Yes, Microsoft's answer to Flash is going to fix the problems we've been talking about IRT cross-compatibility - if there's anything we know about Microsoft, it's that they share equally.
Maybe the answer shouldn't involve a browser extension, but something inherent to the net, and open. As mentioned earlier, a better result would be HTML5, something that doesn't restrict the interactivity to a small closed-off proprietary window within the larger website.
But honestly, the concept that Microsoft has the solution to any of modern computing's problem is a gag in and of itself.
Yes, Microsoft's answer to Flash is going to fix the problems we've been talking about IRT cross-compatibility - if there's anything we know about Microsoft, it's that they share equally.
Maybe the answer shouldn't involve a browser extension, but something inherent to the net, and open. As mentioned earlier, a better result would be HTML5, something that doesn't restrict the interactivity to a small closed-off proprietary window within the larger website.
But honestly, the concept that Microsoft has the solution to any of modern computing's problem is a gag in and of itself.
I can say with absolute certainty that Silverlight and Moonlight will not be allowed on any of my computers ;-)
Barrakketh on
Rollers are red, chargers are blue....omae wa mou shindeiru
Yes, Microsoft's answer to Flash is going to fix the problems we've been talking about IRT cross-compatibility - if there's anything we know about Microsoft, it's that they share equally.
Maybe the answer shouldn't involve a browser extension, but something inherent to the net, and open. As mentioned earlier, a better result would be HTML5, something that doesn't restrict the interactivity to a small closed-off proprietary window within the larger website.
But honestly, the concept that Microsoft has the solution to any of modern computing's problem is a gag in and of itself.
I can say with absolute certainty that Silverlight and Moonlight will not be allowed on any of my computers ;-)
Are you serious? I've always though Silverlight was pretty cool. You can write a simple little UI in XAML and play with it in Javascript, or you can write a full fledged C# component to deal with heavy processing. A media player in Silverlight can be basically just a media element stuffed off in an odd external file or out in a custom script element somewhere. A little (lot) like Flash, but without the expensive developer overhead. You can write Silverlight at home for free, and do 3D rotations or video/audio/canvas effects, all with freely available tools. Maybe its similar to FLEX or something, but I've never really played with them. The more I've looked at it though, it seems like a really nice platform. Not the open source heaven that HTML+Javascript is, but nice nonetheless.
Yeah except that it's pointless to code in something that's only going to be compatible with like 40% of the browsers out there (considering IE's market share and the proportion of users with fully updated browsers, etc).
So it's going to flop.
Pheezer on
IT'S GOT ME REACHING IN MY POCKET IT'S GOT ME FORKING OVER CASH
CUZ THERE'S SOMETHING IN THE MIDDLE AND IT'S GIVING ME A RASH
Yeah except that it's pointless to code in something that's only going to be compatible with like 40% of the browsers out there (considering IE's market share and the proportion of users with fully updated browsers, etc).
So it's going to flop.
That's like saying flash would flop 2 years after its first release because it wasn't already on a billion computers.
Yeah except that it's pointless to code in something that's only going to be compatible with like 40% of the browsers out there (considering IE's market share and the proportion of users with fully updated browsers, etc).
So it's going to flop.
That's like saying flash would flop 2 years after its first release because it wasn't already on a billion computers.
A few years ago when flash became popular you couldn't really do much webpage interactivity wise, so when it came out there was a need for it. Now however it has established itself as the de-facto standard if you want that kind of thing.
Now however with HTML5 etc there really isn't a need for a flash replacement/competitor, the web is moving on from annoyingly little browser plugins. Five more years and flash/silverlight will only be around for compatibilities sake with old sites that still use them. Don't be surprised for example if Google switches streetview from flash to a pure HTML5/JS/Canvas version in the near future.
GrimReaper on
PSN | Steam
---
I've got a spare copy of Portal, if anyone wants it message me.
Doesn't Silverlight work on other browsers? I've had it on Firefox, and on Mac OS X.
Yeah, it works on all major platforms, and has an open source (somewhat) equivalent on Linux.
The nice thing about it is that its description language is much more open than Flash. Thanks to that, and the fact that your program in it using CLR stuff, it is much easier to write a Silverlight implementation (for creating or decoding) than it is to try to reverse engineer Flash.
Yes, Micorsoft spearheaded it, just the same as they funded C#. That doesn't make the technology evil or bad, it just makes it "By Microsoft". People should take software on its own merits.
jonxp on
Every time you write parallel fifths, Bach kills a kitten.
3DS Friend Code: 2707-1614-5576 PAX Prime 2014 Buttoneering!
Doesn't Silverlight work on other browsers? I've had it on Firefox, and on Mac OS X.
Yeah, it works on all major platforms, and has an open source (somewhat) equivalent on Linux.
The nice thing about it is that its description language is much more open than Flash. Thanks to that, and the fact that your program in it using CLR stuff, it is much easier to write a Silverlight implementation (for creating or decoding) than it is to try to reverse engineer Flash.
Yes, Micorsoft spearheaded it, just the same as they funded C#. That doesn't make the technology evil or bad, it just makes it "By Microsoft". People should take software on its own merits.
C# is a mess and it's more or less a .NET technology only. Don't bring up Mono, it's pretty much irrelevant.
I would place for faith in the likelihood for Adobe to continue to improve cross-platform and cross-browser support for Flash than I would in MS regarding Silverlight. That they threw a bone at the very outset to get people to pay attention doesn't convince me that this is a serious or likely to be longstanding commitment to keep that level of cross-functional support up to date.
Pheezer on
IT'S GOT ME REACHING IN MY POCKET IT'S GOT ME FORKING OVER CASH
CUZ THERE'S SOMETHING IN THE MIDDLE AND IT'S GIVING ME A RASH
Until Microsoft goes more than 5 years without appearing to invoke their "Embrace, extend, extinguish" directive, people are going to have a rough time trusting them.
That they threw a bone at the very outset to get people to pay attention doesn't convince me that this is a serious or likely to be longstanding commitment to keep that level of cross-functional support up to date.
The fact that their agreement with Novell places restrictions on the licenses that the Linux runtime (Moonlight) can be placed under, states that "Microsoft reserves the right to update (including discontinue) the foregoing covenant" which allows them to eventually change the terms of or prevent future development of the runtime (the new versions would leave you open to be sued for patent infridgement), and only covers you if you receive the runtime from Novell leaves me feeling less than excited about Silverlight. Mono also lags behind .NET, which is part of Silverlight from 2.0 on.
Flash is still proprietary, but the Adobe Flex SDK is available under the MPL (one of the licenses that Firefox is licensed under).
Barrakketh on
Rollers are red, chargers are blue....omae wa mou shindeiru
Silverlight is required to watch streaming videos on Bungie.net. So needless to say, they have at least 8 million Halo players that will be downloading it (not like it even takes that long)
Protip: without Silverlight, Adobe has every reason to sit on their asses and take their fucking time with improving flash.
With their new HD improvements in Silverlight giving amazing performance and quality, with minimal CPU usage, and with graphics hardware acceleration, Adobe is going to have to step up their game soon.
There is no reason to bash on C# or Silverlight. They may be made by Microsoft, they may not be suitable for every task (which applies to any language or platform), but they are good products that a lot of people use (okay maybe not a lot are using Silverlight yet).
I hope Google's programmers will do some neat crap that can be used by the Linux community regardless of the outcome of their own OS.
It's my understanding that Google contributes heavily upstream, so Linux and open source in general has been getting a lot of new/improved toys already.
I hope Google's programmers will do some neat crap that can be used by the Linux community regardless of the outcome of their own OS.
It's my understanding that Google contributes heavily upstream, so Linux and open source in general has been getting a lot of new/improved toys already.
Google does release a lot of items as open source and contribute code to carious projects. If memory serves correctly it was Google programmers that worked on Firefox and really got them off the ground. It all depends on the license though. For instance Chrome's V8 engine has a BSD license. So it can be used in commercial apps.
There is no reason to bash on C# or Silverlight. They may be made by Microsoft, they may not be suitable for every task (which applies to any language or platform), but they are good products that a lot of people use (okay maybe not a lot are using Silverlight yet).
No, Silverlight is terrible. I've used it. Unwillingly, and it is astoundingly bad. And it's not C# or the .NET framework that is hurting it. OK, maybe it's a little bit of .NET's fault but C# is fine and dandy.
Silverlight suffers from the fact that the production tool itself and everything surrounding it with the exception of Visual Studio is absolutely inexplicably terrible. No code hinting for XAML, very little real documentation, an ass-backwords video publishing software design that nearly prevents remote embedding are just SOME of the huge problems facing Silverlight.
Also, you *need* Visual Studio to do serious Silverlight development and VS is not cheap. The only people using Silverlight for commercial work are people being subsidized by Microsoft to use it, either directly via commission or indirectly by their business partner program which gives small businesses incentive for utilizing the technology.
The biggest problem however is that they are just way slow off the line. I would argue that the primary purpose of Silverlight was three fold.
1) Simplify data interfacing using .NET's provider/SQL manager shit.
2) Implement HD video is a somewhat more open way.
3) Carve out a place in the interactive desktop app market.
The problem is that Adobe has pretty much already done 1 and 3. Adobe Air is about as powerful as you can make a secure web distributed application framework, and there are a dozen good solutions to the data problem up to and including entire libraries for direct connection to SQL databases.
#2 is turning out to be a non-issue due to HTML5, and Adobe is probably not even going to seriously pursue it.
I think people here in general make the mistake of assuming that Adobe's livelihood is somehow based on video, it really isn't. These sites like Youtube and Dailymotion are not licensing out hundreds or thousands of Flash Media Server licenses, they write their own custom streaming servers, their own custom players, and so on. The only thing they sell to that industry is Flash CS4 licenses, maybe. If Youtube died today, Adobe would be fine. Flash thrives because Flash developers are making triple digits per hour writing incredible interactive applications for wealthy clients who can afford fancy marketing.
As a "flash guy" I am struck when people meet the concept of Adobe with hostility for somehow cornering the market. They are no more guilty of anti-trust or "controlling teh interwebz" than Google is. Flash earned itself a terrible stigma in the early century, but if anything it has been making a resurgence, and it will *never* go away within the relevant future, because no matter how good you are at Javascript, there are some things you simply cannot do with it.
Adobe will get there with video, but they've had a lot of loose ends to tie up in the last 5 years. They only just last year got all their damn programs under a uniform interface, and they have already started hardware accelerating some of their studio apps. If CS5/Flash Player 11 does not include hardware accelerated video, I would be shocked.
Also, you *need* Visual Studio to do serious Silverlight development and VS is not cheap. The only people using Silverlight for commercial work are people being subsidized by Microsoft to use it, either directly via commission or indirectly by their business partner program which gives small businesses incentive for utilizing the technology.
Ever heard of VS 2008 Express? Granted, I don't know if it works with Silverlight, but I see no reason why it wouldn't. Microsoft is pretty hardcore about getting .Net out there for everyone.
Not having any real experience (yet) with Silverlight, I won't comment on the rest of your post.
Visual Studio is also given away to students for free. I haven't had the time to learn .net and I intend to learn it and work with Silverlight and Live Mesh. I like what MS is doing with these plateforms.
I'm not entirely sure that VS Express works with Silverlight. There are certain required extensions and project types involved. I could be wrong, I haven't opened Silverlight up in at least 4 months.
I'd be surprised if it worked with Express, if it does, then what the hell is their business model? Because they are practically giving away Expressions Suite these days.
I'm not entirely sure that VS Express works with Silverlight. There are certain required extensions and project types involved. I could be wrong, I haven't opened Silverlight up in at least 4 months.
I'd be surprised if it worked with Express, if it does, then what the hell is their business model? Because they are practically giving away Expressions Suite these days.
This information is harder to come buy than it should be. Any way with VS Express it doesn't appear to come with the templates and SDK for Silverlight. It appears that you can install them into VS Express using Silverlight tools from MS that appear to be free. Also MS Expression Blend allow you to create UI's very easily for Silverlight apps. Silverlight 3 was just released as well.
And I would also like to note, I just installed Chrome to check out the latest stable. It actually ran Silverlight this time instead of crapping it's self like it did in the past.
I hope Google's programmers will do some neat crap that can be used by the Linux community regardless of the outcome of their own OS.
It's my understanding that Google contributes heavily upstream, so Linux and open source in general has been getting a lot of new/improved toys already.
Also, they said in their blog post that they're open-sourcing it later this year. But, as Dark Shroud said, it depends on the license. Correct me if I'm wrong, but even if they use the BSD license, the code can be used in GPL'd software.
I hope Google's programmers will do some neat crap that can be used by the Linux community regardless of the outcome of their own OS.
It's my understanding that Google contributes heavily upstream, so Linux and open source in general has been getting a lot of new/improved toys already.
Also, they said in their blog post that they're open-sourcing it later this year. But, as Dark Shroud said, it depends on the license. Correct me if I'm wrong, but even if they use the BSD license, the code can be used in GPL'd software.
Considering Apple took a BSD derivative and based a (mostly) closed-source OS on it, I would say its relicenseing restrictions are few or non-existent. :P
Visual Studio is also given away to students for free. I haven't had the time to learn .net and I intend to learn it and work with Silverlight and Live Mesh. I like what MS is doing with these plateforms.
Oh right. Do they give the only operating system Visual Studio works on out for free too?
Actually, they do. It's a shame that its the only operating system that Visual Studio works on, though, because I like to use another certain operating system. But I guess people who've never used anything but Windows never think about that sort of thing.
Visual Studio is also given away to students for free. I haven't had the time to learn .net and I intend to learn it and work with Silverlight and Live Mesh. I like what MS is doing with these plateforms.
Oh right. Do they give the only operating system Visual Studio works on out for free too?
Actually, they do.
They do? So there's a form for me to request a free copy of Windows that's licensed for use in a virtual machine, or have I been missing out on something? :P
Barrakketh on
Rollers are red, chargers are blue....omae wa mou shindeiru
Visual Studio is also given away to students for free. I haven't had the time to learn .net and I intend to learn it and work with Silverlight and Live Mesh. I like what MS is doing with these plateforms.
Oh right. Do they give the only operating system Visual Studio works on out for free too?
Actually, they do.
They do? So there's a form for me to request a free copy of Windows that's licensed for use in a virtual machine, or have I been missing out on something? :P
Students can get the Professional/Business versions of Windows for free at some educational institutions. But yeah, not to the general public. :P
Visual Studio is also given away to students for free. I haven't had the time to learn .net and I intend to learn it and work with Silverlight and Live Mesh. I like what MS is doing with these plateforms.
Oh right. Do they give the only operating system Visual Studio works on out for free too?
Actually, they do.
They do? So there's a form for me to request a free copy of Windows that's licensed for use in a virtual machine, or have I been missing out on something? :P
You can get a copy of Windows Server 2008 through their Dreamspark program if you're a student.
Visual Studio is also given away to students for free. I haven't had the time to learn .net and I intend to learn it and work with Silverlight and Live Mesh. I like what MS is doing with these plateforms.
Oh right. Do they give the only operating system Visual Studio works on out for free too?
Actually, they do. It's a shame that its the only operating system that Visual Studio works on, though, because I like to use another certain operating system. But I guess people who've never used anything but Windows never think about that sort of thing.
At this point I have no doubt that porting VS to other platforms would most likely just result in a mess. You can use Eclipse or something if you're dead set on using a different OS for development (if you're doing web development and don't have a Windows machine around to test with you're crazy anyway). It looks like there's tools out there for Silverlight development in Eclipse, although I have no idea how well they work. Or the old, load it in a virtual machine adage.
I don't do much (anything) in Silverlight though. I just think it looks like nice, interesting tech. And you don't even need a compiler to start to use it. Although, as was said, if you want to do anything really serious you'd probably be up shit creek without one. If you just want to embed a little video player in your site with Play/Pause/Stop/Seek/Volume though, I don't see why you'd ever need to touch C#.
Posts
I hope to God that's a joke.
?
Yes, Microsoft's answer to Flash is going to fix the problems we've been talking about IRT cross-compatibility - if there's anything we know about Microsoft, it's that they share equally.
Maybe the answer shouldn't involve a browser extension, but something inherent to the net, and open. As mentioned earlier, a better result would be HTML5, something that doesn't restrict the interactivity to a small closed-off proprietary window within the larger website.
But honestly, the concept that Microsoft has the solution to any of modern computing's problem is a gag in and of itself.
I can say with absolute certainty that Silverlight and Moonlight will not be allowed on any of my computers ;-)
So it's going to flop.
CUZ THERE'S SOMETHING IN THE MIDDLE AND IT'S GIVING ME A RASH
That's like saying flash would flop 2 years after its first release because it wasn't already on a billion computers.
A few years ago when flash became popular you couldn't really do much webpage interactivity wise, so when it came out there was a need for it. Now however it has established itself as the de-facto standard if you want that kind of thing.
Now however with HTML5 etc there really isn't a need for a flash replacement/competitor, the web is moving on from annoyingly little browser plugins. Five more years and flash/silverlight will only be around for compatibilities sake with old sites that still use them. Don't be surprised for example if Google switches streetview from flash to a pure HTML5/JS/Canvas version in the near future.
---
I've got a spare copy of Portal, if anyone wants it message me.
Yeah, it works on all major platforms, and has an open source (somewhat) equivalent on Linux.
The nice thing about it is that its description language is much more open than Flash. Thanks to that, and the fact that your program in it using CLR stuff, it is much easier to write a Silverlight implementation (for creating or decoding) than it is to try to reverse engineer Flash.
Yes, Micorsoft spearheaded it, just the same as they funded C#. That doesn't make the technology evil or bad, it just makes it "By Microsoft". People should take software on its own merits.
3DS Friend Code: 2707-1614-5576
PAX Prime 2014 Buttoneering!
I would place for faith in the likelihood for Adobe to continue to improve cross-platform and cross-browser support for Flash than I would in MS regarding Silverlight. That they threw a bone at the very outset to get people to pay attention doesn't convince me that this is a serious or likely to be longstanding commitment to keep that level of cross-functional support up to date.
CUZ THERE'S SOMETHING IN THE MIDDLE AND IT'S GIVING ME A RASH
And I like .NET and C#.
The fact that their agreement with Novell places restrictions on the licenses that the Linux runtime (Moonlight) can be placed under, states that "Microsoft reserves the right to update (including discontinue) the foregoing covenant" which allows them to eventually change the terms of or prevent future development of the runtime (the new versions would leave you open to be sued for patent infridgement), and only covers you if you receive the runtime from Novell leaves me feeling less than excited about Silverlight. Mono also lags behind .NET, which is part of Silverlight from 2.0 on.
Flash is still proprietary, but the Adobe Flex SDK is available under the MPL (one of the licenses that Firefox is licensed under).
I use it daily for both personal and professional projects and it certainly doesn't feel like a mess to me.
CUZ THERE'S SOMETHING IN THE MIDDLE AND IT'S GIVING ME A RASH
With their new HD improvements in Silverlight giving amazing performance and quality, with minimal CPU usage, and with graphics hardware acceleration, Adobe is going to have to step up their game soon.
There is no reason to bash on C# or Silverlight. They may be made by Microsoft, they may not be suitable for every task (which applies to any language or platform), but they are good products that a lot of people use (okay maybe not a lot are using Silverlight yet).
SC2 NA: exoplasm.519 | PA SC2 Mumble Server | My Website | My Stream
It's my understanding that Google contributes heavily upstream, so Linux and open source in general has been getting a lot of new/improved toys already.
Google does release a lot of items as open source and contribute code to carious projects. If memory serves correctly it was Google programmers that worked on Firefox and really got them off the ground. It all depends on the license though. For instance Chrome's V8 engine has a BSD license. So it can be used in commercial apps.
No, Silverlight is terrible. I've used it. Unwillingly, and it is astoundingly bad. And it's not C# or the .NET framework that is hurting it. OK, maybe it's a little bit of .NET's fault but C# is fine and dandy.
Silverlight suffers from the fact that the production tool itself and everything surrounding it with the exception of Visual Studio is absolutely inexplicably terrible. No code hinting for XAML, very little real documentation, an ass-backwords video publishing software design that nearly prevents remote embedding are just SOME of the huge problems facing Silverlight.
Also, you *need* Visual Studio to do serious Silverlight development and VS is not cheap. The only people using Silverlight for commercial work are people being subsidized by Microsoft to use it, either directly via commission or indirectly by their business partner program which gives small businesses incentive for utilizing the technology.
The biggest problem however is that they are just way slow off the line. I would argue that the primary purpose of Silverlight was three fold.
1) Simplify data interfacing using .NET's provider/SQL manager shit.
2) Implement HD video is a somewhat more open way.
3) Carve out a place in the interactive desktop app market.
The problem is that Adobe has pretty much already done 1 and 3. Adobe Air is about as powerful as you can make a secure web distributed application framework, and there are a dozen good solutions to the data problem up to and including entire libraries for direct connection to SQL databases.
#2 is turning out to be a non-issue due to HTML5, and Adobe is probably not even going to seriously pursue it.
I think people here in general make the mistake of assuming that Adobe's livelihood is somehow based on video, it really isn't. These sites like Youtube and Dailymotion are not licensing out hundreds or thousands of Flash Media Server licenses, they write their own custom streaming servers, their own custom players, and so on. The only thing they sell to that industry is Flash CS4 licenses, maybe. If Youtube died today, Adobe would be fine. Flash thrives because Flash developers are making triple digits per hour writing incredible interactive applications for wealthy clients who can afford fancy marketing.
As a "flash guy" I am struck when people meet the concept of Adobe with hostility for somehow cornering the market. They are no more guilty of anti-trust or "controlling teh interwebz" than Google is. Flash earned itself a terrible stigma in the early century, but if anything it has been making a resurgence, and it will *never* go away within the relevant future, because no matter how good you are at Javascript, there are some things you simply cannot do with it.
Adobe will get there with video, but they've had a lot of loose ends to tie up in the last 5 years. They only just last year got all their damn programs under a uniform interface, and they have already started hardware accelerating some of their studio apps. If CS5/Flash Player 11 does not include hardware accelerated video, I would be shocked.
Ever heard of VS 2008 Express? Granted, I don't know if it works with Silverlight, but I see no reason why it wouldn't. Microsoft is pretty hardcore about getting .Net out there for everyone.
Not having any real experience (yet) with Silverlight, I won't comment on the rest of your post.
SC2 NA: exoplasm.519 | PA SC2 Mumble Server | My Website | My Stream
I'd be surprised if it worked with Express, if it does, then what the hell is their business model? Because they are practically giving away Expressions Suite these days.
This information is harder to come buy than it should be. Any way with VS Express it doesn't appear to come with the templates and SDK for Silverlight. It appears that you can install them into VS Express using Silverlight tools from MS that appear to be free. Also MS Expression Blend allow you to create UI's very easily for Silverlight apps. Silverlight 3 was just released as well.
And I would also like to note, I just installed Chrome to check out the latest stable. It actually ran Silverlight this time instead of crapping it's self like it did in the past.
Considering Apple took a BSD derivative and based a (mostly) closed-source OS on it, I would say its relicenseing restrictions are few or non-existent. :P
If you define "very easily" as "no less than 8 times harder than doing identical operations in Flash", then yes. Very very easy.
Oh right. Do they give the only operating system Visual Studio works on out for free too?
Actually, they do. It's a shame that its the only operating system that Visual Studio works on, though, because I like to use another certain operating system. But I guess people who've never used anything but Windows never think about that sort of thing.
Students can get the Professional/Business versions of Windows for free at some educational institutions. But yeah, not to the general public. :P
Although I believe there's an extra license attached that pretty much says you're not allowed to use it for anything other than academic use.
You can get a copy of Windows Server 2008 through their Dreamspark program if you're a student.
I don't do much (anything) in Silverlight though. I just think it looks like nice, interesting tech. And you don't even need a compiler to start to use it. Although, as was said, if you want to do anything really serious you'd probably be up shit creek without one. If you just want to embed a little video player in your site with Play/Pause/Stop/Seek/Volume though, I don't see why you'd ever need to touch C#.
And the devil
Fuck you robotics