NBCOlympics.com using Silverlight 3, Smooth Streaming for Winter Olympics video
By Richard Lawler 
posted April 20th 2009 1:04PM
posted April 20th 2009 1:04PM
posted April 20th 2009 1:04PM
A look back on popular stories from today in a specific year.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
NOOOOOOOOOOoooooooOOOOOOoooooo!!!!!!!
Silverlight BAD!
Ok. Now that I've that off my chest. It is not so much that Silverlight is bad at a base level. It is more that it really offers nothing over flash and should never have been started in the first place. Plus, by the time Mono project's Moonlight player in Silverlight 2.0 compatible, all the sites will move to 3.0, then making the open source alternative to Silverlight (which MS even backs) relatively useless.
I always love this "it should have never been started" argument.
We need to get the DOJ after MS (sorry, M$) because we need choice in operating systems.
We need to create FF, Opera, Safari, because we need choice in web browsers.
We need to create SageTV, BeyondTV, etc because we need choice in media center applications.
We need iTunes because we need a choice in media players.
We need Open Office because we need choice in office programs.
We need MySQL because we need choice in databases.
We need Blu-Ray because HD DVD is M$' attempt to own the physical disk format.
M$ was foolish for creating .NET, we already had Java.
What was M$ thinking, we don't need Zune, we have iPods.
Sony and Nintendo were doing just fine, then M$ had to force their way into a video game console market.
Silverlight really offers nothing over flash and should never have been started in the first place.
@nohone
I honestly do not understand your argument. You seem to be supporting Microsoft's right to produce a product that competes with Adobe's flash. Which I agree, they have every right to do. I take issue with the implementation. But you support your argument by mocking other products and the people who support them that complete with Microsoft. So are you for competition, or against it? You can't have it both ways.
Also, are you trying to attribute all of that anti-Microsoft sentiment to me? Because I never said any of those things. I use MS products on 3 of my 4 systems. I have a number of issues with their implementation of Silverlight, which frankly I just don't want to re-type since my first attempt at this post somehow got lost. But to put it succinctly, Netflix was better before they switched to Silverlight.
(Reposting because of Engadget's broken reply system)
I am not mocking any of those non-Microsoft products. I am mocking the philosophy that many people have where we need fierce competition against any and all products MS makes (I agree, we do need competition), but then when Microsoft makes a product that competes, immediately it is shot down because we already have similar functionality.
I don't care how many MS products you use. You specifically said MS was wrong for wanting to try to compete with Flash ("should never have been started in the first place"), and therefore you are completely and utterly wrong.
and I for one am glad there is a viable alternative to flash.... and silverlight does offer one very big thing over flash (and the reason many of the big name companies/events are using it). that is the microsoft support behind the product.
and it really does off alot more stuff beyond that.... flash really needs to overhaul alot of things these days.
plus the less adobe in the world the better... adobe actually makes ms look good in comparison.
No kidding.
I can update Silverlight from WSUS, roll out the updates to all my managed desktops with no problems.
Flash is a PAIN to update on a large scale (seriously, Adobe.. Local admin required to update flash?) I wish we didn't have a need to install and support it.
Silverligth doesn't seem to be nearly as resource intensive as flash either and it often often better video quality. Flash needs something to whip it into shape.
The problem with "Microsoft support behind the product" is what that entails. It means a constantly moving target, minimal cross-platform support, DRM lock-in, and Windows server dependency if you want to deliver protected content and plenty more besides. Moonlight is and will continue to be a joke for cross-platform support - always 1 step behind, bereft of DRM support and dependent on Microsoft for its video codecs.
Silverlight isn't actually a bad development platform. If you know WPF and C# you'll get Silverlight although its not strictly .NET. In some ways it is superior to Flex, in some ways it is worse. For example MXML and ActionScript are okay but its a very verbose language compared to C# and lacks multithreading (meaning lots of stupid hacks involving timers). Conversely, the Flex tools are better and it has decent offline support via AIR. The same goes by comparison to JavaFX. On the one hand, the Silverlight tools are better that NetBeans' JavaFX support and it has a UI description language, but then again I could reuse an existing Java code relatively easily since JavaFX extends J2SE 6.0 rather than being some look-a-like subset. Speedwise Flex & Silverlight seem pretty similar to me. I suspect JavaFX might be faster for compiled Java classes but slower for .fx script files.
At the end of the day all these runtimes have strengths and weaknesses, but I don't believe for a second that Microsoft or Silverlight has an interest in protecting platform or browser neutrality.
The only way NBC is going to get me to watch is if they ditch the stupid tape delay for the West Coast. Sporting events should not be tape delayed.
Hulu should be into this.
At this rate, we'll be up to Silverlight v47 (or some other esoteric name) by the end of next year...
Silverlight 3 will probably be out officially in late 2009/early 2010, which will be the third version in its third year. What is so crazy about that? I have nothing against them adding features and fixes on a regular basis.
I am not mocking any of those non-Microsoft products. I am mocking the philosophy that many people have where we need fierce competition against any and all products MS makes (I agree, we do need competition), but then when Microsoft makes a product that competes, immediately it is shot down because we already have similar functionality.
I don't care how many MS products you use. You specifically said MS was wrong for wanting to try to compete with Flash ("should never have been started in the first place"), and therefore you are completely and utterly wrong.
If you need competition, then MS offers that, doesn't it? For a long time, Adobe has dominated all the graphic and video media business, now it has a competitor from SL and Expression studio. It's gonna benefit all of us because now they both improve their platforms, in terms of quality and pricing, faster than ever.
To be fair, flash has almost more than 10 year life of development whereas SL is still a newbie, so can't say it's worse than Flash in any way. Yet, i reckon SL 4 will go beyond Flex/flash and become a mature product.
Flash is bloated. Silverlight gives me better quality (especially over slower connections) and lower cpu usage. I like flash as much as the next person, but I think hating on silverlight seems rediculous.