[UnoriginalGuy]

ActiveX isn't a major concern, in current IE if you look in the security tab in the Internet context, it is pretty locked down and damn near depreciated.

Intranet is more liberal. But a lot of enterprises add their internal portals to the trusted list if they still depend on ActiveX (as a depressingly large number do).

Chrome and Firefox's extensions are better. Although Firefox's extension model is a little clunky due to how old it is (or at least it was last time I used it).

[Animats]

Chrome and Firefox's extensions are better. Although Firefox's extension model is a little clunky due to how old it is.

New-style "Jetpack" add-ons in Firefox and add-ons in Chrome are very similar. I have the same add-on for both platforms, and there's about 80% code commonality. If Microsoft does something reasonably similar, that would be convenient for add-on developers.

[wideroots]

If Microsoft kills ActiveX in the new browser, it will force everyone to stop depending on ActiveX. You would be very surprised how many websites outside of the U.S. still depend on ActiveX, and these are critical websites like banking and government. Hence, killing ActiveX support is important to me.

[contextfree]

"Metro" and Windows Phone IE already dumped ActiveX and extension support.

[Silhouette]

Given how unpopular both of those platforms are, I'm not sure you're making a very compelling argument there...

[parag_c_mehta]

Yes but a good browser with Chrome's features will be a great alternative. Right now Chrome has become a big memory hog and is slowly going to competition with old IE.

[benaiah]

If you're having memory problems with Chrome, check to see if you have AdBlock Pro installed - it often results in vast amounts of additional memory required for Chrome[0]. I recommend µBlock[1] if you're using Chrome - it works quite well in my experience.

[0]: http://www.extremetech.com/computing/182428-ironic-iframes-a... [1]: https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/%C2%B5block/cjpalh...