Topic awaiting preservation: Microsoft preps IE changes in response to patent ruling (Page 1 of 1)

quote:

---

"In the near term, Microsoft has indicated to W3C that they will very soon be making changes to its Internet Explorer browser software in response to this ruling," a statement issued by Steven R Bratt, W3C's chief operating officer, said.

"These changes may affect a large number of existing Web pages," the statement continued. "W3C does not yet have any indication of what action, if any, other vendors of Web tools might take."

---

Fair warning.

Full article here: http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/32561.html

Edit: The W3C press release: http://www.w3.org/2003/08/patent



[This message has been edited by brucew (edited 08-29-2003).]

ok, i apologize in advance if this is a stupid question and i'm just thick...BUT...

in both articles it says that this may affect a large number of existing web pages.... i don't really understand how that's so? i mean, i understand that this would affect web sites that only cater to IE... i don't get why there should be changes in browsers, authoring tools, and web sites simply because microsoft (thievin' bastards) has to scrap bits and pieces of IE?

quote:

---

...which is used by about 96 percent of all Web users..

---

do that many people really use it? shikes!!!

__________________________
Cell 1007::

When I look at my site stats, that's about right...

:::11oh1:::

brucew: Thanks for that.

Its unclear what they are talking about - the patent invovled is US Patent 5,838,906 and the W3C sum it up as:

quote:

---

The patent claims to cover mechanisms for embedding objects within distributed hypermedia documents, where at least some of the object's data is located external to the document, and there is a control path to the object's implementation to support user interaction with the object. The implementation can be local or distributed across a network, and is automatically invoked based upon type information in the document or associated with the object's data.

---

So what are they talking about? ActiveX?
Is this going to impact on some multimedia applications that embed movies in the page with controls and stuff?

Any chance we can get the buggers to improve their browser at the same time?

Ahhhhh I have done some more digging and it becomes clearer:

Links:

Eolas statement: http://www.eolas.com/zmapress.htm

also:

quote:

---

The Web Application Platform
Distributed hypermedia method for automatically invoking external application providing interaction and display of embedded objects within a hypermedia document

U.S. Patent 5,838,906, Filed in October, 1994, Issued November 17, 1998
Inventors: Michael D. Doyle, David C. Martin and Cheong Ang

First demonstrated publicly in 1993, this invention lifted the glass for the first time from the hypermedia browser, enabling Web browsers for the first time to act as platforms for fully-interactive embedded applications. The patent covers Web browsers that support such currently popular technologies as ActiveX components, Java applets, and Navigator plug-ins. Eolas' advanced browser technology makes possible rich interactive online experiences for over 500 million Web users, worldwide.

---

The patent:
Dirty great big URL

Other stuff: http://www.cptech.org/ip/business/webstandards/#eolas
http://www.atnewyork.com/news/article.php/2247661

quote:

---

Eolas' patent (US Patent 5,838,906) was granted on November 17, 1998 and covered technologies for the creation of a browser system that allowed for the embedding of small interactive programs, such as plug-ins, applets, scriptlets or ActiveX Controls, into online documents.

---

-----------
~sigh~ what exactly were they thinking?

Pos. w are massive and can get away with whatever we want?

___________________
Emps

FAQs: Emperor

The patent is "for embedding objects within [web pages]." Like Flash.

It's telling that Macromedia hosted the meeting to "evaluate potential near-term changes that might be implemented in browsers, authoring tools, and Web sites as a result of the court case."

Why would it effect other browsers? In order to get around the patent, Microsoft plans to change the way IE handles plug-ins. They're not saying yet how they intend to implement these changes. Being the 800-pound gorilla, expect there will be more to it than simple patent remediation.

Even if they're nice guys about making changes to IE, site owners may have to make changes to keep using their gratuitous Flash intros or Flash-based advertising. Losing either would be a good thin IMHO, but I don't expect that to happen.

Either way, the changes that have to made to web sites that take advantage of plug-ins may break those same web sites in other browsers.

It affects tools the same way. If object embedding has to change, so do the tools used to embed objects. Expect it to work just fine in VisualStudio and FrontPage. Expect it to break Dreamweaver.

And yes, regular analysis of every one of my clients' site logs support the 96% claim.

Wow. I need to learn to type faster.

Emps: Yes I suppose it covers ActiveX. I always forget about that one. But still, I think the larger issue is Flash, Java, multimedia movies, etc.

brucew: Ahh yes but as far as I'm aware some of the multimedia applications use ActiveX coontrols (the Sydney Opera House tour springs to mind). I'm not an expert so I'm not sure how or why but I think it has become icnreasingly more important in a number of online multimedia areas.

___________________
Emps

FAQs: Emperor

yup, my initial big thought was Flash, while IE has a 96% share depending on who you talk to, the Flash plugin is in 97% of browsers, depending on who you talk to.

If I'm not mistaken I believe that the latest Flash plugin for the latest IE required activeX didn't it?

telling about MM hosting that meeting? Not sure, they've been involved quite a lot with the w3c but yeah =D know exactly what you're saying.

Jason

Follow-up article:

MS to hobble ActiveX and Shockwave Flash in Internet Explorer? InActiveX? Security experts shed crocodile tears.

Earlier in the thread, we forgot about the Adobe PDF plug-in and that the patent may also apply to Mozilla, Opera, and all other browsers. Both subjects discussed in the article.

Edit: UBB code



[This message has been edited by brucew (edited 09-01-2003).]

brucew: Good find - things could certainly get a little sticky but envision this scenario:

"Urm please upgrade to IE 6.5 so that web pages won't work properly"

Can't see that working. How about:

"Buy the new fancy pants version of Windows (in which we sneak the downgraded version of IE)"

Ahhh now I see that working (esp. as the bit in brackets isn't going to be in the ads) and as there is no standalone version that would mean we'd need to upgrade Windows to find out how badly our pages now suck

I suspect some busy little beavers somewhere out there are creating an Open Source alternative but would this put MS in an unfortunate posiiton?

Ahhhhhhhh well - all wild speculation - lets see how it works out.

___________________
Emps

FAQs: Emperor

I believe IE doesn't support the standard "Plug-In" system other browser support, instead they do everything thtough Active-X. That's Flash, Director/Shockwave, PDF, QuickTime etc etc etc....

That's why we use both an <object> tag and an <embed> tag for plugin content, cause IE doesn't know what to do with the embed, but it can use active-X through the <object> tag, which I believe was the prefered W3C method of using content like that (not through active-X, but by using the object tag)... Eh, now I'm even confusing myself...

Anyways, I do know that many big name companies use IE and Active-X for some rather critical web apps -- UBI soft's online multiplayer game lobbies spring to mind, and UBI are one of the top three game developers in the world now aren't they?. I also believe the MSN gaming zone makes a raather heavy use of Active-X.

In any event, things don't look good for the future of plugins. Honestly, in light of todays technological progression and somewhat plug-in depandant web, I think that patent should be burnt on the spot.

[This message has been edited by Dracusis (edited 09-01-2003).]

I haven't read all the posts, but found an interview of Michael DOYLE, EOLAS founder, at eWEEK.com where he says something important:

quote:

---

We have from the beginning had a general policy of providing non-commercial users royalty-free licenses. We expect to be paid for the commercial use of our technologies.

---

If EOLAS sticks to that policy Mozilla have nothing to fear from them which is not the case for Opera since it's not completly free

Microsoft have already made public some "pre-release" of the Internet Explorer update. For the end user, it consist in an annoying prompt asking them to grant the loading of "active embedded content".

Apple, RealNetworks and Macromedia have already published a javascript work around. Like many hacks, it's ugly, unappealling and may even generates some extra requests to the web servers.

Another side effect of the case may be that Microsoft will work even hader to force the users to use their proprietary technologies and file formats.

Mathieu "POÏ" HENRI

[This message has been edited by poi (edited 10-08-2003).]