Slashdot Mirror
Moonlight 1.0 Brings Silverlight Content To Linux
An anonymous reader writes "Novell has unveiled some of the fruits of its technical collaboration with Microsoft in the form of Moonlight 1.0, a Firefox plug-in which will allow Linux users to access Microsoft Silverlight content. Officially created by the Mono project, it is available for all Linux distributions, including openSUSE, SUSE Linux Enterprise, Fedora, Red Hat and Ubuntu. Also included in Moonlight is the Windows Media pack, with support for Windows Media Video, Windows Media Audio and MP3 files."
'[fake-coughing] Moonlight... so deadly... Choking... [laughs] Kidding! When I said "Firefox plug-in," the deadly was in massive sarcasm quotes. I could take a bath in this stuff, put it on cereal, rub it right into my eyes, honestly, it's not deadly at all. To me. You, on the other hand, are going to find its deadliness a lot less funny.
Moonlight is a neat project and Silverlight looks interesting, Flash works. But why can't an open, rich experience, open standards solution for building web sites emerge? Surely that would be better for web site developers and consumers.
OK I installed this. Now what? Any sites use this?
Something like this perhaps?
SVG + Video > Silverlight
And that's only the tip of the technological iceberg. Behold the power of HTML5. Coming to every web browser except Internet Explorer.
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
Would this work with Netflix?
That seems to be the message Microsoft is sending.
Oh yes, will it run on my ARM processor (where Flash runs just fine)?
If Adobe is finally taking Linux seriously, it's because they are afraid of Microsoft. Best outcome we can have is Adobe and MS each taking a 50% share of this market. We'll reap the benefits, regardless of OS of choice.
The one word I was thinking of was "Meh."
Now to spend the next few minutes trying to work out whether that actually counts as a word...
From TFA:
Also included in Moonlight is the Windows Media pack, with support for Windows Media Video, Windows Media Audio and MP3 files.
Yes, I can just see the lines of linux users just queuing up in anxious trepidation waiting to be able to use Windows Media Video and Audio files on their beloved linux systems...
Moved to http://soylentnews.org/. You are invited to join us too!
XmlHttpRequest, the 'X' in AJAX, started life as a Microsoft only, proprietary ActiveX object back in IE5.
Given that, your post doesn't really make sense.
Maybe not
Which post would that be? The one where Microsoft failed to implement DOM2 events, then implemented HTML5 features based on DOM2 events and therefore incompatible with the standards, therefore not HTML5?
Don't get me started. IE8 is a sore point for me. You WON'T appreciate what you hear. (Or maybe you will. But it won't be the most pleasant conversation.)
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
Don't get me wrong, I think its cool that projects like this exist and I am not going to criticize anyone for spending time working on it.
But Silverlight really seems like a solution in search of a problem. Flash provides nice interactivity at the cost of an annoying plugin, and HTML5 is quickly catching up and should be the long term method of constructing web apps.
The only advantage of Silverlight seems to be the unified language for both backend and content, but that doesn't seem compelling to me. Anyone here using Silverlight for anything interesting that couldn't be done in Flash or HTML?
sheep.horse - does not contain information on sheep or horses.
The WebKit CSS extensions added in Mobile Safari are interesting. I wish for people to agree on a version of this for all browsers, as it would replace Flash in at least some areas.
http://webkit.org/blog/324/css-animation-2/
Clearly, you've never read a W3C standard. No-one likes them.
How we know is more important than what we know.
Well, even with this, I STILL can't watch anything on Netflix's "Watch It Now" section... because THAT requires Moonlight AND ActiveX (and I still had to forge my UA just to get that far).
We're no farther along than we were before.. as always.
short memory you have there. before MS started working on silver light a decent flash player on linux was but a pipe dream. say what you want about them, but anything MS takes an interest in ends up with savage competition that benefits us all.
If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
Sun could have owned this market, but Java was a piece of crap for multimedia and video applications, and so people dropped it. Instead of coming up with nice looking, robust, real-world solutions, Sun was busy building a platform designed by committee and with some of the world's most bloated and least tested APIs on it.
I got a bid in a gig for Silverlight, and, the thing is, Flash is actually a bit better for some of the special effects. I think its fair to say that Flash and Silverlight are designed to do two different things. Flash has more fancy graphics options, but, Silverlight is easier to assemble content dynamically with. You could go one of two routes with Silverlight. One way is to send out the binary blob ala Flash, but you can also just send out xml straight out to it.... that makes it a bit more like working with a normal web server paradigm. In that sense, you can view Silverlight as more of a stopgap to HTML5 than you would Flash.
This is my sig.
As it should (cost you karma). May your next life be spent working at a Windows ME help desk support center. (j/k, I wouldn't wish that on anyone.)
On the media side, check out:
http://www.smoothhd.com/
I encoded the "Big Buck Bunny" clip up there :). It's still in pre-alpha, but you should be able to get the idea
This uses a new API called MediaStreamSource, which enables file parsers and protocols to be built in managed code, and then hand off the video and audio bitstreams to Silverlight's built int decoders.
In the case of Smooth Streaming, every two seconds of the video is a seperate http request, and each of those chunks is available in six different data rates. Managed code heuristics running inside of Silverlight dynamically pick the right bitrate for the next chunk based on available CPU power, network speed, and window size (no reason to download 720p if the brower window is shrunk down in a corner of the stream).
And because this is based around small http requests, chunks get proxy cached, so 100 people watching the same video behind the same firewall would only need to get a single copy, providing much better scalability than traditional unicast streaming.
Anyway, this is something that Flash certainly can't do, and I haven't seen any hint of HTML5 being able to do. Pulling it all together requires some pretty specific characteristics of the video decoder (the ability to switch resolutions with a new sequence header without any pause), an API like MediaStreamSource, and having a performant enough runtime to be able to run all the heuristics and parsing without using much CPU.
I blogged the authoring workflow for this and some other details here:
http://on10.net/blogs/benwagg/Expression-Encoder-2-Service-Pack-1-ndash-Intro-and-Multibitrate-Encoding/
My video compression blog
We all can bash silverlight, but but theres nothing wrong with it. Its a newer, and from what i've seen, more stable alternative to flash.
I don't see anything in that demo that wasn't in Silverlight 1.0 demos a couple of years ago.
My video compression blog
The interesting thing is that Moonlight downloads the codecs for you on demand (no need to add other repos) and they are properly licensed (as opposed to w32/w64codecs). I can see a lot of Linux users doing this, actually.
Since Ubuntu and Suse already ship Mono (or have drunk the MS kool-aid, depending on how you feel), they should include this plug-in by default so that it works out of the box.
Put identity in the browser.
Keeping up with the microsoft tradition novell unleashes a much touted piece of software which really does not work. Typically inept.
Firefox 3.0.6 32 bit Intrepid
Randomly tried some different stuff from the microsoft showcase http://silverlight.net/Showcase/:
Lasercopter: Cannot work with 1.0 compiled for 2.0
autocosmos tv: Does not even detect the plugin
Meshviewer: Does not detect the plugin
Lorenzo Reca: Does not detect the plugin
Manic Miner: Does not detect the plugin
My teeth start gnashing and give up
And I don't see anything in Silverlight that isn't similarly addressed by HTML5. Ergo, HTML5 is superior for its standardization, true cross-platform support, and competing implementations that can meet the needs of many different ideals.
For the record, I don't have anything against people such as yourself who work at Microsoft. Many people who work there are great people. But from the inside looking out, you can't see the forest through the trees. You especially can't see the massive amount of harm and disrespect your company is paying the industry. And that harm is why I can't stand Microsoft anymore. Mr. Wilson can complain about negativity all he wants, but he refuses to recognize the trail of broken promises he and your company have given to the industry.
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
Yes, I can just see the lines of linux users just queuing up in anxious trepidation waiting to be able to use Windows Media Video and Audio files on their beloved linux systems...
The day this article hit slashdot I said that the purpose for this was to insert Microsoft IP into Linux. People called me crazy. Well, we're here! Let's all get comfy in this brave new world, shall we?
Does anybody still trust Novell? Why?
Oh, and Windows Media Player is way cool, because it has the codecs for Plays For Now.
Help stamp out iliturcy.
The HBO example page they use works just fine with gecko-mediaplayer and mplayerplug-in, that Linux users have had for years.
Odd that this is just now breaking on Slashdot. According to the Mono project's Moonlight page, the final version of Moonlight 1.0 was released Jan. 20 -- just in time for Linux users to accept de Icaza's invitation to watch President Obama's inauguration over the Internet via Silverlight.
To answer somebody's earlier question, Moonlight 1.0 is licensed under LGPL.
Prevent Windows piracy. Use Linux instead.
And all you DRM fetish purists
"Ohhh, encrypt me stronger baby. More Secure, more secure! That's it! Ohhhhh..." ?
I'd like to watch movies from netflix
Ok, so you need this for Netflix.
Any other reasons why you'd want Silverlight?
Honestly, not trolling. Netflix is apparently one reason, and a good one. What are the others?
Weaselmancer
rediculous.
The premature ejaculators break it in days.
Dominatrix: "No, It's just a game we're supposed to play! Now gimme 50 bucks."
User: "What? That's it? It didn't even work last time!"
Do what exactly? Linking off to a site that requires Silverlight with no explanation doesn't seem like a very good argument when you're posting to a forum that doesn't want to install your plugin. (Or more to the point, many of them can't install Silverlight 2.0.)
Your second link talks about multi-bitrate encoding. Which strikes me as (like the entire Silverlight platform) a solution looking for a problem. Despite the fact that Microsoft has had the technology deployed for years as part of WiMP, the market hasn't bought into it. It's just as easy (and probably less confusing) to simply provide different sizes. 95%+ of current streaming videos don't even have to worry about that. The closest thing we have to an issue is Youtube using low quality as the default. And even that has more to do with backwards compatibility and paced rollouts than it does a strict technology problem.
Perhaps Silverlight will be better positioned when HD streaming becomes the norm. More likely however, is that HD will be the norm when the majority of hardware on the market is both capable of HD streaming and integrated into the standard home in a way that would make HD streaming a superior enough experience for consumers to want to use it. At which point the advantage of technologies like multi-bitrate streaming simply vaporize. Microsoft would do better to spend those resources on implementing the web standards they've been blatantly ignoring for the past decade.
As an aside, why is it that every Silverlight website stops you cold? There's not even a description of what it is you're missing and/or why you should install the plugin. It's simply "install this or go away". So I go away. No skin off my nose.
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
Don't get me started. IE8 is a sore point for me. You WON'T appreciate what you hear. (Or maybe you will. But it won't be the most pleasant conversation.)
Well, if it's something to the effect that though for years, you've absolutely hated Internet Explorer 6's limitations and the fact that Microsoft all but abandoned its development, and during those years, while you put up with all its idiosyncracies you accumulated a metric ton of contempt for the company whose half-life might -- if all the issues were addressed today -- only have you wishing painful chronic illnesses on the IE product development team in 5 years, and that despite all that, you allowed yourself a glimmer of hope when you heard the Microsoft folks talking about how IE 8 would support web standards, only to discover that they're basically still planning on being 4-5 years behind everybody else while dumping a lot of effort into silverlight, but you weren't really surprised because honestly, if they had either the skill or will to keep up, they could have done it without breaking a sweat back when IE6 was actually briefly in the lead, and so your contempt, rather than diminishing, is actually pretty much cemented on a monotonically increasing curve which will eventually cause the cretins involved in IE's product development team to suffer debilitating effects proportional their proximity to you.... then by all means, do go on.
Tweet, tweet.
Do what exactly? Linking off to a site that requires Silverlight with no explanation doesn't seem like a very good argument when you're posting to a forum that doesn't want to install your plugin. (Or more to the point, many of them can't install Silverlight 2.0.)
The second link is about how the stuff in the first is authored, and doesn't require Silverlight. Sorry if that wasn't clear.
Your second link talks about multi-bitrate encoding. Which strikes me as (like the entire Silverlight platform) a solution looking for a problem. Despite the fact that Microsoft has had the technology deployed for years as part of WiMP, the market hasn't bought into it. It's just as easy (and probably less confusing) to simply provide different sizes. 95%+ of current streaming videos don't even have to worry about that.
The challenge with offering multiple sizes is that in forces the user to know what their system and connection can play, and it really only works with progressive download models, not real instant-on, easy random access long-form "streaming." That's fine for some audiences, but not for the mass market. Multibitrate done right means nearly instant startup and gapless playback, dynamically adjusted to what the user's machine can play back. It's a very different use model than YouTube.
Perhaps Silverlight will be better positioned when HD streaming becomes the norm. More likely however, is that HD will be the norm when the majority of hardware on the market is both capable of HD streaming and integrated into the standard home in a way that would make HD streaming a superior enough experience for consumers to want to use it.
Ah, that's the point! Smooth Streamings gets us out of having to wait for everyoen to be able to do HD to use it for mass audience content. If only the top 40% of users can get full 720p, the top 40 % of users get full 720p. And users who have less get the best experience their hardware and network is capable off. We don't have to sweat the lowest common denominator.
As an aside, why is it that every Silverlight website stops you cold? There's not even a description of what it is you're missing and/or why you should install the plugin. It's simply "install this or go away". So I go away. No skin off my nose.
There's a lot of flexibility in how a site can present the install option. For example, NBCOlympics.com offered a fallback to an IE embedded WMP ActiveX component. I agree that more sites could do a nicer job of it, and we're talking to them about improving that experience.
My video compression blog
I haven't seen any good come out of this junk. Every time I want to watch something with some importance, I have to use Silverlight. I really get the feeling that the reason companies go with this tech is not because of application ubiquity, but because some jackass made a deal with Microsoft. Just give me Netflix and I'll be happy!
And nothing of value was gained.
It's crystal-clear:
XmlHttpRequest is a "de facto" standard, yes. It was introduced by Microsoft, yes (it was not intended for AJAX, though), and IE implements it right by definition.
On the other hand, it's not possible to do AJAX if if the DOM and every thing else in the browser is not standards conformant, and boy, Microsoft has troubles doing that! It's the same old problem with JavaScript, only much worse.
Makes sense now?
Quite simply getting access to some of the finest German shizer films on the web!
What? you'd claiming that the internet is used for more than just fulfilling the fetish desires of lonely men in their basement?! heresy! heresy I say!
Moonlight features codecs that have already been licensed by Microsoft from major media companies. Moonlight users are indemnified against litigation that might arise from their use in Moonlight due to the Novell whole agreement...thing. In other words, everyone's safe from the (possible or otherwise) threat of litigation, honest!
Also, Moonlight 1.0 has been tested with, and passed, all the regression-testing tools Microsoft tested with Silverlight. Meaning a guaranteed high level of compatibility.
Of course the motivation behind this isn't of course Microsoft's "throbbing heart" for the FOSS community; it's purely and simply that it wants to blow Flash out of the water, and is even willing to Open Source, support, and invest heavily in OSS to do it if necessary.
And that's good because it means Adobe will have to raise the bar on flash now someone's invading it's territory...put another way, did you REALLY think you'd get 64-bit flash support on Linux from Adobe if Silverlight hadn't been released?
throw new NoSignatureException();
The only reason Microsoft is allowing Moonlight on Linux is because there is someone to hurt!! (Adobe)
If there was anything else MS wasn't market leader in they would probably hint novell into making a clone of that too.
Cross-platform....... Using a blob of codecs that are almost certainly not going to be updated or even there in a few years' time.
I don't think you understand quite what cross-platform means.
For example, NBCOlympics.com offered a fallback to an IE embedded WMP ActiveX component. I agree that more sites could do a nicer job of it, and we're talking to them about improving that experience.
Oh good, we can fall back to the older, less secure Windows model?
Cross-platform compatibility is the key. And I don't think one can reasonably trust anything based on a Microsoft standard. It doesn't mean I won't install moonlight anywhere, but it does mean I won't ever, ever be using silverlight.
If the system doesn't fall back to something actually standards-compliant without me having to do anything, then it is a gigantic fuckup. I don't want to do it Microsoft's way, I want to do it the right way, the standard way, the correct way.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Just out of curiosity, does it prompt you for permission to download? I'm wondering what sort of protections they have against someone using either their own codec (thus downloading arbitrary executable content - presumably they don't allow this), an obscure codec not typically used (this would greatly increase the attack surface area since it effectively becomes any bug in any codec supported by the platform whether or not you have it installed), and finally against man in the middle attacks that allows someone to deliver you a false codec when you're trying to download a normal one.
Slay a dragon... over lunch!
Any other reasons why you'd want Silverlight?
Say it with me, "Monopolies are bad."
Just because it's Microsoft doesn't make it evil. What's truly evil is being forced to rely on something like Flash to bring you content--no matter what.
Am I the only person dismayed by the fact that flash video is *so* horrible, you can't full screen youtube's HD stuff on a 2.8 GHz Pentium 4 machine?
I mean, FFS, Adobe had Flash ready for the iPhone in months.... But we can't even get a native x64 version of it on ANY OS. If Microsoft can force some swift kicks in Adobe's ass (which they should for forcing me to download a damned plugin to save to PDF in Office 2007 anyway) and vice-versa, I see nothing but good things on the road ahead.
Boot Windows, Linux, and ESX over the network for free.
I keep hearing this but no evidence supports it. The only evidence you can provide is "Microsoft is evil". Despite your quite common belief that Mono is some kind of Microsoft plot, Microsoft has been actively helping Mono. I don't think this is going to change anytime soon and just like any company Microsoft has, and will continue to change. I think when Ballmer leaves you're really going to notice a change. As more and more of Microsoft's developers have experience with Linux and acceptance of Linux the attitudes will change, they already are. Can you imagine if Windows released their proprietary codecs freely to Linux systems 10 years ago, or even 5 years ago? Of course pure software purists would not accept them but a lot of people would have been very happy to have freely licensed codecs to legally watch video on Linux. Now when they do it it's made out to be some kind of plot. It's a little tin-foil hat-ish.
They're still a business and they're still going to try to push their solution over all others but this isn't anything different than any other business out there, including Linux companies like Red Hat but comapanies are not monolithic, never changing entities. Those that don't change with the times die and Microsoft knows that. They can't just depend on being installed on 99% of computers anymore and no amount of lawsuits are going to change that in this global economy.
Time makes more converts than reason
That part was clear. My issue was that the content of the first link was not clear. I assume from the name it's a site that streams HD videos. Which means... well, nothing. Absolutely nothing to me. There's a variety of sites that already do that. Without more information, I can't understand why your site is superior enough to make me install Silverlight.
Complete nonsense. The idea of "SD" vs. "HD" has been so ingrained into our culture at this point, that it's quite easy for users to figure it out. Take this movie website as an example:
http://www.startrekmovie.com/
It streams the trailer in computer resolution by default and gives the options for smaller versions (iPod/iPhone) and larger versions (HD). No one complains that they can't see the trailer. It either just works, or they select a resolution more appropriate to their device. Plus they're made aware that they can watch the super-hires stuff by the "HD" link. Apple's website gives users the option of "Small/Medium/Large/iPod". Again, no one complains that they can't figure out how to get the video to work. They complain far more about having to install Quicktime. (Sort of like I'm complaining about Silverlight.)
You're completely missing the point. Multibitrate does not matter. Consider how many people link off to the Youtube versions of the Star Trek trailers! Those are of terrible quality. Yet the convenience and real-world benefits are more important to them than HD resolutions.
HD will catch on when the hardware gets here. And the reason why it will catch on when the hardware gets here is because that is when the best experience can be offered. It's not about HD vs. non-HD. That's a red herring. It's about providing a better service overall. HD video is a bonus and nothing more.
I understand that you've probably put a lot of heart and soul into making multibitrate work. But what you're working on is the modern equivalent of sending VOC files to the PC Speaker. A nifty technology that never saw wide distribution because it attempted to close a perceived gap that simply wasn't there. In the end, users upgraded to SoundBlaster sound cards rather than supporting the VOC->Speaker technology.
You aren't listening. I don't care about the install option. I don't want to install Silverlight. It's the job of the website to convince me that "Yes you do!" The website does nothing to convince me. It merely gives me an ultimatum: We won't show you what we're about until you install this plugin. So install it or leave.
I leave.
In comparison, Youtube can be navigated without Flash. A user can understand what the site is about, why they might want the service, and ultimately make an informed decision about installing Flash.
Good to know that they made the effort to support my Mac, cell phone, Nintendo Wii, PS3, set-top box, Linux, etc. No, wait...
Indeed. They could use multi-platform H.264 codecs and thus support nearly every web player on the market. From HTML5 video to the widely deployed Flash 10.
Whoops. That wasn't what you mean
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade