First Look At Microsoft Silverlight 3 228
snydeq writes "InfoWorld's Martin Heller finds Silverlight 3 gaining ground on Adobe Flash, Flex, and AIR in all the areas where Silverlight 2 had lagged. No longer do developers need to build desktop WPF apps based loosely on corresponding Silverlight RIAs, as Silverlight 3 adds the ability to install Silverlight apps on the desktop, update them in place, detect Net connectivity state changes, and store data locally and securely. Moreover, solid Expression Blend 3 and Visual Studio 2010 betas provide developers with much improved tools to create Silverlight RIAs. '"I do not expect many Adobe shops to give up their Flash, Flex, and AIR for Silverlight 3. I do expect many Microsoft shops to do more RIAs with Silverlight now that it's more capable and to create lightweight browser/desktop Silverlight 3 applications where they might have fashioned heavier-weight Windows Forms or WPF client applications," Heller says.'"
Silverlight a good thing? (Score:5, Interesting)
Well, not in the grand scheme of things it's not, I'd rather see the likes of Silverlight and Flash dissapear altogether. I think however in this context Silverlight might actually be a good thing. Flash has become so widespread because there was really no challenge to it, Java applets never really ever managed to perform as was originally hoped.
On one hand I'm glad to see some competition for Flash rather than it be allowed effectively a monopoly on RIAs but on the other the worry is of course that this'll just mean more RIAs!
I'd personally rather see the advances in Javascript allow us to move forward for RIAs because no plugin is required, and it's not some compiled proprietary lump of bits. Google's chrome demos mentioned here a couple of months ago looked very promising in this area so hopefully this will eventually the path we see taken for RIAs but in the meantime I think Silverlight is possibly a good thing, if not only because even in the worst case it forces Adobe to make Flash a better product.
Re:Silverlight a good thing? (Score:4, Interesting)
There's at least one more "challenger" (I use the term loosely) in the form of JavaFX. The fact that you hadn't even heard of it says a lot about its potential for success.
I do think you're being unfair on Java applets, though. It took a long time for them to perform as originally hoped, but I think they're there now.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
To be fair, I have actually heard of Java FX, but as with Java I've just never come across it in use. Similarly I understand Java has come along leaps and bounds in terms of performance and I've seen some great Java desktop apps, but on the applet front I've still yet to see anything that shows it off as a viable platform. Of course, that's not to say it isn't just that I've not seen it to compare, I have at least seen Silverlight in use in a few places and it does seem to be able to hold it's own against F
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I've not looked at it to be honest, is it obfuscated or has it simply been run through a non-destructive compression process to shrink the size of the .js file downloads for clients?
Either way the process should be entirely reversible else the Javascript interpreter wont be able to do anything with it.
But that's really the beauty of Javascript - it's open, with a plugin you have no idea what it's going to do unless the plugin explicitly allows you to do so, however with Javascript as it's open a Javascript
Re: (Score:2)
GWT JavaScript code is obfuscated and compressed. But if you can expand that back to readable code, you can also argue that every piece of code ever written is "open" because it can be reassembled somehow and run with a debugger.
Don't get me wrong, GWT is absolutely great, I love working with it. Really great innovation. But I would not call it "open" just because it works on JavaScript.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah I understand it doesn't necessarily produce open source code.
My point is that it's still parsable in the sense that the browser can work with it. Effectively it can still be used with say, accessibility tools such as screen readers - even if a string of text to be displayed on a messagebox is obfuscated in code, it still has to be de-obfuscated before it's rendered by the browser for example and so it can still be used with a screen reader, or perhaps for kids a piece of filtering software. Plugin base
Re: (Score:2)
With JavaScript we have a situation where every browser has a slightly implementation of the execution environment. The problem with GWT is it just hides the problem (although pretty well): We need a new standard to building applications and not just JavaScript on top of JavaScript.
I really do not see the actual benefits of JavaScript vs. Flash plugins for example: To me they are just execution environments within the browser.
Good call on the GWT obfuscation/compression, I didn't realize it was controlled t
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Amd HTML5 will do much of the video streaming and onscreen animation that flash and silverlight are offering, but is an actual open standard. I tolerate flash, but silverlight is not getting anywhere near my machines, Windows, OS X or Linux. Now I see it can install apps and updates directly to the desktop, and is based on .net/mono - absolutely no way!
Novell - for some reason they keep shipping this crapware called tomboy on their distros, that required mono. It is the single largest resource consuming app
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Now I see it can install apps and updates directly to the desktop, and is based on .net/mono - absolutely no way!
It's not running native code apps, sheesh. It's the same managed code sandbox and security model as the browser plugin, but can run without being in a browser proper.
But the (high) security model remains the same. It's just like opening "Default.html" from the desktop.
Re: (Score:2)
Can you post a link to where Miguel says that if you use Mono on a non-Novel distro "all bets are off"? Keep in mind that the mono project predates Novell's involvement.
Mod story flamebait (Score:5, Interesting)
Gaining ground! (Score:3, Funny)
I would sooner accept the existence of elves, gremlins, and Eskimos, than Silverlight apps in the wild.
UltraLearn (Score:2)
UltraLearn Studio [ultralearn.com] uses Silverlight.
Elves, gremlins, Eskimos, and baseball (Score:2)
I would sooner accept the existence of elves, gremlins, and Eskimos, than Silverlight apps in the wild.
Mr. Simpson: Elves [wikipedia.org][1], gremlins [wikipedia.org], and Eskimos [wikipedia.org] exist. And until recently [slashdot.org], Major League Baseball used Silverlight. Believe it [wikipedia.org].
[1] One axis, two axes. One Elvis, two...
Re:Mod story flamebait (Score:5, Interesting)
No-one cares about such things in the real world. Everyone uses Windows, remember? /sarcasm... or is it?
Doesn't seem to matter much. Slashdotters want such things, business don't care, because such benefits aren't seen when the vast majority of people are using Windows. I see it time and time again - we are losing the battle for open standards. If Silverlight and other proprietary technologies are GAINING prominence, how can we win?
The straight line (Score:2)
And Linux users are techies, who almost by definition have high income.
There's so much fun to made of this. So little time.
Re: (Score:2)
Silverlight is gaining on flash in all areas
It is? Color me surprised. I wasn't even aware that there was a Silverlight "2" having never actually seen any Silverlight plugin or warning about it on any website ever.
I suppose, in the same sense, we could say that "Safari-for-Windows is gaining on Internet Explorer in all areas". It rose from 0.07% market share on Windows boxes to 0.21% when Apple bundled it in their update for iTunes/Quicktime.
Silverlight's published standards + Moonlight (Score:2)
Silverlight is essentially .NET bytecode + XAML markup + media .NET ECMA spec: http://www.ecma-international.org/publications/standards/Ecma-335.htm [ecma-international.org]
Silverlight XAML spec (under Open Specification Promise):
http://blogs.windowsclient.net/rob_relyea/archive/2008/10/14/ms-slxv-silverlight-xaml-vocabulary-2008-specification-v0-9-published.aspx [windowsclient.net]
Media is MPEG-4 or MP3 (ISO), Windows Media (VC-1 is a SMPTE spec), and the Raw AV pipeline for extensitbilty to aribtrary codecs.
As for interoperabilty and portability, h
Re: (Score:2)
Or you can filter such stories yourself and pretend they don't exist.
Re: (Score:2)
I believe Microsoft is making an even bigger token effort in interoperabilty, actually.
In both cases it is token, however.
Balkanization of the web (Score:5, Insightful)
What would the web be without JPEG, GIF and PNG? Can you imagine what a hot mess it would be if you had to install proprietary binary plug-ins to view images on web pages? And if some of the plug-ins weren't available on your platform?
Then go in the other direction and imagine what the web could have been with a universal video format and vector animation format. That's the crazy amount of damage Microsoft, Apple, Adobe, Real and the MPEG4 LA have collectively wreaked on the web at large.
So please, please avoid Silverlight (or Flash, for that matter). It aims to balkanize the web into mutually-incompatible, vendor-dominated fiefdoms in which the overwhelming incentive is to tax users for their access to data.
Re:Balkanization of the web (Score:4, Informative)
The real underlying problem is software patents. As long as software patents exist, somebody will always find a legally enforcible way to tax users for their access to data.
Re: (Score:2)
That's the crazy amount of damage Microsoft, Apple, Adobe, Real and the MPEG4 LA have collectively wreaked on the web at large.
You can't stop these guys.
Napster. Amazon, Hulu, MySpace, Twitter - something new - something corporate - it has happened before. It will happen again.
And to perfectly blunt, the damage they cause is mostly to the geek's bruised ego - he can't let go the thought that the Internet was once his private playground.
The geek places his bets on Dirac -
while Flash becomes the de facto sta
Re: (Score:2)
"And to perfectly blunt, the damage they cause is mostly to the geek's bruised ego - he can't let go the thought that the Internet was once his private playground."
And that bruised ego is probably sympathy pains because most geeks weren't even on the Internet in the pre-commercial days.
Silverlight is becoming ... Java (Score:5, Interesting)
Applications that can be run in the browser or installed on the desktop? Java's had both for many years (applets and webstart).
Ability to update desktop apps? Webstart again.
Access to a rich, general purpose library? Yup, Java provides that - and it's very similar to .NET for some reason.
So suddenly the old thing is the new thing.
Re: (Score:2)
True, but in my experience the difference between Java and the .NET stuff is performance.
Sure, some synthetic benchmarks might show that Java beats .NET by some margin, but in practice, that's not what matters.
What users notice is that Silverlight loads almost instantly (as fast as Flash), and that desktop .NET apps run just as fast as native, and look as good, or better than native apps.
I can always tell when a Java app starts because the JVM startup brings my machine to its knees, and the end result is in
I have a question about that... (Score:2)
Thanks.
Re: (Score:2)
No, this is not the same thing. Webstart is like .NET's ClickOnce (which, admitedly, came in later).
What Silverlight 3 does is let you make a browser RIA that the user can "detach", and move and use locally, with or without an internet connection. So basically imagine if you had an applet that could become a WebStart app, with virtually zero effort on the developer side, and completly streamlined on the user site.
This is what adobe should do (Score:5, Interesting)
For Silverlight, the only direction it had to go was "up". I mean, it had an almost zero percent installed base. Now if I were Adobe, I would seriously consider open sourcing Flash and all technologies around it. Otherwise Adobe will only continue to lose market share to Silverlight.
Re: (Score:2)
So while we do have a few companies seeking their own private monopolies, choosing a browser that requires open standards to render will register as feedback to the various websites we visit. Remember that each bro
Re: (Score:2)
Re:This is what adobe should do (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
I hate to feed a troll, but obviously no one is suggesting Adobe should open source their dev tools.
Just the flash interpreter. They give it away for free anyway (those commie bastards), why not let other people deal with fixing it? Then they can proceed to rake in tons of profits from people who want to build apps that they now can rest assured will run on the coming generations of Flash-enabled smartphones.
Silverlight = Silverfish (Score:2, Funny)
Silverlight is a terrible marking choice for a name. I automatically think 'silverfish' when I see the word in print, and find myself substituting that word when I say 'silverlight' or sound it out in my head.
Silverfish, as far as I know, are a small bug that scuttles down further into your mattress when you pull up the covers.
Work on it a little in your head:
Silverlight ,,, Silverfish
Silverlight ... Silverfish
I think you, too will start to associate silverfish... er ..light, with a scourge.
I am rather uninformed but... (Score:2)
I am rather uninformed, but since when has that ever stopped me from making commentary?
I have heard/read casually that a lot of HTML 5 will do what Flash does. That rather puts Flash and anything Flash-like (including Silverlight) out of business soon doesn't it?
Re: (Score:2)
I have heard/read casually that a lot of HTML 5 will do what Flash does. That rather puts Flash and anything Flash-like (including Silverlight) out of business soon doesn't it?
Internet Explorer 6 on Windows 2000/XP is still a significant percentage of the internet browser use. It supports flash.
In fact nothing out there today except beta's and previews really support html5. But nearly all of it supports flash. Its going to be a LONG LONG time before the current crop of browsers have been sufficiently phased
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Flash and Silverlight 1, yes, you're right. Flex and Silverlight, not so much: they're just not browser APIs, but actual app frameworks, so they go a lot further than just providing end user features: they help the programmer, too (like Silverlight can consume an ADO.NET data service with LINQ, which is a lot better than using the built stuff, even in HTML 5. Flex has BlazeDS, and so on. Just an example)
securly install Silverlight on the desktop (Score:2)
I don't have admin rights on this computer and how does installing some remote app make this computer more not less secure?
Re:securly install Silverlight on the desktop (Score:4, Informative)
I think he was referring to "isolated storage". Basically you can allow "applicatoions" to store data locally on your machine. By default only a limited quota is granted (the application can ask for more and the user has to approve it).
The stored data is obfuscated to avoid malicious apps downloading files/scripts and then use social engineering techniques to fool the user into launching them. This allows an app access to data even when offline.
Silverlight itself executes inside a pretty restricted sandbox. Silverlight has an impeccable security record Secunia reports zero vulnerabilities in both SL1 and SL2. That is not to say that there are no vulns in SL. But at least compared to Flash it's quite good.
Even so, installing yet another plugin/app will *never* make your computer *more* secure, except when you're installing some lock-down app or firewall. Obviously any app only increases the attack surface.
Re: (Score:2)
JNLP is closer to .NET ClickOnce (actually its the same thing, just for .NET. And yeah, ClickOnce came in later). The other .NET technologies that need to run in a similar sandbox just tap into the same APIs. So XBAP apps and Silverlight, for example.
Go MIcrosoft! (Score:2)
I expect Silverlight© to enjoy the same sterling security reputation as the rest of the Microsoft® stable of software, increasing the joy and ease of use customers have come to expect over the years.
The Cost of Graphical Internet Solutions (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You had a point until there.
It's a trap (Score:2)
We're going to trust the future of rich media/apps on the web to a company that studiedly ignored any progress on their basic web browser for over five years?
Seriously, the IE 6 fiasco seals it. It was a concrete and persistent demonstration that the company simply does not care about the quality of their products beyond their position in the market, a giant middle finger rising from Redmond to web developers everywhere for the better part of this decade. They sat on a nearly unmatched trove of resources an
Microsoft releases Silverlight 3, nobody cares (Score:2)
Microsoft today announced the release of version 3.0 of its world-beating Silverlight multimedia platform for the Web. As a replacement for Adobe's Flash, it is widely considered utterly superfluous and of no interest [today.com] to anyone who could be found.
"We have a fabulous selection of content partners for Silverlight," announced Microsoft marketer Scott Guthrie on his blog today. "NBC for the Olympics, which delivered millions of new users to BitTorrent. The Democrat National Convention, which is fine because t
Microsoft Ad (Score:2)
Is it just me or did this read like a promo right off of Microsoft's web site?
Is slashdot going to go the way of PC Magazine back in the late 1980s and just becoming a venue for corporate promotion?
This article was kinda depressing.
It is nice to have at least one corner of the Netverse not dominated by the corporate overlords.
Loyal Microsoft minions are loyal. (Score:2)
I do expect many Microsoft shops to do more RIAs with Silverlight now that it's more capable and to create lightweight browser/desktop Silverlight 3 applications where they might have fashioned heavier-weight Windows Forms or WPF client applications," Heller says.
In other words, loyal Microsoft followers will use new Microsoft tool that produces Windows-only GUI software instead of older Microsoft tools that produces Windows-only GUI software.
Ad paid by Microsoft? (Score:2, Insightful)
"Bottom Line: Microsoft Silverlight 3 is catching up to the capabilities of Adobe Flash, Flex, and AIR in all the areas where Silverlight was behind."
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Just in case anyone decides to post the parent as informative, I'll point out Moonlight [mono-project.com] which is an implementation of Silverlight that runs on Linux. There is also Mac support in Firefox and Safari.
Re:I'll pass. (Score:5, Insightful)
Moonlight supports Silverlight 1. Support for Silverlight 2 is in "preview".
Thus far the Moonlight project is "compatible" enough to tell you your version of Silverlight is out of date, and please upgrade.
That's not even close to what I'd call multi-OS or useful. Hell, I barely put up with flash (no-script saves the day most of the time). If sites are forcing Silverlight down my throat, I'll just not use them.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:I'll pass. (Score:5, Informative)
I had a couple of Microsofties come in to work to present to us about Virtual Earth. They talked a lot about VE's Silverlight integration, but when asked they admitted that only about 35% of desktop users had Silverlight installed. Even if that is not a high estimate, it's pathetic.
Even if you only care about Windows users, Silverlight is not a suitable technology to roll out to end-users. Flash 9+ has something like 98% market penetration.
Re:I'll pass. (Score:5, Insightful)
when asked they admitted that only about 35% of desktop users had Silverlight installed. Even if that is not a high estimate, it's pathetic
It's not pathetic at all.
Flash has been around since 1996.
Silverlight is a product two years in beta.
If the geek calls a 35% share of the client desktop "pathetic" - what is one to make of Firefox at 20% and Linux at 1%?
Re: (Score:2)
Who are the morons that modded the parent flamebait?
Oh, welcome to mod me down too, when you are here.
35% Mac + Linux + Firefox + Safari... (Score:2)
only about 35% of desktop users had Silverlight installed.
Which is more than the combined marketshare of Mac OS X, Linux, Firefox, Safari, Opera, and the iPhone.
Re:I'll pass. (Score:4, Insightful)
You need to meet new people. (Score:2)
eh? go to any tech conference and the only people not using Mac laptops are the ones running linux. Maybe 1 or 2 Windows machines per hundred.
The tech conference is - let us say - somewhat - unrepresentative of the larger world!
Re: (Score:2)
no, not Apple or related conferences
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Since people with no programming skills can't write programs by definition, I don't think there's a problem.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Moonlight supports Silverlight 1. Support for Silverlight 2 is in "preview".
Thus far the Moonlight project is "compatible" enough to tell you your version of Silverlight is out of date, and please upgrade.
Silverlight 1 and 2 are much more different than 2 and 3. The Mono development team has explain that implementing the full CLR for Moonlight 2 is one of the largest stages of the development process. For instance, Moonlight 2 Preview already has many Silverlight 3 features implemented. So, once Moonlight 2 is out, it will not be long before Moonlight 3.
Furthermore, I consider this the best pro-developer free software rant explaining the pros of mono in general:
http://www2.apebox.org/wordpress/rants/124/ [apebox.org]
Re:I'll pass. (Score:5, Insightful)
Moonlight supports Silverlight 1. Support for Silverlight 2 is in "preview".
Thus far the Moonlight project is "compatible" enough to tell you your version of Silverlight is out of date, and please upgrade.
Silverlight 1 and 2 are much more different than 2 and 3. The Mono development team has explain that implementing the full CLR for Moonlight 2 is one of the largest stages of the development process. For instance, Moonlight 2 Preview already has many Silverlight 3 features implemented. So, once Moonlight 2 is out, it will not be long before Moonlight 3.
Furthermore, I consider this the best pro-developer free software rant explaining the pros of mono in general:
http://www2.apebox.org/wordpress/rants/124/ [apebox.org]
And as soon as Moonlight catches up with Silverlight 2, Microsoft will have Silverlight 4 out. Let's face it, this is _exactly_ what everybody was predicting back when Moonlight started: endlessly running after Microsoft but never catching up, a perpetual existence as a "nice, but not useful for anything current" piece of software.
Re: (Score:2)
Advertising something as "multi-platform" is a joke when one platform is always at least one version ahead of the other platforms: it looks like silverlight 3 support will be available on Windows before Moonlight actually supports silverlight 2.
Now, keeping things that way might not be Microsofts intention in this case but knowing their track record [robweir.com] I'm not betting on it.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I call the bluff. To run moonlight you need mono. Microsoft holds ALL the pattens on the dotNET programming environment. When you can show me an app that runs on Mono that Microsoft gives one of those royalty free licenses to, then come talk to me.
I am an old Forth programmer so I don't mind building my own stuff. However, I would appreciate some actual "proof" that I won't get sued. A supporter of Mono saying that "Microsoft would not dare get into a patent war over d
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Just in case anyone decides to post the parent as informative, I'll point out Moonlight which is an implementation of Silverlight that runs on Linux. There is also Mac support in Firefox and Safari.
And I'll point out that it doesn't bloody work on video sites. So pretty much pointless. Offer Moonlight as a token effort, and then try to take over Adobe's niche. SOP pretty much.. Why yes Mr customer.. Silverlight is cross platform.. (It works with Vista and XP..) So your customers will be able to view the rich multimedia experience no matter what platform they use..
Air on the other hand, works great with the BBC iPlayer on Linux AND Windows. No idea if it is available for Apple.
Re: (Score:2)
Silverlight currently runs on the VAST MAJORITY (read 98%+ of non-mobile) of machines today: Windows and OS X.
Anti-MS zealotry on
Yes, it is vendor 'lock-in'. Sort of (see Moonlight). BUT IT IS NO WORSE THAN ANY OF THE ALTERNATIVES INCLUDING FLASH/FLEX/AIR AND JAVA/JAVAFX!! Plea
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You mean US military might (Score:2)
"Did you forget that it's Windows only and there goes against everything the internet stands for."
Since the origins of the Internet are from a US military project, I assume it stands for world-wide military intervention. I didn't realize that Windows was so peace-loving.
Re:I'll pass. (Score:5, Insightful)
I asked Becker about Microsoftâ(TM)s plans to support Silverlight 3 on Linux clients. He said if and when that support happens, it will most likely come from Novell, which created the Silverlight port to Linux, known as Moonlight.
So no, it's not really multi-OS. Silverlight will never come to Linux. It will always be Moonlight which will always be behind Silverlight and will always run the risk of MS undermining it.
Re: (Score:2)
http://www.apple.com/downloads/macosx/development_tools/silverlight.html [apple.com]
So yes, it is multi-OS. Linux is such a niche desktop OS that it's not a priority for any commercial entity to support it, let alone MS.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
MS invented Ajax, and for a long time only IE supported the XmlHttpRequest (it was originally designed for Outlook Web Access). So it wasn't a platform-neutral api. I guess it should have been condemned too, because it "broke" the internet, right?
Rich clients and media delivery like Flash, Silverlight, etc. are here to stay, for better or worse. The best you can do is to pitch in and help out with Moonlight, or switch to a Mac and forget about it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"Ajax is just JavaScript and XML."
Right. That's why they call it "jax" .. oh wait.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm pretty sure I have Silverlight 2 running on my Mac OSX Leopard - it's what I use to watch the ITV Catch-up service. It's possible that it's just Silverlight 1, but I'm pretty sure the button I clicked to download it said "Silverlight 2.0"...
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:I still use Windows XP. (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
I'd like to know where you got bikini models that can do binary math.
Re:But will it run on linux? (Score:4, Interesting)
No? /me doesn't care
That's just exactly the problem. TBH I dont care either. I browse with no flash plugins (if absolutely needed then yes I have a separate installed browser with it), noscript, and all the other little useful privacy goodies.
I want information and I want it fast. In all reality text is still text information is information. I dont need popups, animations, ads, etc etc the list is long.
The problem arises when technologies like flash, silverlight, etc come out. Major websites and corporations start publishing there material and information with these technologies because everyone wants to be "up to date". Then your normal user who doesn't have and idea about technologies being used comes along. These users who think the internet is that blue "e" or the little "fox around the globe" on their desktops. These types of people want content too, and if they cant view it then they start to feel they are "missing out". They just don't care and just want it to "work like designed".
Like another reader commented about "balkanizing the web" I feel that this hits the nail on the head. Think of the repercussions if major social networking sites, or other major web presences starting implementing code "X" which doesnt run on every system. (And I am not saying it hasnt already happened) They are alienating people. Which then in turn makes movements like FOSS, OSS, or other kind of free and open standards look bad because your "normal user" thinks while it sounds nice and the idea is good nothing "works as designed" and is in the end limiting their user experience.
imo I think its time that the experienced user base starts taking back the web. Implementing more "open" standards. Showing some of these major asshat corporations that it can be done differently. The internet was not intended just to make a $
Re:Moonlight? (Score:5, Insightful)
It has been around for a while and I'm sure it'll eventually get to 3.0 compatibility rather quickly
And I'm sure it'll remain consistently at least one version behind the Windows one, and still missing features, just as Microsoft would prefer. Moonlight has not even reached parity with Silverlight 2.0 as a final release, let alone 3.0.
Interesting that they focus on Flash/Flex as the competitor, when really the more important rival for developers' attentions is HTML 5, and the various APIs built on top of the open web (Google Gears etc).
If you're developing a web app, why develop using tech which will only ever work properly on Windows? I guess for a shop which thinks they'll never stop using Microsoft software for everything, it might seem like a good idea.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Of course... (Score:2)
On the other hand, more and more cell-phone devices are gaining userbase to worry about.. The picture is more interesting there...
Most mobile browsers still lack flash support, though their general capability of rendering and interacting with websites is nearing parity with desktop browsers otherwise.
So if your website can only expend effort to develop to one of Flash, Silverlight, or standard Javascript/HTML5, which do you pick? Desktop users in theory would be able to download a free browser to support t
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Microsofts assistance to Moonlight is actually increasing.
Microsoft helped Moonlight users get legal access to commercially licensed codecs by allowing Moonlight users to download the codecs from Microsoft's site. That way the codecs are covered by Microsofts licenses (Microsoft licences these codes from 3rd party IP companies).
Perhaps more importantly Microsoft also open sourced the control widgets for Silverlight so that the exact same controls can be used in Moonlight.
That said, Moonlight still hav
Re: (Score:2)
Silverlight 3 also features hardware 3D acceleration. I don't know how far Moonlight has come there. The other parts such as C# 4 and DLR Mono and Moonlight actually seems to be not to far behind.
Moonlight has actually had GPU compositing and scaling via Cairo for the last few previews, in advance of that support in Silverlight 3.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
And I'm sure it'll remain consistently at least one version behind the Windows one, and still missing features, just as Microsoft would prefer. Moonlight has not even reached parity with Silverlight 2.0 as a final release, let alone 3.0.
Functionally, Moonlight is probably somewhere between Silverlight 2 and 3. It already includes quite a few Silverlight 3 features in its current preview.
And bear in mind that Silverlight 3 isn't out yet.
Silverlight already had Mac/Win parity, and most of the code sits on top of a platform abstraction layer. So it's already proven to have full functionality outside of Windows.
Re: (Score:2)
Silverlight already had Mac/Win parity, and most of the code sits on top of a platform abstraction layer. So it's already proven to have full functionality outside of Windows.
The fundamental problem with this sort of technical argument for Silverlight is it ignores the long term strategy behind Silverlight.
The story of Microsoft and IE is a good example of why people distrust your company so much. A technically interesting browser, which foreshadowed a lot of the developments on the web now, was deliberately left to stagnate for years after Microsoft imposed it as the dominant browser. It was only picked up again after fierce competition from other companies forced Microsoft to
Re:Moonlight? (Score:4, Informative)
The story of Microsoft and IE is a good example of why people distrust your company so much. A technically interesting browser, which foreshadowed a lot of the developments on the web now, was deliberately left to stagnate for years after Microsoft imposed it as the dominant browser.
The IE6-IE7 gap wasn't due to some clever plan. IE7 was always meant to ship with Vista, and so with the Vista delays, IE6 remained on the market longer than anyone had imagined. But Microsoft certainly was at least as frustrated by how late Vista and IE7 were as anyone else.
Given that every IE6 user is also an XP user who hasn't upgraded to Vista or (soon) Windows 7, Microsoft has a big business incentive to make IE6 go away. And the very fact that IE7 and IE8 exist and are architected to balance compatibility with IE6-specific sites and standards based sites is exactly what needs to happen, so that businesses don't feel like they have to stay on IE6 forever to retain compatibility with crufty old LOB intranet pages.
HTML 5 support doesn't look like it's coming to IE8 - I wonder why not?
Er, because it shipped :)? HTML5's not coming to Safari 3, is it? I assume you're speaking of the tag; IE8 does have some other HTML5 features. Also, HTML5 is still in draft form, and no one has as full implementation of it. There's no tagged content that works in both Safari and Firefox. It's an interesting technology, but it's not final, no one has a robust implementation of what's in there yet, and the whole "what's the basline codec/format" question remains wide open.
If anything, Silverlight would be a great way to implement HTML5. Silverlgiht already has the compositing and media playback engines browsers lack, supports managed code codec plugins, and can have logic updated as managed code out of band without binary updates.
Silverlight would be a better platform to implement than will be a viable competitor to Silverlight anytime soon.
I'm sure *in theory* Silverlight could have exactly the same functionality on Windows, Mac and Linux, but until I see it actually happen, it's really of no interest.
Well, what have you seen so far? Any sites that work in Silverlight for Windows but not Mac? Any features in Silverlight which Moonlight isn't going to be able to implement? increasing divergence between Silverlight/Moonlight? It seems like things are going in the direction you're saying you want them to go.
With HTML 5 this sort of binary plugin becomes less and less relevant every day.
Why do you think HTML 5 won't be implemented with a binary plugin? Chrome uses ffmpeg. Safari uses QuickTime. Building a robust media pipeline is HARD; it'd take browser developers years to integrate that kind of functionality as a truly native part of the browser model, instead of a "oh, binary over there, you own this rectangle" approach.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No, they won't. Silverlight 3 is miles ahead of Mono technically right now.
I don't see that changing any time soon.
Re: (Score:2)
So what is best for Linux, being a version behind on Silverlight or not having it available at all?
Re: (Score:2)
The market for Flash is huge. That there is a need (perceived or real) is self evident, MS are simply trying to get in on this.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Surely you jest? The Silverlight tools [microsoft.com] are an installable plug-in to either Visual Studio 2008 or Visual Web Developer Express [microsoft.com], which is Microsoft's free IDE.
Or you can get the Silverlight(TM) 2 SDK [microsoft.com] without the extra tools to use it without any IDE at all [microsoft.com].
Microsoft have also provide support to open source projects like Eclipse4SL [eclipse4sl.org] to add support to the Eclipse IDE to "enable Java developers to use the Eclipse platform to create applications that run on the Microsoft Silverlight runtime platform".
I have never
Re: (Score:2)
If it were a competition between Moonlight and Silverlight to implement a neutral, third-party standard, I would agree. But such isnot the case.