Native Client vs ActiveX

Developers should learn Native Client for building high-performance web applications that require intensive computation, such as games, multimedia processing, or scientific simulations, where JavaScript performance is insufficient meets developers should learn activex primarily for maintaining or migrating legacy systems, such as old enterprise applications or intranet sites that still rely on it for specific functionalities like document viewing or custom controls. Here's our take.

Native Client

Nice Pick

Developers should learn Native Client for building high-performance web applications that require intensive computation, such as games, multimedia processing, or scientific simulations, where JavaScript performance is insufficient

Pros

• It is particularly useful when porting existing C/C++ codebases to the web without rewriting them in JavaScript, offering a bridge between native desktop applications and web platforms
• Related to: webassembly, c

Cons

• Specific tradeoffs depend on your use case

ActiveX

Developers should learn ActiveX primarily for maintaining or migrating legacy systems, such as old enterprise applications or intranet sites that still rely on it for specific functionalities like document viewing or custom controls

Pros

• It is also relevant for understanding historical web development practices and COM-based architectures, but modern alternatives are strongly recommended for new projects due to better security and cross-platform support
• Related to: component-object-model, internet-explorer

Cons

• Specific tradeoffs depend on your use case

The Verdict

These tools serve different purposes. Native Client is a platform while ActiveX is a technology. We picked Native Client based on overall popularity, but your choice depends on what you're building.

The Bottom Line

Native Client wins

Based on overall popularity. Native Client is more widely used, but ActiveX excels in its own space.