Mono Coders Hack Linux Silverlight in 21 Days 409
Etrigoth writes "After the recent announcement of Silverlight by Microsoft at their Mix event in Vegas, Miguel de Icaza
galvanised his team of developers in the Mono group at Novell to create a Linux implementation, a so-called 'Moonlight'.
Remarkably, they achieved this in 21 Days.
Although they were first introduced to Silverlight at the Las Vegas Mix, de Icaza was invited by a representative of Microsoft France for a
10 minute demonstration at the Paris Re-Mix 07 keynote conference, should they have anything to show.
Joshua, a blogger for Microsoft has confirmed that the Mono team did not know anything about Silverlight 1.1 before its launch. Other members of this team have blogged about this incredible achievement, Moonlight hack-a-thon. It's worth noting from a developer perspective that Moonlight is not Mono and doesn't require Mono to work"
Joshua, a blogger for Microsoft has confirmed that the Mono team did not know anything about Silverlight 1.1 before its launch. Other members of this team have blogged about this incredible achievement, Moonlight hack-a-thon. It's worth noting from a developer perspective that Moonlight is not Mono and doesn't require Mono to work"
Wonderful (Score:4, Interesting)
Regardless though, having a native solution is always good.
Re:Wonderful (Score:4, Interesting)
What goes around comes around (Score:5, Interesting)
Now that Moonlight is finished Miguel and his team should, having listened to customer demand (I believe that's the excuse Microsoft always uses), build some Free extensions on to Microsoft's work. Meaning the best experience can only be had by people running Moonlight under GNU/Linux and that some functionality will be unavailable to other platforms.
Gosh, does that mean people will be locked-in to using GNU/Linux? Well Microsoft could use the GPL'ed code if they want to! We'll call it 'Freedom lockin'. :)
Re:The MS teams (Score:3, Interesting)
While that's funny 'round these parts, Microsoft is really pushing hard for quality code on the inside. They're implementing processes on top of processes to create new processes to improve the quality of their software (or so they think.) And they're succeeding in a lot of ways -- the code they ship now as "1.0" is far better than any of their previous 1.0 offerings.
Internally they're killing off the cowboy coders that got them to where they are today. They've shifted the focus from brilliant coders to creative marketers and competent managers, and hire code monkeys to grind out exactly what the specs require. The cowboys who used to make giant leaps (like Miguel's leap here) are being neutered by best practices and architecture boards.
Yes, it's the way of the industry. What it really means is that the innovative spirits are likely to continue jumping ship for effective positions in small companies, and that Microsoft will remain a "competent" choice, but never a "great" choice. But that's what the rest of industry wants, anyway.
Re:Wonderful (Score:2, Interesting)
With that being said, it'll be a rough road ahead for MS. It's hard to beat the ~98% penetration that Flash has.
Not good enough! (Score:1, Interesting)
Alrighty. If it is a virtual machine, where can we find documentation about:
1) the OPCODES of this vm
2) the standard libraries and interbrowser API
3) The format of silverlight compiled scripts
I have been un-able to find this information from the silverlight website.
Maybe this kind of information is what the MS/Novell deal meant when they said "exhange of technical information"?
And the Mono team was able to pull this of from this? Given these info, maybe someone else can implement Silverlight in 18 days in perl, 15 days in Ruby and 11 days in Python!
Flash is Cross Platform? I beg to differ? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:You Have to Put Silverlight in a Dominant Posit (Score:2, Interesting)
Lots of web content is made for Flash, which is in a dominant position on the web today. Flash is not an open web stndard, and its future development is always controlled by Adobe.
The difference? Thanks to Miguel and his team, there's a free and open-source implementation of Silverlight. There is not a free and open-source implementation of Flash; the only usable Flash implementations are and remain the locked-down, closed-source ones produced by Adobe themselves, and they use horribly restrictive EULAs to ensure that nobody who has ever looked at any Flash documentation is ever allowed to write a free competitor. Microsoft is actually being MORE free and MORE open than Adobe here. Haters take note.
Whether Silverlight succeeds or not, our dominant rich-web-content technology is going to be a closed technology controlled by a corporation with a chequered history. Given that fact, you know, I think I'll go with the one with a free implementation.
Then port Moonlight to Windows in 21 days (Score:3, Interesting)
Then we need to port Moonlight to Windows (and every other platform), so that the MS implementation isn't hte one that's mostly used. Otherwise, MS can just extend their own version in whatever way and have a large impact on those using Moonlight. If instead Moonlight and Silverlight have 50/50 market share, if Silverlight has a new feature, it won't be used by most until Moonlight catches up, or vice versa.
Re:Wonderful (Score:3, Interesting)
MS could drop IE 32 and no one could do anything about it. They are not required to ship a product just so a plugin by another company can continue to exist. Not shipping IE 32 does not stop Adobe from making 64bit flash for IE 64
Re:Wonderful (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:The MS teams (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Wonderful (Score:3, Interesting)
- Silverlight is gravy for VB and C# developers, and the
- Microsoft will offer very appealing Silverlight hosting plans for the multimedia content -- what's more often than not quickly becoming the bottleneck at least for media heavy web sites. Free storage of up to 4 GB and delivery at 700 kbps in max 1 million minutes per month, alternatively unlimited streaming if you allow them to tack on some ads, alternatively unlimited streaming with a "nominal fee".
Re:Wonderful (Score:2, Interesting)
Why don't they do something for Linux instead of cloning a dead MS proprietary technology. Let MS port it to Linux!
They may be good at coding fast, but are they really being strategic for Linux, I don't think so.
I bet that they have wasted their effort. What a shame.
Next time, be more strategic. Do something truly amazing in 21 days.
Stupid Microsoft (Score:3, Interesting)
I have Mac OS X 10.4.10 - like most people who installed the latest patches.
I guess the six-character string "10.4.1" is less than the string "10.4.8"...
And Gnash is still not finished (Score:3, Interesting)
If only our OSS Microsoft Fanboy Midguel would galvanize his team to implement an entire pipeline of Flash tools, generators and Players. If MS doesn't kill this one off and a viable Kit of OSS tools & players for Silverlight comes to life I might even drop Flash RIA for it.
But no way, for as long as I live, will I support an non-open RIA standard that MS has total control over. I'd rather mess with Adobes crappy Flash IDE for another 10 years.
Already better tools for Silverlight (Score:3, Interesting)
It's video experience is Windows Media, which has been shipping for years and is more widely available than good
For tools, there's the Expression suite for design, and Visual Studio for code. And unlike Flash, there's a really good workflow for designers, developers, and video folks to collaborate together without having a single person who runs the Flash app to integrate all the elements.
Re:Wonderful (Score:3, Interesting)
IMO, Miguel is just leading his followers to slaughter. History tells me this is the how Microsoft does business and GNU/Linux along with OSS are targets. And the latest Microsoft payoffs to those GNU/Linux distros who've signed up for their IP patent protection scam are the 2nd phase of the attack. SCO was the 1st. You probably don't understand that either so here goes, Microsoft help fund SCO via direct financial licensing 'deals' and by backroom negotiations to get a large Canadian company( Baystar and a Canadian bank ) to also fund SCO.
So use mono and anything else Miguel puts out AT YOUR OWN RISK. There ARE strings attached. IMO
LoB
Re:Cool, but ultimately pointless (Score:2, Interesting)
To use the German translation of English works example, the German version of Wikipedia doesn't have to wait for an English article to already exist and translate it. They can write their own, whilst they may also translate some of the English articles. This makes sense as long as there are enough German-speaking users to bother doing it, just as making GTK# (or any other Mono extension of
Flash is currently a game of catch-up because the majority of Flash files won't run properly in Free Software players like Gnash (I keep a close eye on these projects, and no they are not usable yet. Unless you like waiting 5 minutes for anything more complicated than a stick man to render), so thus it is either Gnash (as an example) or Adobe, and Adobe's supports everything Gnash does and more. If (when?) Gnash is able to handle, display and run the majority of Flash files in a way indistinguishable from Adobe's player then it may start to become a standard on Free Software systems. If it becomes such a standard, and Free Software development tools exist (which is of course true for Mono, but not so for Flash in any significant way) then Gnash could easily add its own functionality without any trouble. People developing games (for example) for Linux systems could then use the Flash format with Gnash extras knowing that it is a fast, platform-independant format. So what if the widely used Adobe player is so pervasive in the Windows world and doesn't support the extras? The developer is making a game for Linux, where Gnash is a standard. If he wants to release it for Windows then he can just stick a Gnash executable and a script to launch it with the right file in the archive.
The same can happen for Moonlight. Whilst it may not become the most widely used implementation (which is still in question, since both implementations are new, but Microsoft's marketing will probably make this a foregone conclusion) it doesn't matter as long as it is widely used within certain target audiences, and catering to the others would be a matter of including it as a library.
Basically what Free Software can do for standards and implementations is make them transparent and cross platform. This is important, because choosing a development platform is then not dependant on install base, it is dependant on whatever you want to use. Package management (if done properly, with a standard cross-distro naming scheme) sort of makes this possible, since I can write an app in Python, C, Objective Caml or whatever else I want, and I can just set whatever is needed as a dependancy. If the storage overhead isn't a concern then I could just bundle it all together with my app. This then makes pushing efforts from Microsoft, Adobe, whoever a waste of money, since they're trying to market air. Everyone already has it, or can get it from anyone for no cost. Then there is no point using a proprietary system which you aren't allowed to bundle at the OS or application level, since it would just create confusion for the user who shouldn't have to know it exists (I know I know, it's long-winded, but I HATE the term "commoditised").
Well, I think my brain is empty now so I'll stop.
Whatever (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Wonderful (Score:3, Interesting)
No, but using your monopoly power to suffocate another company's product in a different market is.
Microsoft sees themselves as being under attack from companies trying move userland away from the OS as a key platform, Google with their AJAX apps, Sun with Java, Adobe with Flash, and so on. If any or all of these succeed, Microsoft's control, and therefore their ability to make those 85% profit margins, diminishes.
In Vista search, Silverlight and .Net, they're responding to each of these threats by diluting mindshare, direct competition, their classic "embrace, extend, extinguish" etc, etc. These products don't make Microsoft any money directly, but they protect the OS platform Microsoft derives so much of it's income from. Many of these tactics are largely (legally) acceptable in normal circumstances. It is illegal however, for Microsoft to use it's desktop monopoly to drive adoption at the expense of their competitors.
They're sailing very close to the wind with many of those products.