The real problem is for the end user who has to deal with this mess and install countless codecs, plug-ins and updates to codecs and plug-ins in order to access the content.
Ever heard of FFDSHOW?
The real problem is for the end user who has to deal with this mess and install countless codecs, plug-ins and updates to codecs and plug-ins in order to access the content.
What? 2? What else is seriously competing with Flash? I'd much rather have 2 products in the field than have one go on unchallenged for years.
I'm sure they'll all be pleased to know that they can just deal with it.
This would add 1 installation, if I understand it correctly. Silverlight would have to be installed, but after that, it would use all the existing codecs, formats, etc. that other technologies use. I don't understand how 1 more than what we have today is "countless." It's not like you have to install WMV for each program that uses it.
SPM, since when did Silverlight turn to "single OS"? It's for Windowses and Mac OS X's atm, that's already more than one [wink]
And as stated already in this thread, some people are already working on Linux version of Silverlight even though it's not 100% sure yet that MS wouldn't release one themselves.
We already have one "standard" in Flash. This would be a competitor, so it would be adding 1.You just don't get it do you? What is the point of having two or more "standards" (or more accurately non-standards since they are mutually incompatible) to do the same thing?
As an end user, I would get both (if available). Both would be in-browser, so I have no switching to do. Why is this an issue at all?As an end user would you like two standards for HTML, one for Microsoft and one for other OSes and having to switch between the two in order to access Internet content.
That would take years, if it ever happened, would likely not offer all functionality and would suffer from variable implementation anyway.What is required is a single open royalty free multi-vendor standard like W3C compliant HTML from IETF.
I don't know how Flash streams video. If it is layered on top of existing codecs, this is a non-issue as Silverlight will do the same. If it's based on a proprietary Adobe codec, why are you not flaming Adobe for creating their own standard? At least Silverlight is not doing that.Are you suggesting that Silverlight will be compatible with Flash which is the major format at the moment and currently gaining market share over WMV and MOV formats? I don't think so.
That has nothing to do with what I said.Are you suggesting that Silverlight will be available on other platforms?
From the consumer point of view, there's basically no difference between your best and bad scenarios. Consumers don't give a rip who designed, implemented, etc. what they're using. They just want it to work, and it already does that.From the customer point of view the scenarios are as follows:
Open fully documented multi-vendor royalty and restriction free format available from many independent vendors - Best scenario
Adobe Flash, a single vendor, proprietary, OS neutral format - Bad scenario
Market split between Adobe Flash and MS Silverlight, a proprietary, single vendor, single OS format - Worse scenario
Market monopolised by MS Silverlight, a proprietary, single vendor, single OS format - Worst possible scenario
Silverlight is a solution to a much bigger problem set than Flash. It's unlikely that any other company can hit the same problem set. That is, IMO, its biggest strength and I hope it improves the technology we use whether it be directly or indirectly.Another good outcome would be if Adobe saw Silverlight or Gash as such a threat that they released it as an ISO standard like they did PDF, or GPLed it like Sun did for Java. The latter is unlikely though because Flash is pretty strong now with Google, Youtube and a lot of others using it and I doubt if Silverlight will have much of an impact soon.
I love it.
Because it's microsoft people assumes the worst and don't actually read up about the format.
... others are just worried about whether this will actually come true in the fullest sense of the term "cross-platform". I run Windows, OS X and Linux, what are my chances of getting the same experience under all of them (running Firefox...)? Will MS be releasing the relevant code and/or documentation to allow a decent Linux implementation on a decent timescale? Or even release a Linux version itself? How rapidly is the Silverlight spec going to evolve? Will the Mac version keep up with this evolution? Or will it "keep up" like Office for Mac keeps up? These are just unanswered questions IMO.Being able to write cross platform applications that run at native-code speed,
Thinking about it...
Being able to write cross platform applications that run at native-code speed, in a website, without an ugly control box, having hardware accelerated UI capable of 3d, and proper scalable vector graphics, one of the best video codecs out there, the .net framework with its class library and security, the HD photo image format (I'm pretty sure), all written and in your choice of language in visual studio or whatever ide.
Yeah. Competition is terrible!
As a guide, look at uptake in the browser <CANVAS> and XMLHttpRequest features. The latter has huge penetration now, and the former is being actively by many, even Google.
The key driving force for getting Web developers to adopt features is to deliver small, simple pieces of functionality, not huge megalithic platforms.
Microsoft is a massive failure on the internet, a distant third despite huge spending volumes, and continues to fail to capture the hearts and minds of web developers and even web users, and the reason is, Microsoft's culture still doesn't "get" it.
Wow, that was a pretty good video. Before seeing it, I didn't think SL had a chance, not anymore. It might take a while to break Flash's grip, but its quite possible.Like to see what Silverlight is capable of?
A company called Metaliq created a sample video edition application that runs as a silverlight application (i.e. as a browser application using the silverlight plugin).
Video can be found here. Very, very cool stuff. The sample was reportedly created in just a month.
Now try putting together something like this with Flash. Good luck.
Most people have to download and install a Flash plugin on a new PC when they want to see Flash content. I don't see how this is an insurmountable barrier for Silverlight. It will have good content if Microsoft manages to show significant advantages to content creators. And if it has good content, people will install it. It's the same way Flash got popular.Flash has >95% penetration, Javascript close to 100%. No one seriously launching a B2C venture is going to opt for Silverlight and hope users will install it. This is is dead on arrival. .NET isn't really a success either if you measure it against J2EE deployments, or LAMP.
Microsoft will probably include Silverlight in Vista SP 1 and XP SP3 and/or push it through Windows Update. I estimate that SL will have 80%+ penetration for relevant user groups in about a year.Most people have to download and install a Flash plugin on a new PC when they want to see Flash content. I don't see how this is an insurmountable barrier for Silverlight. It will have good content if Microsoft manages to show significant advantages to content creators. And if it has good content, people will install it. It's the same way Flash got popular.
Good Joke!People have been able to do this for years with Java. Java has superior execution performance compared to .NET as shown on various benchmarks like SciMark and LINPACK, Java's native graphics canvas 'Java2d' has been much more capable than Windows for over a decade and delivered cross platform capability. It is for this reason that most SVG implementations are in Java. WPF may have caught up, even surpassed J2D in some cases, but the reality is, Flash is 'good enough' and has reached a level of resource requirements vs capability that is the sweet spot for what most people need.
Good Joke!
Microsoft will probably include Silverlight in Vista SP 1 and XP SP3 and/or push it through Windows Update. I estimate that SL will have 80%+ penetration for relevant user groups in about a year.
No, I was not laughing about the performance part of your post. That's because I think it's pretty irrelavant if Java is x% percent slower or faster than .NET for environments like Silverlight. *) BTW, I have some annotations about the benchmarks you cited. **)Keep Laughing...http://blogs.sun.com/dagastine/entry/sun_java_is_faster_than1
(Yes, there is no comparison of most recent version of Java6 to most recent .NET 2 compilers, but for most of its lifetime, .NET performance sucked compared to Java, and even with .NET 2.0's recent improvements, I don't think they will beat a highly tuned Java6 VM, especially on throughput. And if you count multi-platform, you'll really lose out)
Nice! Let's see how it develops. Personally I would have preferred a self-contained VM (like Silverlight) to a full-blown JRE, but maybe I'm splitting hairs here. Anyway it's always good to have some more competition. Competition and choice is a good thing.BTW, Sun has an open-source competitor to Silverlight called JavaFX, see here: https://openjfx.dev.java.net/. Probably the best demo is the StudioMoto demo.