Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 9th Jul 2009 21:20 UTC
Internet & Networking A day earlier than expected, Microsoft has released version 3 of its Flash alternative Silverlight, including a number of related tools to aid in Silverlight development. It comes with a whole lot of new features.
Thread beginning with comment 372739
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: Wow
by lemur2 on Fri 10th Jul 2009 02:27 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Wow"
lemur2
Member since:
2007-02-17

Except its not being bundled with the computers, its being used as an optional update. Also, I hardly see anti-trust being entered into the equation when Flash dominates it in terms of web usage. Let me reinforce the fact that its an OPTIONAL update. On XP most users wont even KNOW to download it since you have to manually go to Windows update, do a custom search and then add it. Vista/Win7 makes it easier since its listed under the built in client but again, you have to click View All Updates and its listed as...OPTIONAL. So, how is that abusing their position? Considering flash comes bundled on most computers now adays by the OEM and is virtually required for all web usage. Silverlight atleast as the possibility of being open and Microsoft is working with (though slowly) the linux base to port it


You don't need proprietary junk like Silverlight or Flash that is constrained to run only on platforms which the proprietary owners decide to port it to.

Everyone is immeasurably better off if no one vendor gets to decide which devices can and which cannot support rich multimedia content. This is so fundamental it can be considered as a guiding principle for the entire internet.

To that end, W3C standards HTML5 + SMIL (+ open codecs) + SVG + ECMAScript + animated PNG are far, far preferable to either Silverlight OR Flash.

http://blog.dailymotion.com/2009/05/27/watch-videowithout-flash/

http://www.dailymotion.com/openvideodemo

The W3C open standards are just as capable performance-wise too.

http://pinstack.blogspot.com/2009/06/hey-youtube-we-want-open-video...
http://people.xiph.org/~maikmerten/youtube/

"It is possible to use Theora to serve streaming content on the web without inflating bitrate or dramatically decreasing quality compared to the H.264 encoding setup used by the web's most popular online streaming service."


Edited 2009-07-10 02:31 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[5]: Wow
by anduril on Fri 10th Jul 2009 02:33 in reply to "RE[4]: Wow"
anduril Member since:
2005-11-11

Except there is no standardized codec now for video watching with HTML5...so its going to be another cluster. How many different implementations and bastardizations will there be? (again, NO standard) Hell, when is HTML5 actually going to be finished? Its been worked on since what...originally 2004 and 2007? So in 2015 it might be finished?

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[6]: Wow
by lemur2 on Fri 10th Jul 2009 02:53 in reply to "RE[5]: Wow"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

Except there is no standardized codec now for video watching with HTML5...so its going to be another cluster. How many different implementations and bastardizations will there be? (again, NO standard) Hell, when is HTML5 actually going to be finished? Its been worked on since what...originally 2004 and 2007? So in 2015 it might be finished?


It is exactly as "finished" as proprietary interests have allowed it to be.

It isn't through lack of trying, or any fault with HTML5, that proprietary interests have held it up from being approved.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Html5
"HTML 5 was initially said to become a game-changer in Web application development, making obsolete such plug-in-based rich Internet application (RIA) technologies as Adobe Flash, Microsoft Silverlight, and Sun JavaFX. Such applications would be made obsolete by specifying a standard video codec for all browsers to use. However, in July 2009, the editor of the burgeoning draft specification announced the dropping of Ogg Theora, the open standard, due to opposition from Apple, as well as the rival H.264 codec due to opposition from other browser vendors. This means HTML 5 does not currently specify a common video codec for Web development."


In other words, there is nothing wrong with HTML5 other than that some big proprieatry vendors feel they won't be able to rip people off enough. In other words, the only thing missing from HTML5 being complete is the specification of the codec.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ogg_controversy

Not to worry though, HTML5 + Ogg Theora and Vorbis codecs will work today in Firefox, and it will soon also work in:

"Opera Software and Mozilla have been advocates for including the Ogg formats into the HTML standard and have included native decoding for these formats in their browsers. Google is planning on including Vorbis and Theora support in Chrome."


... Opera and Chrome as well as Firefox.

Almost 50% of the desktop web browser market will support it, even though it isn't an official endorsed standard.

PS: I have heard that there is an open source project under way right now to create an ActiveX plugin for IE that would add support for HTML5 and Ogg format codecs.

Opera and Firefox represent a huge slice of the non-desktop-platform web browser market as well.

Edited 2009-07-10 03:06 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[5]: Wow
by modmans2ndcoming on Fri 10th Jul 2009 14:24 in reply to "RE[4]: Wow"
modmans2ndcoming Member since:
2005-11-09

Javascripts SUCKS!!!!! sorry, but is is a horrid tool that is being shoehorned into places it does not belong.

And yeah... silverlight is soooooo proprietary that they allow the open source crowd to reimpliment it in all ways.

Reply Parent Score: 2