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.
“The other one is a biggie, and it's something very noticeable in the videos: touch sensitivity is pretty bad. Using the virtual keyboard proved to be far too painful, and we're pretty sure it wasn't multitouch-friendly.”
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.