ActiveX or client installer
From: Benjamin van den Broek (allstar_ben_at_hotmail.com)
Date: 03/30/05
- Next message: N. Miller: "Re: about the XP copies In China."
- Previous message: Rebecca Chen [MSFT]: "RE: forbidden a programme under WinXP2"
- Next in thread: Michael Pelletier: "Re: ActiveX or client installer"
- Reply: Michael Pelletier: "Re: ActiveX or client installer"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 08:29:43 +0200
Hi all,
The company I work for has build a completely browser based application. As
a sales argument we say that you don't need to install a (fat) client on
your user machines. However, our application only runs in the browser if you
allow a browser plug-in (ActiveX) component to be installed. Some people say
that allowing an ActiveX component is in principal the same as providing a
client installer.
The following questions:
1) Do companies differentiate between client installers and allowing ActiveX
components, or are the two the same to them?
2) Does a Browser plug-in require more setup (deployment) and maintenance
cost than a client installer?
3) Is it possible (from a client viewpoint) to limit the ActiveX component
(f.e. allow everything, except file-system access)
Thanx in advance!
Regards,
Ben
- Next message: N. Miller: "Re: about the XP copies In China."
- Previous message: Rebecca Chen [MSFT]: "RE: forbidden a programme under WinXP2"
- Next in thread: Michael Pelletier: "Re: ActiveX or client installer"
- Reply: Michael Pelletier: "Re: ActiveX or client installer"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|