Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 3rd Mar 2010 20:21 UTC, submitted by poundsmack
Internet Explorer "With the latest releases of Opera, Google Chrome and Firefox continuing to push the boundaries of the web, the once-dominant Internet Explorer is looking less and less relevant every day. But we should expect Microsoft to go on the offensive at its upcoming MIX 2010 developer conference in Las Vegas, where, it has been speculated, the company will demonstrate the first beta builds of Internet Explorer 9 and possibly offer a preview release of the browser to developers. Several clues point to the possibility that the next version of IE will include broad support for HTML5 elements, vector graphics and emerging CSS standards. If Microsoft plays its cards right in Vegas, IE 9 could be the release that helps IE get its groove back in the web browser game."
Permalink for comment 412300
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[7]: Comment by Kroc
by lemur2 on Fri 5th Mar 2010 04:52 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Comment by Kroc"
lemur2
Member since:
2007-02-17

COM Automation in Silverlight is limited to Out of Browser applications, which require Full Trust, and are extremely rare in their use. Your run of the mill Silverlight website won't use it. The most common use case for COM Automation in SL4 would be in-house clients designed for consumption internally. The WebBrowser complaint is also something which again, requires a full trust OOB application to use. To be honest, you'd be hard pressed to find a scenario where you'd even want to embed a webbrowser inside a Silverlight canvas ontop of another webbrowser. Anything else? No?


Actually, yes. Two OSes (Windows and OSX) does NOT qualify as "cross-platform". Sorry. How about the plethora of other platforms which can access the web, hmmmmm?

Ok. Find me any combination of open standards which do anything even remotely close to what Silverlight does, and I'll be glad to pick the technologies apart.


The entire set. Silverlight is just a re-write (in order to obscure) SVG, DOM2/DOM3 and ECMAScript.

I've been following Silverlight since it was a glimmer in the eye of Avalon at PDC03, and I've seen (through various Avalon Alphas and WinFX CTPs) the extreme lengths they went through to try to mesh a bunch of sub-par webstandards together. The result was lacking in so much cohesion that they just scrapped it all. XAML does what it does better than XUL and HTML ControlTemplates/Styles do what they do better than CSS XAML's SVG support is on-par with SVG to the point where the differences are really small. and of course, the JIT Compiler of the .NET Framework slaps the shit out of the fastest Javascript engine out there.


Blah, blah, blah.

Why re-implement SVG? Just do the real thing, then it would be acceptable. Also implement DOM3, CSS3, HTML5, ECMAscript (correctly) with a decent JIT compiler, SMIL, etc. Why scrunge it all up and regurgitate it as Silverlight? What is the point?

If Microsoft want Silverlight/.NET to be a standard, then make it so. It is simple really ... make it so that anyone may implement, no roylaties, no patented proprietary bits (such as multimedia codecs, Winforms, ASP.NET or ADO.NET), no caveats about "non-commercial development" etc, etc. No threats. No talk of any need for "indemnity".

If Microsoft did that, then Silverlight/.NET can become a public-access web standard.

Not otherwise. No way.

People just aren't going to swallow that kind of malarky from Microsoft any more.

Reply Parent Score: 2