Comments on: Browser Extensions Considered Harmful http://itredux.com/2006/01/20/browser-extensions-considered-harmful/ New Rules for a New IT World Tue, 14 Oct 2008 11:59:19 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5 By: gbwcpfqs http://itredux.com/2006/01/20/browser-extensions-considered-harmful/#comment-46675 gbwcpfqs Wed, 14 Feb 2007 19:32:06 +0000 http://itredux.com/blog/2006/01/20/browser-extensions-considered-harmful/#comment-46675 <strong>gbwcpfqs...</strong> gbwcpfqs... gbwcpfqs…

gbwcpfqs…

]]> By: Paul Topping http://itredux.com/2006/01/20/browser-extensions-considered-harmful/#comment-14183 Paul Topping Sun, 01 Oct 2006 20:29:51 +0000 http://itredux.com/blog/2006/01/20/browser-extensions-considered-harmful/#comment-14183 I totally agree that plugin mechanisms have technical problems. As they represent executable code, security is a big issue. Also, many extension mechanisms are proprietary and cause undue product or platform lock-in. I do believe that these problems are surmountable, however. The root of the problem is that most extension mechanism have been implemented in a kind of back-door, application-specific way. If an extension mechanism is based on robust, public standards, these problems can be solved. -Paul I totally agree that plugin mechanisms have technical problems. As they represent executable code, security is a big issue. Also, many extension mechanisms are proprietary and cause undue product or platform lock-in. I do believe that these problems are surmountable, however. The root of the problem is that most extension mechanism have been implemented in a kind of back-door, application-specific way. If an extension mechanism is based on robust, public standards, these problems can be solved.

-Paul

]]> By: Ismael Ghalimi http://itredux.com/2006/01/20/browser-extensions-considered-harmful/#comment-14177 Ismael Ghalimi Sun, 01 Oct 2006 20:00:19 +0000 http://itredux.com/blog/2006/01/20/browser-extensions-considered-harmful/#comment-14177 Paul, I agree with the business benefits offered by plugins, but I do not like their technical implementation, for they prevent mobility. Now, this is very much a matter of personal preference. Plugins are needed in many instances, and I am not saying that they should not be used in such instances. Instead, I am just recommending that application developers do not use them when alternative approaches are available. In your particular example, I cannot think of any working alternative, hence plugins are the only option available, and should be used as such. Paul,

I agree with the business benefits offered by plugins, but I do not like their technical implementation, for they prevent mobility. Now, this is very much a matter of personal preference. Plugins are needed in many instances, and I am not saying that they should not be used in such instances. Instead, I am just recommending that application developers do not use them when alternative approaches are available. In your particular example, I cannot think of any working alternative, hence plugins are the only option available, and should be used as such.

]]> By: Paul Topping http://itredux.com/2006/01/20/browser-extensions-considered-harmful/#comment-14174 Paul Topping Sun, 01 Oct 2006 17:57:37 +0000 http://itredux.com/blog/2006/01/20/browser-extensions-considered-harmful/#comment-14174 Hi, I can't disagree more strenuously. While plugins and extensions have gotten a bad name for security reasons, to blame the concept is wrong. Extensions to applications often are what moves functionality forward. What would the web be today without Flash? My own company's situation and product, <a href="http://www.dessci.com/mathplayer" title="MathPlayer" rel="nofollow">MathPlayer</a>, is an excellent example here. It is a plugin that provides MathML support within Microsoft's Internet Explorer. Mozilla/Firefox, on the other hand, has MathML built in. All other things being equal, one might easily conclude that Firefox's built-in MathML support is better than IE's add-on support via MathPlayer. However, MathPlayer's support of MathML is superior as it supports more of MathML, and it interfaces with screen reader software used by the blind to have web pages read to them using a synthesized voice. MathPlayer has a number of other features that Mozilla's MathML lacks. I mention this not to toot my company's own horn, but to indicate how important and beneficial the marketing dynamics gained from a plugin architecture are. On one hand, Mozilla's MathML support was added mostly by the herculean efforts of one person who gave up their own time, unpaid as far as I know. On the other hand, my company builds products that are based on MathML technology. While MathML is an open standard, my company profits from it. It allows us to invest in providing the free MathPlayer plugin that would be hard to duplicate otherwise. In conclusion, plugins and extensions are a very good thing. They allow new functionality to be explored in an efficient way, and exploit market dynamics to supply solutions that would otherwise not occur. Paul Topping Hi,

I can’t disagree more strenuously. While plugins and extensions have gotten a bad name for security reasons, to blame the concept is wrong. Extensions to applications often are what moves functionality forward. What would the web be today without Flash?

My own company’s situation and product, MathPlayer, is an excellent example here. It is a plugin that provides MathML support within Microsoft’s Internet Explorer. Mozilla/Firefox, on the other hand, has MathML built in.

All other things being equal, one might easily conclude that Firefox’s built-in MathML support is better than IE’s add-on support via MathPlayer. However, MathPlayer’s support of MathML is superior as it supports more of MathML, and it interfaces with screen reader software used by the blind to have web pages read to them using a synthesized voice. MathPlayer has a number of other features that Mozilla’s MathML lacks.

I mention this not to toot my company’s own horn, but to indicate how important and beneficial the marketing dynamics gained from a plugin architecture are. On one hand, Mozilla’s MathML support was added mostly by the herculean efforts of one person who gave up their own time, unpaid as far as I know. On the other hand, my company builds products that are based on MathML technology. While MathML is an open standard, my company profits from it. It allows us to invest in providing the free MathPlayer plugin that would be hard to duplicate otherwise.

In conclusion, plugins and extensions are a very good thing. They allow new functionality to be explored in an efficient way, and exploit market dynamics to supply solutions that would otherwise not occur.

Paul Topping

]]> By: Ismael Ghalimi http://itredux.com/2006/01/20/browser-extensions-considered-harmful/#comment-10861 Ismael Ghalimi Sun, 10 Sep 2006 14:04:23 +0000 http://itredux.com/blog/2006/01/20/browser-extensions-considered-harmful/#comment-10861 Chris, Very good question. I view them as ubiquitous, yet I tend to prefer solutions that do not rely on them. AJAX is not yet as powerful as Java or Flash, but it's a lot more Web-friendly. Chris,

Very good question. I view them as ubiquitous, yet I tend to prefer solutions that do not rely on them. AJAX is not yet as powerful as Java or Flash, but it’s a lot more Web-friendly.

]]> By: Chris Kerns http://itredux.com/2006/01/20/browser-extensions-considered-harmful/#comment-10846 Chris Kerns Sun, 10 Sep 2006 11:57:40 +0000 http://itredux.com/blog/2006/01/20/browser-extensions-considered-harmful/#comment-10846 You say "Browser extensions such as plugins and toolbars..." but you don't really talk about plugins such as Java and Flash. Office 2.0 sites as <a href="http://www.thinkfree.com" rel="nofollow">ThinkFree</a> and <a href="http:/www.gliffy.com" rel="nofollow">Gliffy</a> make heavy use of these plugins. Do you consider Java and Flash so ubiquitous that a dependency on them is not an issue? Or do you lump them into the browser extension category and avoid them? -Chris You say “Browser extensions such as plugins and toolbars…” but you don’t really talk about plugins such as Java and Flash. Office 2.0 sites as ThinkFree and Gliffy make heavy use of these plugins. Do you consider Java and Flash so ubiquitous that a dependency on them is not an issue? Or do you lump them into the browser extension category and avoid them?

-Chris

]]> By: IT|Redux » Rules for Office 2.0 http://itredux.com/2006/01/20/browser-extensions-considered-harmful/#comment-179 IT|Redux » Rules for Office 2.0 Wed, 25 Jan 2006 20:09:28 +0000 http://itredux.com/blog/2006/01/20/browser-extensions-considered-harmful/#comment-179 [...] No browser extension or pluginFor reasons explained in a previous article, browser extensions and other plugins should be avoided at all cost. If two services offer the same functionality, but one requires an extension and the other does not, I will always go for the later one, even if that means that I have to lose a couple of features along the way. [...] […] No browser extension or pluginFor reasons explained in a previous article, browser extensions and other plugins should be avoided at all cost. If two services offer the same functionality, but one requires an extension and the other does not, I will always go for the later one, even if that means that I have to lose a couple of features along the way. […]

]]> By: IT|Redux » Upgraded to Simpy http://itredux.com/2006/01/20/browser-extensions-considered-harmful/#comment-163 IT|Redux » Upgraded to Simpy Mon, 23 Jan 2006 05:45:02 +0000 http://itredux.com/blog/2006/01/20/browser-extensions-considered-harmful/#comment-163 [...] I liked del.icio.us a lot, but two features convinced me to upgrade to Simpy: first, Simpy allows you to create private bookmarks; second, it provides a REST API that I intend to use to synchronize my bookmarks with the various links I store into Salesforce.com. Obviously, I must not be the first one to upgrade from del.ico.us, and the Simpy team developed a del.icio.us import tool that made the upgrade a snap: just enter your user name and password, wait for an hour or two, and you’re ready to uninstall the del.icio.us plugin and install the Simpy one, keeping in mind that browser extensions should be used with care. Much like with del.icio.us, I am sharing my bookmarks, and among them my office 2.0 setup, the candidate services that might eventually make their way into the later, and the technologies that I am currently investigating in order to connect all these pieces together. Among them, I have just discovered Feed Digest and must say that I am quite impressed. More on this later. [...] […] I liked del.icio.us a lot, but two features convinced me to upgrade to Simpy: first, Simpy allows you to create private bookmarks; second, it provides a REST API that I intend to use to synchronize my bookmarks with the various links I store into Salesforce.com. Obviously, I must not be the first one to upgrade from del.ico.us, and the Simpy team developed a del.icio.us import tool that made the upgrade a snap: just enter your user name and password, wait for an hour or two, and you’re ready to uninstall the del.icio.us plugin and install the Simpy one, keeping in mind that browser extensions should be used with care. Much like with del.icio.us, I am sharing my bookmarks, and among them my office 2.0 setup, the candidate services that might eventually make their way into the later, and the technologies that I am currently investigating in order to connect all these pieces together. Among them, I have just discovered Feed Digest and must say that I am quite impressed. More on this later. […]

]]>