Microsoft To Release Silverlight 2 In Late Summer
Posted by Steven Parker on 07 April 2008 - 10:46 · 30 comments & 13903 views
About the Author
Full name: Steven Parker
Forum name: Neobond
Contact: via forum PM
Submissions: Normal · Headline
Full name: Steven Parker
Forum name: Neobond
Contact: via forum PM
Submissions: Normal · Headline
Slashdot It!
Submit to reddit
Submit to blinklist
Bookmark on del.icio.us
Add to furl
Share on Facebook
Add to Windows Live
Add to Google- Advertisement
-
-
#1 Posted by +Antaris on 07 Apr 2008 - 10:57
- Has anyone started using Siliverlight yet? I've only done bits and pieces here and there, but with v2 we are getting the client-side mini CLR, so we can move a lot of the processing to the client side.
The problem I can see, is that many people are downloading SL, but only Microsoft seems to be using it.
-
(1 reply)
#2 Posted by David Arno on 07 Apr 2008 - 11:03
- Back in January, Microsoft announced that Silverlight 2 would be used to provide online content for the Beijing Olympics. They start on the 8th of August. Thus it has been public knowledge since January that Silverlight 2 would be released before 8th August.
-
(1 reply)
#3 Posted by OceanMotion on 07 Apr 2008 - 11:27
- Been to a few sites were it's used, Microsoft ones obviously but it seems really solid, no issue installing, nice and simple. Video quality is excellent on streaming sites.
-
(2 replies)
#4 Posted by HalcyonX12 on 07 Apr 2008 - 11:43
- Flash uses Sorensen H.263, H.264, and VP6 encoding, it wouldn't really add that much to support all video formats. But MS has a history of not wanting to license from Sorensen. Flash is free to download so I'm guessing the licensing costs aren't prohibitive, it's more for political reasons.
-
#4.1 Posted by Express on 07 Apr 2008 - 16:14
- It was Sorensen which refused to license codecs to Microsoft.
As a result, Microsoft had to remove support for quicktime files in later versions of Windows Media Player.
WMP 6 used to support quicktime. -
#4.2 Posted by HalcyonX12 on 07 Apr 2008 - 22:35
- (Express said @ #4.1)It was Sorensen which refused to license codecs to Microsoft.
As a result, Microsoft had to remove support for quicktime files in later versions of Windows Media Player.
WMP 6 used to support quicktime.
That's a different codec, Flash uses Spark, which Sorenson was able to license out. As far as WMP I hadn't heard about that problem... I only remember this and this but I never heard about a problem where MS wasn't able to license the codec, do you have any information? As far as I know, QuickTime is now based on MPEG-4 so Apple would be able to do whatever it wants, and any past agreements with Sorenson were probably over when that happened. Those codecs haven't been mainstream in QuickTime since 2002 when QT6 was released with MPEG-4 support.
Last edited by HalcyonX12 on 07 Apr 2008 - 23:50
-
(2 replies)
#5 Posted by Vandalsquad on 07 Apr 2008 - 12:12
- I like silverlight alot more then flash.. and so does anyone I talk to thats actually used it.
-
#5.1 Posted by HalcyonX12 on 07 Apr 2008 - 13:13
- (Vandalsquad said @ #5)I like silverlight alot more then flash.. and so does anyone I talk to thats actually used it.
Probably because it's not as widely used as flash. Just wait until you see silverlight ads, silverlight intro screens, sites that insist on only using silverlight, or there's something you want to download but silverlight makes it annoying for you, etc etc -
#5.2 Posted by theyarecomingforyou on 07 Apr 2008 - 15:39
- My experience has been the opposite - I haven't been impressed by the Silverlight usage on Microsoft sites. I'm not going to write off the entire technology based upon one preview but certainly nothing to drop Flash for. Also, I don't trust Microsoft with a replacement to Flash.
-
(1 reply)
#6 Posted by Magallanes on 07 Apr 2008 - 13:53
- Silverlight runs on Linux or Mac?.
Anyways, flash is (was) cool but to work on Actionscript is a real pain in the a**, the "ide" (Flash) is pretty outdate, there are many unclear concept and it's hard to manage/maintenance resources. MS can success in this point and bring many developers to do project on it. -
#6.1 Posted by MioTheGreat on 07 Apr 2008 - 14:44
- Silverlight has an OSX version. They're working on a Linux version with the mono team.
-
(1 reply)
#7 Posted by David Arno on 07 Apr 2008 - 14:42
- Silverlight runs on Macs already, and Microsoft are indirectly supporting the Moonlight project, which will bring Silverlight to Linux. Later releases should including Windows CE and Symbian versions too. MS are serious about cross platform on this one; they have to be if they want to compete with Flash/ Flex.
-
#7.1 Posted by
markjensen on 07 Apr 2008 - 15:23
- "Indirect support" is the same commitment as "indirectly serious" about cross-platform.
-
(1 reply)
#8 Posted by Screaming Slave on 07 Apr 2008 - 14:53
- This may be a great alternative to Flash for some web developers, but as an "end user", I see no reason to use this over Flash. In conjunction to, perhaps, but never by itself. Oh, and the fact that it doesn't play Flash videos? Nice move. Not so much of an alternative at all.
-
#8.1 Posted by sialivi on 07 Apr 2008 - 17:24
- (Screaming Slave said @ #
This may be a great alternative to Flash for some web developers, but as an "end user", I see no reason to use this over Flash. In conjunction to, perhaps, but never by itself. Oh, and the fact that it doesn't play Flash videos? Nice move. Not so much of an alternative at all.
That post made no sense what so ever.
In conjunction to? Exactly what is it you think is missing from silverlight? And you don't see a reason to use silverlight by itself, but possibly silverlight and flash on the same page? Makes no sense.
I don't know why people bring up lack of .flv support. I don't know any webdevs that have their video assets as .flv files before they encode them for the web, so it makes no difference to them if they encode to .flv or vc-1.
-
(1 reply)
#9 Posted by garpunkal on 07 Apr 2008 - 15:37
- quite a few people have started using silverlight, however version 2 is the first version to fully incorporate c#.
sites such as hard rock cafe (http://memorabilia.hardrock.com/), nbc, microsoft and more are using it now.
As a web developer myself, we are in the process of investigating the possibilities. I think its just going to take time to fully adopt this product. -
#9.1 Posted by HalcyonX12 on 07 Apr 2008 - 16:03
- (garpunkal said @ #9)quite a few people have started using silverlight, however version 2 is the first version to fully incorporate c#.
sites such as hard rock cafe (http://memorabilia.hardrock.com/), nbc, microsoft and more are using it now.
As a web developer myself, we are in the process of investigating the possibilities. I think its just going to take time to fully adopt this product.
Hmm running complex code on a client through a plugin (Although it doesn't seem to really be a plugin but an entire API), I really hope they secured the product. I'm sure content providers will love silverlight though as it apparently implements DRM. I'm just concerned that MS is trying to sidestep web standards by offering a platform that they feel will drive the next-generation web, but is under their control. What if silverlight becomes as important as HTML? It is patent encumbered and controlled by a single entity describing the standard.
-
#10 Posted by Lasker on 07 Apr 2008 - 15:37
- It's a lot more diificult to develop a silverlight animation than doing in flash, I am still trying without success in Microsoft Expression Blend
-
#11 Posted by garpunkal on 07 Apr 2008 - 15:40
- i think personally the most benefit will come from the interaction between designers and developers with silverlight. I see silverlight as more a media streaming piece of software, whilst flash as more a animation/game application
-
#12 Posted by Doli on 07 Apr 2008 - 16:46
- I cant wait to see what Expression Studio 2 brings to Silverlight development
-
#13 Posted by rdf8585 on 07 Apr 2008 - 16:53
- Almost anyone with mlb.tv will agree - silverlight blows.
-
#14 Posted by sialivi on 07 Apr 2008 - 16:54
- I've done some silverlight 2 development and enjoyed it. Learning curve wasn't as steep as flash and since I already know java the transition to C# took about 5 minutes. And it's great that you don't have to spend money on expensive tools
-
#16 Posted by sialivi on 07 Apr 2008 - 17:13
- There are several known crash bugs, across all supported browsers
-
#17 Posted by MadDog on 07 Apr 2008 - 21:24
- Why do I have the feeling that the Silverlight vs. Flash battle will go the way of the WINS vs. DNS fight years ago...
-
#18 Posted by hotdog963al on 08 Apr 2008 - 08:15
- ITV catchup makes me want to install it, but I really don't want to.
-
#20 Posted by Quasar2112 on 09 Apr 2008 - 02:24
- Yay. I installed Silverlight. So now what?
Until there is a video sharing web site in the same vein as Youtube but dealing in Silverlight, I don't care.
Silverlight 2.0 supports VC-1, WMV, MP3 and WMA content, but Microsoft has no plans to support the Flash video (.flv), used by Youtube and many other Websites, said Thapliyal. Microsoft's rationale here is to avoid paying licensing fees and to keep the Silverlight download file size as small as possible, he added.
"Silverlight isn't designed with an extensible codec model in mind, so there is no date/version announced for this," wrote Thapliyal. A second Silverlight 2.0 beta is due in May, and this version will be very similar to the final release, according to Thapliyal. He said no details are available about the roadmap for Silverlight for mobile, or Silverlight v.Next, also known as Silverlight 3.