There's a giant difference between "only work well on their platform" and "purposefully designed to only work on their platform."

There is NO EXCUSE for a TOGGLE to not work, cross-browser, in the year 2014.

http://try.buildwinjs.com/default.aspx#toggle

The github issue for that is listed right under it. It looks like they may be pulling them in automatically via tags on the issues. If so, that's one of the best documentation -> issue systems I've seen.

Does NOT work in Internet Explorer on Windows Phone 8 (Lumia 1020).

Doesn't work in Chrome on Ubuntu 14. Doesn't work in Firefox on Ubuntu 14.

Works for me on Android Chrome. What browsers don't display this correctly?

Doesn't in android stock browser on ICS. If I had a more powerful phone, I'd use chrome, but on my G2, it's kinda slow...

Doesn't work on Chrome 33 on Win 7.

Does work on BlackBerry Z10 - no tap to toggle, but press and drag to toggle.

I'm on Chrome 33 (latest stable) @ Windows 8.1 and it doesn't work.

You're right, it doesn't work on my Desktop either. It's very weird that it works fine on Chrome for Android.

It works for me if I enable touch emulation (Google Chrome on Linux). I don't see the styling that you apparently get in IE though.

Safari 7.0.2 Firefox 28 Chrome 33.0.1750.152

all on os x 10.9.2

Doesn't work in FF 28.0 on x64 linux.

THIS.

I think Scott Hanselman put it best with his recent 'Microsoft killed my Pappy' post...

http://www.hanselman.com/blog/MicrosoftKilledMyPappy.aspx

Really? Since when is mentioning hardware specs considered "open sourcing"?

Quote: We've open sourced Azure hardware specs, opening SDKs, and we're making systems more pluggable than ever.

Datacenter hardware designs are valuable. They solve physical limitations of heat dissipation, airflow, as well as compute power density problems and electrical stuff.

Companies building their own DCs spend a lot of money on doing this, so companies like Microsoft (I think Facebook do it too) showing off their designs is really useful.

Just IMO, but perhaps it doesn't "stick" because none of the other folks spent years trying to use their effective OS monopoly to extinguish everything that wasn't their proprietary browser.

Also, ActiveX. ;)

If you substitute "ActiveX" for "Native Client", this almost describes one of the new kids

Maybe I'm misunderstanding, but isn't NaCl meant to be cross-platform? ActiveX was basically "hook directly into Windows (and only Windows) from the browser." It gave many free-license to create "Windows-only" webpages, in addition to producing many security holes during its run. This is where much of the resentment comes from.

How many security bugs does NaCl have compared to ActiveX? How do Microsoft's attempts to sandbox ActiveX compare to the efforts made to sandbox NaCl? IIRC, you could format the C: drive in ActiveX with a couple of lines of code (by design). NaCl (so far as I know) isn't supposed to allow that.

As far as I'm concerned, NaCl and ActiveX aren't even in the same ballpark.

For example the new Google Maps runs horribly slow in Firefox, I have to open Chrome sometimes just to get a map to render.