|There is nothing wrong with ActiveX's.
| Keith Stanier
|
Only M$ fanbois think that.

|I make programs that use ActiveX's
|
Java would be more apt.[1]  Java doesn't have the vulnerabilities
associated with running an ActiveX-enabled browser.
Using a paradigm (like ActiveX)
with more power and access to the OS than is necessary is just stupid.
M$ giving free rein to ActiveX in the first place was incredibly short-sighted.

|they are additional controls and features for an application.
|The applications won't run without them,
|
So, let's see.  Folks who don't run Windoze are screwed.
Folks who don't run Internet Exploder are screwed as well.
You are a self-absorbed idiot.

South Korea is currently going thru growing pains
because of all the legacy ActiveX-only crap still in their infrastructure.
Having chosen these lock-in "solutions" comes from ignorance or hubris.
Tying your future to a single-sourced solution is moronic (as they are seeing).

|so if you need the application you download them.
|
Not even slightly interested.
These could have been done without ActiveX; that would have been smarter. 
cache of http://www.thejemreport.com/mambo/content/view/129/
++ActiveX-can-still-destroy-your-system

|You can virus check them the same as any other file.
|
...or developers could choose a more appropriate paradigm:
only as powerful as it actually needs to be, more inately secure, cross-platform,
not tied to a single vendor,...

"You must be using _____ ..." is sooo 1997.


[1] Java has now been released as open-source.
In the past, if you didn't like the single-vendor thing (Sun, as opposed to M$).
there were Perl, Python, PHP,...and all of those are cross-platform.

• Reply or follow-up to this message

• Search this forum
• Start a new thread on a different subject

• Report abuse of the forum