Seriously though. Stuff like this is what made me quit Chrome. Too much non-standard Google nonsense in what is supposed to be a standards-compliant web-browser.
It just feel wrong.
Active X, AFAIR, was portable in true Henry Ford manner - running everywhere as long as it's a Wintel box with Internet Explorer.
I ran all the same Active X controls on my WAMD box you did on your Wintel.
Or am I missing something about the Windows/Intel combination?
Anecdote: I switched to Mac (Mintel? Mactel?) in 2007. Prior to that, my 486DX4 100 (circa 1995) was the last Intel I used.
</offtopic>
Although, indeed, Intel lost the control when AMD introduced AMD64. :) But this is really getting offtopic.
Wintel is a portmanteau of Windows and Intel, referring to personal computers using Intel x86 compatible processors running Microsoft Windows.
http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/news/press/1996/oct96/macpr.a...
Every browser vendor experiments with new ideas, only because of this we're getting nice things as the results.
Seriously, the absence of a published standard from a credible and relevant standards body would be my primary objection to the phrase. Barring that, de facto standardization would be indicated by multiple interoperable implementations from more than one vendor and widespread adoption. LLVM IR and PNaCl are, at best, documented. That's better than undocumented, but it's a long way from standardized.
I never said asm.js is standardized. ECMA/JavaScript is, though, and asm.js is just a well-defined conventional subset of JS. There doesn't need to be a standard.