Yes, that would be perfect. Actually what I want to use is a java applet for part of the interface and webassembly for part. I think that all browsers stopped supporting java applets before they added webassembly. So you'll have to install both an ancient browser from around 2015 and a modern browser in the last year to fully use the interface.
In relation to the more serious question about Edge, yep, as of version 16 (released in October of last year)... On Fri, Mar 16, 2018 at 3:27 AM, Steve Jones <[email protected]> wrote: > We have to maintain so many versions of web browsers ro access all the > gear we touch, i dont think its a big deal. Edge has turned out to be a > good browser so far. Is this included? > > Know what you should do is make it require a new browser but toss in some > really old java stuff. Everybody loves dicking with java security. > > On Mar 14, 2018 6:49 PM, "Forrest Christian (List Account)" < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> A bit of a survey here.... >> >> A couple of features I'm looking at for current/future products would be >> much easier to implement using a certain feature found only in relatively >> new web browsers, aka, Chrome/Firefox/Edge updated within the last year. >> >> One specific browser feature I'm looking at is webassembly. Various >> tools out there indicate that around 87% of the installed/active browsers >> on the internet are recent enough for native support. Most of the >> browsers gained support for this feature early to mid last year. With >> autoupdates being the rule instead of the exception, anyone on a recent >> auto-updating web browser should support this. I'm mostly concerned about >> 'the rest'. >> >> Support for the older browsers is possible, but it adds a level of >> complexity (specifically a level of testing) which I would prefer not to do >> if I could get away without it. >> >> To be clear: Almost all of the functionality of the upcoming products >> won't require these functions. A specific example of something that might >> require this is setting up the scripting functionality as I'm looking at >> various technologies which would work best if I could run a chunk of >> webassembly code in the browser as part of the code editor. However, other >> than editing a script, the rest of the functionality would work fine. >> >> Thoughts? >> >> -- >> *Forrest Christian* *CEO**, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc.* >> Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602 >> <https://maps.google.com/?q=3577+Countryside+Road,+Helena,+MT+59602&entry=gmail&source=g> >> [email protected] | http://www.packetflux.com >> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/fwchristian> >> <http://facebook.com/packetflux> <http://twitter.com/@packetflux> >> >> -- *Forrest Christian* *CEO**, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc.* Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602 [email protected] | http://www.packetflux.com <http://www.linkedin.com/in/fwchristian> <http://facebook.com/packetflux> <http://twitter.com/@packetflux>
