Microsoft To Open Source Some of Silverlight

Kurtz writes with word that Microsoft is about to follow in Adobe's footsteps by releasing the source code to part of its Silverlight technology. The news comes less than a week after Adobe announced plans to open source the Flex SDK. Microsoft is hungry to build the developer base for its rich Internet app tools, if it can.

It's Microsoft

[Turn-X Alphonse (789240)]

It's Microsoft, they'll probably release the comments in the code and keep everything else shut in. I mean comments are part of the source code, why not just release those and claim it's open source?

It's not quite a complete lie, but it's underhanded in the evil villian sort of way.

Re:It's Microsoft

[James_Duncan8181 (588316)]

No, they will just open source the simple bits that Mono already has mostly sorted out, leaving a fairly small but extremely critical patent-encumbered bit (video codec, maybe) that prevents anyone else making a useful implementation.

The PR people will then jump around saying Microsoft==open!!!eleven!. Do you see?

Re:

[Bacon Bits (926911)]

As opposed to Adobe, who opens the SDK and gives away the player for free, but charges six or seven times the actual value of the product for server software.

Ohhhhh Sources

[Fox_1 (128616)]

"according to sources familiar with the company's plans.----Specifics on which aspect of Silverlight will be open-sourced were not available, and Microsoft's public relations firm declined to comment."

So RTFA - but none of it's official, there are no details other then a little about the market space. In fact I suspect the discussion on Slashdot will be more interesting.

Re:Ohhhhh Sources

[Heir Of The Mess (939658)]

Read this article http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,2123859,00.as p [eweek.com] as it's a bit more interesting. The open source bits are the Dynamic Language Runtime (DLR) and the IronPython language. The DLR sits on top of .NET, so if you are using Mono and IronPython, then I would assume that you would then have all the source from top to bottom.

The MS stuff is here http://www.codeplex.com/IronPython [codeplex.com]

This time I even checked my links :-)

Re:Ohhhhh Sources

[$RANDOMLUSER (804576)]

The OpenLazlo [openlaszlo.org] TFA mentioned in passing looks kind of interesting, at least enough to check out further. The source for their demos looks pretty clean and straightforward.

Re:

[thomas.galvin (551471)]

The OpenLazlo TFA mentioned in passing looks kind of interesting, at least enough to check out further. The source for their demos looks pretty clean and straightforward.

You have not experienced pain until you have tried to express a complex UI and set of interactions in XML, with JavaScript embedded in CDATA tags.

I was really excited about Lazlo when I first heard about it; it seemed like it was "Flash for programmers." But the way they went about implementing it... one more victim of the XML Bandwagon of

Re:

[morgan_greywolf (835522)]

IronPython was already open source before Microsoft got to it. It started out as an independent project that's obviously been acquired by Microsoft. They even changed the license from the Common Public License, which OSI-approved, to the Microsoft Permissive License, which is not.

Re:Ohhhhh Sources

[Heir Of The Mess (939658)]

I don't think you can aquire an open source project. Your comment is a bit misleading. Rather what happened was that the sole developer Jim Hugunin wanted to join Microsoft after meeting with the .NET CLR (Common Language Runtime) team while discussing with them the technical issues he encountered. Jim joined up, and with a team at MS, brought IronPython to it's 1.0 release in September 2006.

There's some history on Jim Hugunin's blog here http://blogs.msdn.com/hugunin/archive/2006/09/05/7 41605.aspx [msdn.com]

There's other Python projects for you purists to get your teeth stuck into, but this one isn't one of them, as it is with a lot of .NET stuff. Here, try Jim Hugunin's JVM based Python called Jython http://www.jython.org/ [jython.org]

Re:

[morgan_greywolf (835522)]

how can an open source project be acquired?

Easily. You can acquire my open source project, Stylus Toolbox [sf.net]. Pay me USD $5,000, and I will transfer the copyright to you. All of the code is contributed by me, so no copyright issues. Then, you can take and release under whatever license you want, provided you remove the dependency on GladeWindow.py, which is GPL and not written by me. All other dependencies are either LGPL or Python license, or are dependencies on applications that are called, not linked,

Re:

[PopeRatzo (965947)]

You can't trust ANY of these fucking companies...

You could have stopped right there. We are entering the post-capital period.

Re:

[Zonk (troll) (1026140)]

You can't trust ANY of these fucking companies when it comes to open source these days. The advent of Trusted Computing hardware (Microsoft being one of the main advocates and users of the hardware), means that open source software is essentially meaningless. They used to remain in control of you by keeping their source code secret... with Trusted Computing, they can release the source... and control DECIDE WHAT BINARIES YOU RUN. These companies will control the keys, and only trust binaries made by themselves. Obviously, kernels, device drivers and media players will be first on this "trust list -- allowing them to implement what most people understand as DRM (your kernel, devices and media player are not made up of trusted code? No "premium" content you for buddy), on a supposedly "open" PC platform.

While it's true that Treacherous Computing is a threat to computing freedom, it's still not very prevalent. You're forgetting the largest current threat to online freedom and innovation: patents. You can be certain that whatever parts of Silverlight Microsoft releases will be heavily infested with patents. Basically, "here's the source, but if you try to use it for anything useful we'll sue your ass".

Re:

[99BottlesOfBeerInMyF (813746)]

The companies involved in this shit include: IBM, Sun, Apple...

Wow, I'm not sure how you fault Apple in this regard. They actually shipped TPM enabled machines for some time, but never used the TPM in their OS or software, only opening it up for developers interested in doing encryption with it and eventually dropping it due to lack of interest. They did implement EFI, but there is no indication of using it for trusted computing either only for a modern replacement to BIOS.

Really.

[apodyopsis (1048476)]

Call me cynical, but...

They..
Get behind their new technology and push
Use every leverage they can to promote it to their "partners"
Give away source code under a restrictive license
Give away development tools
Wait until it is a eb de-facto standard
... Then refuse to allow it on any operating system but Windows?

Flash works, Flash movies work, Flash is ubiquitous, Linux/OSX support it, Everybody knows it. So why do we need anything else?

The underlying argument goes like this: when a technology is est

Re:

[sjwest (948274)]

Some of us hate flash - small tip if you don't have a T1 connection and things are slow Block flash and the internet really speeds up.

If people wish to develop sites that we cant view (think scfi channel) or adverts in it then its not a problem here as we associate flash with rubbish/spam.

Also a defacto standard is not if no 'upto' date linux plugin is available. It is possible to live without flash, and yes the world is a better place.

Flash (and wannabe ompetitors)is a childrens program whether the

Re:

[lolocaust (871165)]

If you don't like flash, you probably won't like this thing either. Either way, theres no point in doing this. And what the hell is up with the posting delay? Its a bit excessive.

Re:Really.

[dFaust (546790)]

Actually, Adobe released Flash Player 9 for Linux last October... I'm not sure what more you want. They now have Flash Player for Solaris, too. Obviously it exists for Windows and OSX, as well. Yes, Flash can be abused... but Flash can also be really useful for creating engaging user experiences and it's also an EXCELLENT platform for application development, particularly via Flex. Flex 2 is great, Actionscript 3 is a really nice language featuring the best of OO and dynamic languages, the AVM2 virtual machine is a really nice piece of work. I know more and more enterprise developers who do .NET or Java that have been exposed to Flex 2 in recent months and come to like it very quickly. The power that it affords is great, it "just works" (regardless of browser/OS), and it's infinitely better to develop apps of all kinds in than HTML/CSS/Javascript.

So I'm sorry that you have such issues with Flash. But as a development platform, it's appealing in many ways. And ever since the Adobe/Macromedia merger, Adobe has really become more open with their developers and has been releasing more and more tools to help them out (checkout labs.adobe.com for some examples).

Re:

[metamatic (202216)]

Actually, Adobe released Flash Player 9 for Linux last October... I'm not sure what more you want.

Oh, how about to be allowed to build a Flash player of my own without being threatened with legal action?

Re:

[Daengbo (523424)]

And if you visit Korean websites, everything is either Flash or ...get this... pictures of text. That's right -- most of the "text" I find on Korean websites can't be searched or indexed because they made a graphic out of it! Flash and pictures of text. Wow. I would hate to be a blind Korean trying to use the Internet.

Re:

[Pollardito (781263)]

i wonder if that might be an old work-around from times when not all browsers were good at displaying alternate character sets?

Re:Really.

[kestasjk (933987)]

The problem is that Flash doesn't integrate in with anything ASP or .NET . XML is good in some ways for this, but no .NET developer wants to learn ActiveScript, buy FlashMX, learn a whole new way of creating UIs, and learn about AJAX to get Flash integrating with their current systems.

I think if Adobe invested more in Flash, and specifically getting more developers into Flash, they'd have a solid niche. But they've made Flash development more difficult to get into than it needs to be, and I think that based on that alone you can predict that Silverlight will probably fight a downhill battle and win over Flash.

Re:

[jsebrech (525647)]

The problem is that Flash doesn't integrate in with anything ASP or .NET . XML is good in some ways for this, but no .NET developer wants to learn ActiveScript, buy FlashMX, learn a whole new way of creating UIs, and learn about AJAX to get Flash integrating with their current systems.

1. Obviously you have no experience with flex (flex is flash for web app development)
2. Flash/flex integrates extremely well with both javascript and any and all server-side platforms
3. ActionScript 3 corresponds to JavaScript

Re:

[ryants (310088)]

So why do we need anything else?

To scratch an itch?

Re:Really.

[nwbvt (768631)]

"Linux/OSX support it"

Does it? Aside from the fact that it cannot be offered with the OS because of license restrictions, I have heard of many people having problems running Flash on Linux. What we really need is something like this that uses entirely open standards so third party players can be developed (not sure if MS will agree to do that for Silverlight, though).

From what I have heard, the main advantage to Silverlight is that it integrates better with .NET applications on the server-side. Besides, how can a little bit of competition be a bad thing? Worst case it will force Adobe to improve their product in order to keep from losing out to Silverlight. If you were to argue we don't need new technologies when there is already something that is "good enough", we should all be running applets in Netscape.

Re:

[jeswin (981808)]

....Give away development tools, Wait until it is a eb de-facto standard.....
Flash works, Flash movies work, Flash is ubiquitous, Linux/OSX support it, Everybody knows it. So why do we need anything else?

Apart from the obvious point that competition is good, Flash is yet another lock-in that is waiting to happen. From the Flash Specification [adobe.com]:
"This license does not permit the usage of the specification to create software which supports SWF file playback."

Why would you want to protect a format/specification,

Re:Really.

[moderators_are_w*nke (571920)]

They've certainly pulled that trick before. Where are:

* MS Core fonts for the web
* IE for Mac / UNIX
* Windows Media Player for Mac

Microsoft's idea of cross platform is do it till its popular and then EOL everything but Windows. The only reason they're doing this at all is that Flash video is killing WMV.

Always late...

[Beuno (740018)]

Am I the only one who gets the feeling they keep on arriving too late every single time?

Re:

[kjart (941720)]

Am I the only one who gets the feeling they keep on arriving too late every single time?

Too late for what exactly?

Re:

[by Anonymous Coward]

Don't worry, they have made a search engine [live.com] for finding their late and forgotten attempts to copy other software/websites.

Although this time around, Microsoft actually has a pretty decent chance (with the .NET backend for Silverlight) at outdoing Adobe Flash Player for consuming the most system resources. So I wouldn't discount them straight away!

Finish what you started

[Riquez (917372)]

I mean, call me picky, but shouldn't they finish developing IE to an acceptable standard before they start on a Flash competitor?

Re:

[Shados (741919)]

Different development teams with different interests... At the size of Microsoft, its not uncommon to end up an hydra with 2 heads. Though IE's crappiness ends up helping Silverlight indirectly, since quite a few developers will move to that to avoid having to deal with IE's quirks...

Re:

[GauteL (29207)]

This is easily summarised by The Mythical Man Month [wikipedia.org].

Throwing more people at IE would make it worse, not better. Therefore, it is better to spend those people doing other useful projects.

Re:

[$RANDOMLUSER (804576)]

That's really funny. This whole campaign reminds me of nothing so much as when they were cranking up IE and telling everyone "What with ALL the sites using Active-X, (there were none) you're gonna want to be using IE, or you'll miss out on the whole Internet experience". For a while there, it became a self-fufilling prophecy, at least until everyone realized that Active-X was crap, Netscape was dead, and the net was full of sites relying on IE's "I know what you mean, you don't have to write well-formed H

Re:

[ms1234 (211056)]

No. This is Microsoft and they need to on every new field as soon as possible once they recognize such a field in order to crush the competition before it becomes to successfull (Google).

Once a noble idea

[Seiruu (808321)]

Of a system being worked on by the users for the users to gain a better system through the networking effect, now is slowly becoming another means for industries to get cheap labor. From the OS community POV quite saddening.

From a commercial POV, if prices do go lower and more people would buy/use it with the backings of corporate Marketing, compared to when it was just OS and mouth to mouth, it might (emphasis on MIGHT) spread more awareness and interest in genuine/creative software.

Re:

[pallmall1 (882819)]

But it's not exactly the end of integrity.

As far as Microsoft is concerned, integrity ended long ago. Why do these shills keep lying? Oops, I've already answered that question.

ActiveX all over again

[by Anonymous Coward]

Been there, done that. M$ is trying to do an ActiveX 2.0. Too late. I for one welcome our new Adobe overlords!

Does not compute

[Inquisitor911 (935895)]

Microsoft?... Open Source?... Does not compute, does not compute!

Silverlight In Action

[N8F8 (4562)]

http://channel9.msdn.com/showpost.aspx?postid=3045 08 [msdn.com]

Re:

[bsantos (655278)]

Lots of people on here worried about interoperability, cross platform runtimes and the likes, but those comments on msdn show that those using MSFT technology couldn't care less. *sigh*

What?

[N8F8 (4562)]

It's a cross platform CLR? I don't read any negative comments at all.

Re:

[tomstdenis (446163)]

No sluh. People using MSFT tech are the types who are easily impressed and afraid of change. I don't see what the world gains from yet another flash type scripting thingy, but now MSFT can split up yet another market by virtue of it running on Windows.

Being an unfan of Flash anyways makes me not really care what MSFT is doing to hurt/help that market. But it's sad to know that MSFT just will never change.

Oh well.

Tom

Re:Silverlight In Action

[N8F8 (4562)]

Before you jump on the MS bashing bandwagon please take a look at the linked video. Even better, download the client plugin and view the demos. It's cross platform and supports a ton of languages including C#, Ruby, Javascript, etc.

here's a preview

[NickFortune (613926)]

#include "bsod.h"

main() { if(running_on_linux()) { crash(horribly, messily); } return proprietary_blob(patented); }

/* anyone remember the days when slashdot allow you to quote pre-formatted text? */

Re:

[Zonk (troll) (1026140)]

/* anyone remember the days when slashdot allow you to quote pre-formatted text? */

Umm, select "plain old text" instead of "html formatted" and then put your comment inside of <code></code>. I always keep it at "plain old text" so I don't have to bother with <p></p> and <br> tags, but I still can use the allowed html, ie, italic, bold, etc.

Scott Guthrie on Silverlight

[tt42 (647778)]

While not directly related to the open-source angle of this story, here is Scott Guthrie (Silverlight team manager) talking about some of the more in-depth aspects of it. (36m long) http://channel9.msdn.com/showpost.aspx?postid=3045 08 [msdn.com]

Re:Auto-print

[lolocaust (871165)]

It was probably the printer friendly version that was linked, so it'd make sense to automatically show the print dialog. The alternative would be to have the article on 8 pages each with its own talking smiley pop-up that scares the shit out of you due to its creepy "I wuv you" catchphrase and the fact you forgot that your speakers were on pretty loud.

Re:

[owlnation (858981)]

Since the beginning of the web, I think that's the first time I've ever come across an autoprint link.

What unfettered arrogance on behalf of the publication that's hosting it in believing that their hack paragraph on a minor tech story is worth a piece of tree - presumably they have a deal going with HP to use up as much ink as possible.

Techworld - a website I will never, at any time, ever visit again. Makes Flash, or its MS competitor, look positively non-invasive.

Re:

[owlnation (858981)]

Yes, that is mostly true.

But... Flash is against everything browsing stands for too - closed source, breaks the back button, invasive, bloated, not available to all. So, I actually do appreciate anything that stands up and fights Flash - it is good for everyone that there is competition in this market. It would be better that there were a genuine open source alternative, however.

Should anyone from the Flashblock team be reading this, can you start working on a sliverlight block too please? I think I'

Microsoft has open-sourced a lot of stuff...

[argent (18001)]

Microsoft has been using open source for some time, albeit sometimes with restrictive licenses, but rarely has any of it been useful for anything but developers already committed to Microsoft's platform.

There are several reasons people may be interested in open source, but they all have one thing in common ... people are interested in what open source does for them. Open source frees them from dependence on a single vendor, it frees them from license fees and royalties, it allows them to share responsibility with a large pool of like-minded developers, and so on. Open source products tied to a single vendor, whether it's hardware (like a Linux-based set-top box or PDA) or software (one of Microsof's efforts was an open-source installer for Windows applications) is only going to be interesting if it's useful for the things they're already doing.

Open-sourcing *part* of a product, when you're potentially going to have to pay Microsoft to use the rest (the price I read was the first million users free, then 25 cents per user after that), is a pretty obvious poison pill.