How to re-enable Java in Chrome 42 +

[GasBandit]

From http://techraptor.net/content/heres-enable-java-chrome-42-newer

Many of you may have noticed that since upgrading to the latest release of Chrome (version 42) certain plugins such as Java, Silverlight and many others have been blocked as Google attempts to phase out NPAPI support. For those interested, Netscape Plugin Application Programming Interface (NPAPI), is an architecture designed so that plugins can be created that will work across multiple browsers without needing to custom tailor your code to either one.

Google is trying to phase out NPAPI at the moment with some good reasons. Most importantly of those is the security flaws that NPAPI could potentially open up. The problem at the moment is that plugins like Java are still extremely crucial to our lives on Chrome so we at TechRaptor are going to show you how to alter a few settings in Chrome so that all of these NPAPI extensions will be enabled once again.

How to enable Java in Chrome​

Before we begin enabling Java, I first want to show you what it will look like if you don’t make these changes and try to use a Java application.

As you can clearly see Java is not supported.

So here is where we begin with the simple steps that will allow you to get back to using Java:

1. In your browser go to your address bar and enter “chrome://flags” and search down the list to where you see the option to enable NPAPI or you can just get to that option directly by entering “chrome://flags/#enable-npapi” in your address bar. You should see something similar to the image below:

Find where it says “Enable NPAPI”

2. From there, click where it says enable and the light blue box around “Enable NPAPI” should now become white.

3. The final step is to simply restart your browser by closing and opening it again.
Once you reopen your browser you should be able to use Java as normal once again.

 

[PatrThom]

This will work..for now. Google has already made it clear that they're going to flat-out deny NPAPI in the future.
Everybody who wants to be part of Chrome will need to hurry up and switch to PPAPI instead.

--Patrick

 

[Eriol]

What's Firefox's equivalent to Chrome's new plugin architecture? IIRC the Firefox people said something similar to "If we tried to implement NaCl, we'd have to implement most of Chrome's back-end too."

Note: NaCl is another name and/or part of PPAPI, as NaCl means "Native Client" and NaCl is also the chemical name for table salt, and the "other side" of the interface is called Pepper, hence "Pepper Plugin Application Programming Interface" or PPAPI. Yes Google named its new plugin interface "Salt and Pepper". You're welcome.

Since implementing most of Chrome is pretty much not-an-option, what do they have planned, as they have the same problem with NPAPI being really insecure.

 

[Covar]

If Google was being honest with themselves they would be calling it ActiveY.

 

[PatrThom]

Since implementing most of Chrome is pretty much not-an-option, what do they have planned, as they have the same problem with NPAPI being really insecure.

Google is just using Chrome's market share to get NPAPI de-facto de-precated, and finally bury Flash/Silverlight/Quicktime/etc. For many people, it will just be another in a long series of Google-isms (like the discontinuation of Google Reader) that turns them away from Google products. Google is ok with this, they're willing to sacrifice those battles in order to win the war. FWIW it really is a good thing for this to be happening, NPAPI does need to die, I just feel like the reason Google is choosing to do this right now is because the developers who are being forced to flee NPAPI will see NaCl as the best alternative to anything else out there right now, and this is a thing Google wants.

--Patrick

 

[Covar]

Google is just using Chrome's market share to get NPAPI de-facto de-precated, and finally bury Flash/Silverlight/Quicktime/etc. For many people, it will just be another in a long series of Google-isms (like the discontinuation of Google Reader) that turns them away from Google products. Google is ok with this, they're willing to sacrifice those battles in order to win the war. FWIW it really is a good thing for this to be happening, NPAPI does need to die, I just feel like the reason Google is choosing to do this right now is because the developers who are being forced to flee NPAPI will see NaCl as the best alternative to anything else out there right now, and this is a thing Google wants.

--Patrick

It would be one thing if they were being more collaborative in regards to a replacement. Instead it's them yet again pushing their own "standard" or closed solution.

 

[PatrThom]

It would be one thing if they were being more collaborative in regards to a replacement. Instead it's them yet again pushing their own "standard" or closed solution.

Which is why they're doing it NOW NOW NOW when there's no other alternative. Everyone who is jumping off that sinking ship will see Google's island as the best chance for survival, and they will head for it, but what end users don't seem to understand is that Google sank the ship helped it sink.

--Patrick

 

[Eriol]

Which is why they're doing it NOW NOW NOW when there's no other alternative. Everyone who is jumping off that sinking ship will see Google's island as the best chance for survival, and they will head for it, but what end users don't seem to understand is that Google sank the ship.

I was with you until your last 4 words. They stopped bailing water with the rest of everybody else. They didn't sink it. The holes existed LITERALLY before Google as a company did (that API is older than Google). So they decided to do their own thing, and nobody else did.

Did they punch an extra hole or two in it via removing support from Chrome? Maybe, but that ship had drowned many already.

Edit: and this is all from somebody who is moving AWAY from Google stuff (Firefox everywhere), but I stay aware of what's happening, and use Google stuff too.

 

[PatrThom]

I was with you until your last 4 words. They stopped bailing water with the rest of everybody else.

That's true. They didn't torpedo the ship themselves (the insecurities, etc already did that), they just decided to withhold their aid and allow it to sink, and decided that maybe it would be a good idea if it did sink. I've adjusted my statement accordingly.

--Patrick