoronix]

Phoronix: Google Puts Chrome NPAPI Support On Final Countdown

Google is moving towards the final steps in eliminating Netscape Plugin Application Programming Interface (NPAPI) plug-in support from the Chrome/Chromium web browser...

http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTg0Njc

[rikkinho]

long time out for linux users

since version 35 i think, if we want use java web plugin we need firefox or other no news for linux users here

[Naib]

Exactly, d-day on Netscape interface was ages ago for Linux.

Java is still needed and hence why I boot ff.
Then there is the media plugins..

I wonder if Java will convert over and whether there is any drive...

Sure javascript and html5 would be great but sites are taking their time

[Scimmia]

Yep, version 35 released last May was it for Linux.

[schmidtbag]

I had no idea NPAPI was still used. Seeing as how I don't use any NPAPI plugins and haven't for probably 10 years, I personally won't miss it.

[jntesteves]

Finally NPAPI is coming to an end and may all the damned browser plugins die with it!

I wonder what are Mozilla's plans now that their h264 implementation uses NPAPI! Is this going to delay their plan on also eliminating NPAPI?

[Daktyl198]

Finally NPAPI is coming to an end and may all the damned browser plugins die with it!

I wonder what are Mozilla's plans now that their h264 implementation uses NPAPI! Is this going to delay their plan on also eliminating NPAPI?

1. you realize the only reason Chrome is disabling it is because they want to push their proprietary PPAPI architecture, right? Browser plugins aren't going to die, they're going to become even worse.
2. Mozilla currently has no plans of killing off NPAPI, since PPAPI really isn't a viable option for any non-chromium-based browser (for various reasons).

[mark45]

1. you realize the only reason Chrome is disabling it is because they want to push their proprietary PPAPI architecture, right?

1) Google did a smarter, trickier thing. PPAPI is designed to be such a product that it's perceived as "open" but in reality you can't create an open (cross-browser) plugin because PPAPI has too many poorly documented or undocumented features or which are tailored to Chrome's needs which is a no-go for non-blink, non-webkit browsers. In this sense it's not Mozilla the asshole, it's Google.

2) Despite the fact that non-blink browsers can't realistically adopt PPAPI, it doesn't change the fact that (in Firefox) we still need a more modern plugin stack than the old NPAPI.

[DeepDayze]

1) Google did a smarter, trickier thing. PPAPI is designed to be such a product that it's perceived as "open" but in reality you can't create an open (cross-browser) plugin because PPAPI has too many poorly documented or undocumented features or which are tailored to Chrome's needs which is a no-go for non-blink, non-webkit browsers. In this sense it's not Mozilla the asshole, it's Google.

2) Despite the fact that non-blink browsers can't realistically adopt PPAPI, it doesn't change the fact that (in Firefox) we still need a more modern plugin stack than the old NPAPI.

Mozilla should reach out for suggestions for a new plugin implementation that's open yet more secure than the old NPAPI structure.

[GreatEmerald]

1) Google did a smarter, trickier thing. PPAPI is designed to be such a product that it's perceived as "open" but in reality you can't create an open (cross-browser) plugin because PPAPI has too many poorly documented or undocumented features or which are tailored to Chrome's needs which is a no-go for non-blink, non-webkit browsers. In this sense it's not Mozilla the asshole, it's Google.

That sounds just like Office Open XML.