Silverlight must Live!

If you want to read a great analysis, read Grant Skinner’s (and while at there check out the next post, free gAlign Panel). Update: Chafic Kazoun also has a great post (Via Keith Peters’ Bit-101) .

Silverlight will certainly fail its role as the Flash killer. (Why? Because it’s from Microsoft). What I’m worried about is not Silverlight killing Flash, I’m worried about what will happen when MS guys get this. Without any other choice, desperately, MS will want to buy Adobe. Can they? I don’t know, both Adobe and Microsoft are giant companies as far as I’m concerned, but MS is known to have lots of money.

Now, I wouldn’t want that happen.

Silverlight gotta have enough success that MS won’t kill it early. Silverlight must live!

This entry was posted in Flash, Flex.

8 Responses to Silverlight must Live!

  1. Weyert says:

    I think WPF itself is nice, and Silverlight on WM is nice. But thats it. You can make same ugly stuff with Flash as with WPF. If you got some flash crappy designer…

  2. Scott Barnes says:

    Apple Quicktime and Flash = Coexistance.
    AJAX and Flash = Co-existance.
    Silverlight and Flash = Co-existance.
    People are getting a little paranoid these days about things dying :)
    Silverlight is another distribution channel offered to millions of .NET developers today and they can use their C# skillset to take their ideas and existing code into new areas.
    ActionScript 3.0 is equally the same for folks whom prefer to go down that path and do likewise
    *shrug* either way, different strokes for different folks.. kind of like Honda vs Ford, (I own a Ford?)

    Scott Barnes
    Developer Evangelist

  3. Hi Scott,
    I’m OK with co-existence. Competition is healthy (unless a company uses its monopoly to gain unfair advantage :) ).
    If MS is OK with co-existence all the way, I’ll be more than happy.
    I’ve now linked to Chafic’s post…

  4. wonderwhy-er says:

    I doubt that Silverlight will be a failure. Not a Flash killer but not a failure too. At least it has one huge advantage over Flash. It is .Net platform. Yes AS 3.0 is great in comparesment to AS 2.0. But it still sucks as a programming language in comparasment to C#
    AS far as i can tell flash will be a lider of page design and grahical things. But Silverlight will be lider of RIA complex pages…

  5. Hi wonderwhy-er,
    Do you consider .Net a success? It’s a failure if you ask me, but it will be around and if MS continues supporting it, it will become a moderate success in the end.
    Silverlight will fail as the Flash killer – that’s my point exactly. If MS thinks Silverlight will kill Flash, then Silverlight will be a failure (from that point of view).
    As for programming languages, IMO, all suck compared to Delphi Pascal…

  6. wonderwhy-er says:

    Burak KALAYCI
    I am a programmer for 7 years now. For 4 years I was using Java C++ and Delphi Pascal. If I needed to make something simple I was using Delphi Pascal. It has great IDE and language itself is good. If I was making something complex + internet based(remote application communication) then I was using Java. Why? Serialization, RPC, Object model. Before i was intrudouced to .Net in university I liked Java as a language and Delphi as IDE. But .Net brought those things together. It has great IDE. The I really like how object model is made. It has many calss lybrarys for anyoens needs. For example I need to write only 10 lines of code to make save/load/send/recive functions for nay object model I made. Want to send Physical engine state somewhere. 10 lines of code. I want save my own made 3D file? 10 liens of code. And it is only one example. What MS is trying to do is to make .Net platform good for RAD(rapid application development) technologies. Tough still C++ is better for processor intensive programs. But for Business applications .Net rocks. Tough Java is good for such things too but I never liked it as a platform. I don like JAVA IDE’s, I don’t like that JAVA applications are bugging because of some problems with JAVA VM installations. I always needed to go to some system settings. Write some classpaths and so on.
    So my conclusion.
    .Net is better then Delphi Pascal because
    1) It has 500% more build in functionalities and libraries.
    2) It has good object model .
    3) Don’t need to write manual serializes for new classes.
    4) Very good reflections in object model. I can use DOM classes to provide C# text file to compile it on a fly. Doubt that it is possible in Pascal. So I can write mutating programs that produce code and compile it in memory :D
    5) Good typing system. Every type has fromString and toString functiosn which allow easy conversions. I remember those times when I was search trough all Pascal library to find some conversions.
    6) Garbage collector. No more mistakes with wrong memory access. Thus faster development.
    Tough I suppose that .Net is slower then Pascal.
    .Net is better then Java because
    1) Better IDE
    2) Less bugs
    3) User friendly in comparesment to Java
    I haven’t programmed on java so much. Just half e year of studying in university + 3 projects. So I suppose that I have no right to say that it is better at all but I like .Net better.
    .Net is better then C++ for same reasons it is better then Pascal. + .Net much much more user friendly then C++. I always have problems with type conversions in C++, because of C++ ideology I have 40% problems with debugging in it than in .Net.
    So yes I thing .Net is good. May be not a huge success but it is very good programming platform for lazy humans. And it becomes better.

  7. Hi,
    I’ve been seriously programming since 1984 (I was 14 then), started with Locomotive BASIC, continued within a few months with Z80 Assembly. I’m professionally programming since 1987 – so it’s been about 20 years now.
    Everyone is entitled to his opinion about programming languages. For example, as a programmer, I love what I do, it’s my hobby and work… I want to allocate and free my memory, I want to have total control – a garbage collector ruins it for me. Though I can see how it can be a life saver for some and can make the development faster.
    I don’t like programming for VMs, I like to program for real CPUs. I don’t like to have my code managed, I want to write native code and manage it myself. (One exception, as Delphi got it right, I’m OK with managed Strings).
    I really don’t like case sensitivity in a programming language, I think it’s totally a wrong language design decision. But that’s my idea and no one is obliged to agree. But even that point can justify me saying that all other languages suck compared to Delphi Pascal *in my opinion*. (I use Delphi 7, not newer versions that suck – though I’ve heard Delphi 2007 does not suck that much and may be usable).
    Anyway, again, what I meant with .Net not being a success was related to expectations. Considering Microsoft’s expectations, .Net is a failure so far. It’s been so many years and I still see only few .Net apps. I, for one, don’t have the .Net runtime installed. .Net didn’t replace JAVA which is quite dead (considering again it’s promise, AS3 is now becoming the ‘write once, run everywhere’ language). Vista was supposed to run on .Net – even that didn’t happen, will you call this a success? I agree that it will get better for .NET as long as MS supports it, and certainly it’s a good platform if it meets your needs. But it won’t really be a success until it runs flawlessly on Macs and Linux boxes, and becomes widely accepted, which probably will never happen…

  8. Guillermo says:

    Java quite dead? Pfft! OpenOffice uses it (try version 3). Go to, see all the apps available. I prefer Java apps because those are truly multi-platform. Unlike Mono on Linux which is always playing catch-up with a platform they do not control.
    I think Flash will continue to be the king for RIA. JavaFX will get Java to new places and newbies into java, and Silverlight… well… it will continue to linger on like the heavy deadweight Microsoft technologies from the past like ActiveX, COM, and the like.