Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Prefers Flash To Silverlight
An anonymous reader writes "Microsoft still has not adopted Silverlight, and uses Flash all over its websites. 'Despite all the controversy over Microsoft using Silverlight to take over the rich internet market from Adobe Flash, the software giant seems to be not even trying. In fact, even most Microsoft web sites are using Flash instead of Silverlight.'"
uhhh.... news flash, there is an OS X and Linux runtime.
Because Silverlight-based applications are cross-platform, they run in most modern Web browsers, including the following:
Microsoft Internet Explorer versions 6.0, 7.0, and 8.0 Beta
Mozilla Firefox versions 1.5 and 2.0
Apple Safari version 2.0 and 3.0 Beta.
Currently it runs on Windows and Mac, with the Mono team apparently having a Silverlight port already up and running. Its not 100% cross platform, but its a hell of alot better then most previous Microsoft technologies. You have to keep in mind the technology is pretty young.
That applies to the origonal post, which frankly seems pretty trollish to start with. Silverlight is new and frankly 1.0 seemed more a proof of concept then an actual technology. All told, its been with us for less then a year. It is going to take MS time to get all their various pages ported over to silverlight... *IF* it even makes sense to do it at all. Just because something new and improved comes along, doesnt mean all that you already have needs to be re-written, something a great many programmers never seem to learn. That said, I already encounter alot of sites ( like Download Center ) that if you have Silverlight installed ask if you want to take part in the new version.
Not trying to fanboying or anything, but I remember installing Silverlight on someones computer (Mac) and it was working flawlessly for videos, the equivalent of a real video player. I can't say the same for the Flash video players, for wich I have very bad experiences: unusable seeking and even unplayabe videos. My two cents.
JavaFX.com uses JavaScript and QuickTime to promote the benefits of JavaFX. No JVM needed.
(Of course, you still have to visit the Wikipedia article for an introduction in context.)
org.slashdot.post.SignatureNotFoundException: ewg
Newsflash: getting silverlight (moonlight) to actually install on Linux takes a team of experts, and even if you manage that it'll fail on most pages. It's no more accurate to say that there's a silverlight for linux than it is to say that all windows programs run in linux thanks to wine.
This space intentionally left blank
The Linux runtime is being supplied by Moonlight, from the Mono team - its opensource and is available from here http://www.mono-project.com/Moonlight - vet away.
I'm sure silverlight is quite a good technology.
.net and how much takeup they have there from the Office, Windows and now the Visual Studio teams. But you, as a MS consumer, still get the marketing message pushed down your throat like it or not.
but who cares, they turned me off it when I kept getting popups asking if I wanted to install it, am I sure I don't, no really we think you should. oh ok, I'll ask again next time you visit any page in case you've changed your mind.
I installed it in the end just to shut the damn thing up, and even then it refused to install. I almost cried with the frustration! The CIA could use this technique to get their terrorist suspects to talk.
MS doesn't often plan their takeover of markets, someone someehere in the depths of MS's vast ranks of development makes something cool, others within MS get to hear of it, its attracts some takeup,, and then everone in MS thinks that becuase they like it, you will too. And if you don't like it - tough, as they want you to have it so it becomes ubiqutous enough that they can use it everywhere without worrying about it. Hence the push to have silverlight installed everywhere.
Of course, that's the old way of MS planning. Now, someone at MS decides they can make money from it/increase market share/dominate a market, and so they tell everyone at MS to push it everywhere. It often doesn't work - look at
BTW, they cannot 'flip the switch' and have you have it, they'd get sued. Again. That's why you have to opt-in to silverlight. Whether you want it or not.
Unless by "No JVM needed," you mean "No JVM needed apart from an already installed JVM."
Yes, you're wrong.
It's a shame you spent so much effort writing all that and none on Googling, because there is plenty of information out there.
Adobe's own application platform for Flash is Flex. OpenLaszlo is an open-source XML based programming language for developing apps in SWF. Flash itself also has a substantial component collection for app development, and finally, there are dozens of third-party ActionScript IDEs and compliers available.
That's why Microsoft is introducing Silverlight. Flash is threatening to become an OS-independent application platform which could make Windows irrelevant.
"I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
And as wikipedia says: "but as a lot of work still needs to be done[7], no firm date has yet been given on the Moonlight website."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moonlight_(runtime)#cite_note-status-6
Basically though, I think Flash has just gone too far down the wrong route, as application development in it seems like a hack. Perhaps someone can illustrate to me why I'm wrong and it really is good for application development and I'm just missing something every time I come to look it it (perhaps because the books and documentation are almost all aimed at animators+designers, not developers?).
You're indeed missing something, because you're looking at the wrong product. Adobe's product for developing web applications for the flash player is called flex. Go take a look at some flex books (for flex 2 or 3), and be enlightened.
In my opinion flex can go toe-to-toe with any client-side web dev platform, be it silverlight, java client, java/gwt, extjs, or whatever.
Actionscript 3 is modern language that encourages good development practices. The flex framework is complete, fast, light, easy to extend, and easy to work with. And mxml, flex's xaml-equivalent, well, just check it out, it's really nice.
I see it as quite opposite. Silverlight doesn't offer a compelling featureset to lure people away from flash/flex. It doesn't do anything development-wise that might tempt flex developers, and it cannot integrate animators and designers as good as the flash / flex combination can.
I am a contractor working on a high profile Microsoft web application at the moment and we are using Flash in it.
The decision is nothing against Silverlight, we have discussed using Silverlight.
The issue is with the skills that the designers who are contracting have.
Microsoft do use a lot a Silverlight across their web applications, try the downloads beta for example.
You will see a lot more of it being used once there are more designers with experience using it.
Flash has got over ten years of being in the marketplace and finding designers with Flash skills is a lot easier than finding designers with Sliverlight experience.
I don't think this says anything against Microsoft's commitment to Silverlight.
It took many years for websites to dump Windows media streaming, Real media streaming and Apple Quicktime streaming media in favor of Flash. It seems Youtube was the tipping point to switch to Flash. Once Youtube took off, many sites dumped WM, Real and Quicktime for Flash.
.NET finally took off. It seems that M$ doesn't get it right until the third release of their product is launched. Silverlight 1.0 will bumble, stumble, and crawl along. Silverlight 1.1 will probably be reasonably okay for some early adopters. Silverlight 2.0 will be a good product. Silverlight 3.0 will be a very good product. Silverlight 3.5 will probably be as good if not better than Flash 9.0.
.Net, and Visual Studio to see that M$ almost always borks the early versions.
Microsoft is a slow learner. It took many years until
I am not a fan of M$. All one has to do is look at the history of Windoze, M$ Office, SQL Server,
It IS open.
On May 1, 2008, as part of its Open Screen Project, Adobe dropped all restrictions on the SWF and FLV formats.
"I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
The reason that x64 CS3 will be Windows-only is that Apple promised, and then later rescinded, a 64-bit Carbon. It's really more a case of Apple shooting itself in the foot than any fault on Adobe's part.
I agree with you regarding getting CS on Linux, though. I also think that Adobe's recent move to lift the restrictions on the use of the Flash format documentation is a step in the right direction -- it says to me that Adobe would rather open up Flash entirely than see it lose to Silverlight, and in the long run that will be great for Gnash and other open source Flash players.
http://blog.dennyboynton.com/post/Why-is-Microsoft-So-Slow-to-Adopt-Silverlight.aspx
My video compression blog
> odd that did not really start some sort of significant promotion for their technology (unless I missed it)
:-)
They certainly are promoting it. Even using Firefox 2.0 (on Win XP), http://www.microsoft.com/en/us/default.aspx opens with a box "layered" on top of the main page:
Enhance your experience on Microsoft.com with Microsoft Silverlight
Microsoft Silverlight delivers a new generation of high-quality audio and video, engaging media experiences, and interactive applications for the Web.
Approximately a 1MB download and a 20-second install.
[Click to install]
By clicking "Click to install" you accept the Silverlight License Agreement.
And there is even a tiny [No Thanks] button.
Of course that was what I picked
I liked my next sig a lot better
I'm actually surprised you're haing troubles with Flash and IE7 - I had the same issues, but with Firefox. It eventually got so bad I just stopped going to certain sites at all using Firefox, and since the IE8 beta came out I've been testing it heavily - while I won't claim it's un-crashable (though remarkably stable for an early beta) I've had no issues with Flash.
Silverlight seems to work fine on both, though I've only run across a few sites that use it.
As for Acrobat, are you talking the PDF creation tool or the reader? If it's the reader, try Foxit Reader from http://foxitsoftware.com/ . It loads much faster and doesn't require rebooting or anything ludicrous like that. Foxit also has PDF creation tools, but they aren't free downloads (they have trials available, however). I won't claim that Foxit and Adobe have perfect feature parity, but they're damn good and Foxit actually has a few nice features Adobe could stand to add.
There's no place I could be, since I've found Serenity...
Microsoft contracts out a lot of it's web page development to http://www.ascentium.com/ and possibly other companies. It is no surprise that their developers choose to use Flash.
Then there was Real,
and we were an[BUFFERING]noyed.
Then there was Flash... At first it was wasted on useless intro animations, and was despised. But then it found its niche, and made one good thing easy: Embedding video in a web page, and giving that an interface.
And we were pleased.
And since it was good, it became very profitable. And Microsoft saw that profit, and said "I want it for me!", and they made silverlight, and tried to force us to use it by signing deals with media conglomerates so that they would remake websites that were perfectly functional (in flash) so that the users couldn't see the content with flash anymore, they would have to download this new thing called dsilverlight, which did not say what it was, to use the site that USED to work.
And we were annoyed.
You can't take the sky from me...
http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,143232-page,1/article.html
I am sure the olympics is a big website in terms of content and viewers. This will be enough to showcase its worth if done well.
Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.
Airplane Photos, Airline News, Planespotting Guides