Microsoft aims for Silverlight at end of the tunnel
SAN FRANCISCO--By next year, half of all devices connected to the Internet will have Silverlight, says Microsoft's Walid Abu-Hadba.
That will still be just a fraction of the number of phones and computers that have a version of Adobe's Flash, but Abu-Hadba said that it will be enough to really start changing the mindset of those who create content for the Web.
Abu-Hadba
(Credit: Microsoft)"It's a totally different game," said, Abu-Hadba, who leads Microsoft's developer and platform evangelism efforts. Abu-Hadba noted that Microsoft now has a set of features that can appeal to both those streaming large-scale Web video content, as well as software developers aiming to create programs that run inside of businesses.
His comments came following Microsoft's launch Friday of Silverlight 3, the latest version of its technology for rich media applications. The new version allows for programs that work in and out of the browser, supports up to 1080p streaming, and lets users pause and rewind a live video stream.
One of the areas where Microsoft still has work to do is on the phone side. Microsoft has long talked about offering Silverlight on phones, even hoping to bring it to Apple's iPhone, but today it is not commercially available for any phone.
"It's taken a little bit longer than we would have wanted, absolutely," said Abu-Hadba.
However, Abu-Hadba and fellow developer unit executive Scott Guthrie say that Microsoft has also taken the approach that it wants the Silverlight experience on the phone to match that offered on the PC, as opposed to having different versions as Adobe does with Flash. Also, Guthrie said, the landscape for the phone has changed dramatically, with more phones adding the kind of graphics chips necessary to do hardware-based acceleration.
"We want to make sure people have a 'wow' experience," Guthrie said.
Microsoft is beta testing its phone software for both Android and Windows Mobile and announcements are expected at this fall's Professional Developer Conference in Los Angeles.
"You are going to hear a lot more details about it later this year," Guthrie said. (For more on Guthrie's take on Silverlight 3, check out the video embedded below.)
For his part, Abu-Hadba said he doesn't wonder if Silverlight will be around 10 years from now, but rather whether his rival will. He said that Adobe has committed itself to moving from a design-oriented company to one that aims to offer a general purpose Web platform, something he said the company doesn't have the resources or experiences to make happen.
"I don't believe they have the assets or the organizational structure," he said. "That's what we do for a living at Microsoft."
Abu-Hadba said Adobe would be better off picking a specialty and sticking to it.
"I don't think they will exist in 10 years in the form they are today," he said. It's a bold statement, he agreed, but added how unthinkable it would have been to predict in 2000 that Sun Microsystems would go away.
I'm checking in with Adobe. I'm thinking it might have a somewhat different take on the subject.
During her years at CNET News, Ina Fried has changed beats several times, changed genders once, and covered both of the Pirates of Silicon Valley. These days, most of her attention is focused on Microsoft. E-mail Ina. 
History also shows that Microsoft's MO is to choose a market, devote immense resources in the creation of a me-too product, go after market share, and when that is achieved, deliberately allow their products to rot while they reallocate resources to the next me-too product.
They both can go to hell. Open standards are the way to go, and the companies that embrace that fact now will be that much further ahead when the MS and Adobe web platforms wither away.
I'm all for open standards and non-reliance on a single vendor and will be the first to accept that using Flash for video delivery is straight up daft. I also wouldn't miss Flash banners and website intros. But for the advanced uses of Flash there is no 'open' (i.e. W3C approved) standard capable of replicating what Flash (or Silverlight) can do. At the same time most people don't care about standards so long as it works. All this frothy proclaiming of HTML 5 being the death of these technologies is nothing more than starry-eyes idealism.
Microsoft's products are already responsible for an overwhelming proportion of virii/worms/trojans/bots 'connected to the internet', and now they are going to foist another potentially massive bundle of security holes on people who blindly click 'yes' when asked to install new software 'Certified by Microsoft' (if they get the option).
Makes me gag. Sort your systems out first boys, and then worry about going head-to-head with Adobe.
In the mean time HTML5 will make your player obsolete.
A true Virus for Vista does not exist as they trigger UAC.
They did fix their systems nice try though troll.
All OS's have bugs and exploits. That's not an excuse for them but if Microsoft (or any other OS vendor) would sit on their hands and not ship it until a product was absolutely perfect would result in another Duke Nukem Forever.
Microsoft's products are not responsible for malware. People looking to make a quick buck, or those that get some twisted satisfaction from harming others, are the one's who are responsible.
F-Secure recently posted document samples that have been used as bait in targeted phishing attacks. Even savvy users have fallen victim, so it goes far beyond users that "blindly" click yes to installing MS software. Until there is a concerted global effort, including standardized laws that address online criminal activity, malware will just get worse. It amazes me that people still fall victim to the Nigerian scams, but they do.
Vista running IE8 in protected mode is very secure. I consider it to be the most secure option available. Microsoft is actually doing quite well in closing security vulnerabilities in both its OS and applications. Apple has been doing just as bad if not worse than MS regarding time to fix bugs. Check out Secunia, CERT, or the National Vulnerability Database at web.nvd.nist.gov for unresolved issues affecting Apple software. There are also serious Linux server issues. There are no OS's that are immune to hacks. Windows gets hit with the most simply because it has the largest install base by far.
http://www.iis.net/media/experiencesmoothstreaming
Scott seems to be conveniently ignoring the fact that the upcoming mobile version of Flash Player will have the same functionality as Flash Player 10 for the desktop. Adobe has announced the beta for Android, Symbian, Palm Web OS and Windows Mobile will be out in October at Adobe's big MAX conference. I would be surprised if Scott what his main competitor is doing in the mobile space, but it's better spin to ignore the facts.
Like he mentions Silverlight working in Linux *today*, yet Moonlight the Silverlight Linux port only released their equivalent of Sliverlight 1.0 early this year. The port of Silverlight 2.0 is still in alpha, so any new features for Silverlight 3.0 are certainly not available today.
Funny thing is that while Scott claims that Flash might not be around anymore in 10 years, the video of the interview is displayed in YouTube using Flash, not Silverlight. It's also a bold statement to make when early Silverlight adopters who were previously used as Silverlight showcases, like MLB.com and the New York Times have dropped have dropped Silverlight in favour of Flash and Adobe AIR.
- by betelgeuse68 July 12, 2009 7:02 PM PDT
- Excerpt:
- Reply to this comment
-
-
- by wanorris July 15, 2009 10:44 AM PDT
- > Right-o. Because we know Adobe is purely a not-for-profit and doesn't make a dime from its software...
-
-
(18 Comments)"I don't believe they have the assets or the organizational structure," he said. "That's what we do for a living at Microsoft."
------
Right-o. Because we know Adobe is purely a not-for-profit and doesn't make a dime from its software...
-M
Adobe is a company built around tools for design professionals (graphic design, video, etc.), and is the best company in the world in catering to that market. When anyone else -- say, Microsoft -- tries to release products into that market, they have enormous disadvantages relative to Adobe, because Adobe has decades of experience and strong customer relationships.
Adobe has never been a company specializing in tools for professional developers. They don't have the expertise of people like Sun/Oracle's Java group (along with the Eclipse Foundation), and they don't have the expertise Microsoft has in this area.
Maybe this can be overcome, and maybe it can't, but it seems like a valid point on it's face.