On 2/2/2011 5:43 PM, Darren New wrote:
> stbenge wrote:
>> On 2/2/2011 1:10 PM, Darren New wrote:
>>> stbenge wrote:
>>>> (assuming that signing my applets is the cure).
>>>
>>> Heh heh heh. Remember all the crap that Microsoft got for ActiveX
>>> security? :-)
>>
>> I missed that... But I imagine if a company is faced with a potential
>> lawsuit, they'd rather make things more difficult for developers
>> rather than suffer the pain inflicted by hurled legal documents :/
>
> Back when Java applets first came out, and ActiveX, everyone mocked
> ActiveX because it allowed unsafe code to run as long as the developer
> had signed the ActiveX package so you could track it back to him.

Ah, so /that's/ the point. I *knew* there had to be some reason behind 
it. But... aren't there file-hosting servers a person can use in 
conjunction with free website companies that would make anonymously 
distributing applets possible? I guess it can all be tracked down 
eventually, but it's not stopping some people, evidently.

> Now, 15 years later, Java gives in and does the same thing, because
> people really do want to run unsafe code sometimes. (Altho what's unsafe
> about OpenGL I can't guess. :-)

I don't know either. I'm sure there's a weakness somewhere (there always 
is [this is somehow more true for Microsoft apps]), or they wouldn't 
have made it an issue. Right? :(

Sam

Post a reply to this message