But that doesn’t mean it is worth using it. There is a difference between adopting it, and learning it. When adopted, you use something.

The only reason Silverlight will grow any ground is because M$ will shove it down our thoughts. You know what I couldn’t find? WHY did they choose to use Silverlight over other options for the Olympics? Why, cause only good reason I can see is if M$ dropped a pretty penny, or, perhaps decided to give away some licenses that China had previously stolen(which China has been known to do) or something.

Flash was adopted, because the web needed it, and it did the job with an easier, cleaner, experience than other options at the time. Now, it is adopted by developers, and users. It’s avail for all major platforms. I would say, one of the everlasting pains in the a… for web developer is having to dev for multiple browsers.

Now they have to dev for multiple multimedia plug-ins? And to a reduced market? For no reason? Thats retarded.

The only reason anyone should have developed a Flash competitor is to provide an open source and truly standardized platform. One that every browser comes with, one every OS comes with. For the most part, the only plug-in people download today is Flash, and that is only in the case that it didn’t come pre-installed which it often does. QT installs out side of OSX are few. WMP installs outside of Windows are zero. RT installs, who uses this? Flash fixed the problem.

There can be no guess that M$ did this solely in attempt to conquer yet another market. Most nations Anti-trust laws think what M$ does is bad for everyone. And I do too. And this is obviously, and agreed upon by states and countries another attempt to break anti-trust laws.

Why not adopt Silverlight. No one needs it. It’s bad for the world economy. It is not moving things forward. It make no USER happier or any more likely to come back to your site than the existing “standards” would.

I think Microsoft dropped the ball big time with the Silverlight content. I honestly did not see too much of it. There was a big banner on msn.com that had the day’s highlights. Some videos where in Silverlight and there was one big page to load the videos on. Even the banner on msn.com (which I don’t think was part of the NBCOlympics) could have had some animations, fading effects. It was something that web 2.0 ajax only apps can do better.

Overall the nbc pages were designed by a bunch of noobs. For example, for Volleyball I couldn’t get the scores..I saw the schedule and then saw the game and then had to click again to see who won. Who designed this? A lot of the tournament type sports, there was no simple bracket to see who was in who qualified further. It was a COMPLETE mess. Other than basketball of course (because that is the only sport in the Olympics).

I think Silverlight could have been used much better! It definitetly did not put Silverlight as a RIA platform.

Silverlight as another option

I think your point is valid and I agree. I just simply do not see Flash/Flex being able to compete with Silverlight in the next couple years on an enterprise level. I think Flash/Flex will be the RIA choice for the “masses” while Silverlight will rule the Enterprise. Silverlight already has ties into some very powerful Microsoft offerings: .net, wcf, data services. Imagine this in Silverlight 3.0+ tied into SQL Server Reporting Services for visualization or Silverlight 3.0 web parts inside SharePoint or Virtual cube slices (cub) for SSAS or even ProClarity. What about the semantic web (3.0) with Mesh?

You are talking some very serious cool Web 3.0/RIA possibilities that ONLY Microsoft can offer. Flash/Flex are already integrated with the CS Suite…what else does Adobe have to offer the enterprise?!

It was funny the quote you mention about Adobe to be bought by Microsoft. I think Apple has to be seriously considering it. Market Cap wise its doable and Apple’s shares have sky rocketed so much that they can do this “cheaply”. Google is going to be using Web 2.0 and JavaFX for their Android platform. Microsoft has Silverlight for their Mobile PCs. Apple has their thing for the iPhone, but it would be really nice to bridge that with Adobe Flash/Flex and bring some more value beyond the iPhone/iPod and into the Mac areas.

Incidentally it wouldn’t equal 400 million installs, as the nbc olympic coverage was only available in the US. I could only watch olympic video online through my local yahoo page (au.yahoo.com), and not using silverlight.

OK, we are on the same page!

Yes, Flash does require a download, but 90+ percent of internet users have ALREADY done this download. So Joe average user will go to a Flash site and experience it without any problem.

Unfortunately with Silverlight(SL), that isn’t the case, and if you’re running a business, that’s not anywhere near acceptable.

I think your confusion is between understanding the difference of having something, and having to GET something. Any analysis of internet users shows a large aversion to downloading new things except for a compelling reason.

That’s SL’s challenge, and seeding the world with beta software is risky, and the jury is still out on how it all comes together.

In the end, SL will be fine, we’re behind it 100%, but facts are facts.

I don’t understand how you can say that Flash JUST works and Silverligth requires a download.

Flash requires Adobe Flash Player “http://www.macromedia.com/software/flash/about/”.

Silverlight requires the Silverlight runtime.

There is thus no difference?

Regards,

Christo Erasmus

Customers are the reason developers develop. If the customers users can’t have a seamless experience, they don’t want any part of it. They don’t understand why Flash just works, and SL requires their users to take steps to buy or use whatever they’re selling.

That’s just business. Now I do understand that the Olympics is coming up, and I’m really glad on one hand, but disturbed on another.

If users get seeded with BETA software, what happens when the BREAKING changes hit the next Beta/RC. It’s ugly user experience all over again, more downloads, less selling, less eyeballs, and more customer complaints costing time and money addressing the issues that shouldn’t exist.

My point is that SL is Intranet ready, we can control that environment, but it’s Internet unfriendly right now. Developers aren’t the important part of that equation, MS is.