What Silverlight can do for the Microsoft Download Center

If you’ve visited the Microsoft Download Center in the last month or so, you’ve probably been prompted with a pop-up asking you to try the Silverlight version of the site. Currently in beta, the new version of the MDC is meant to improve the user experience. Even if Silverlight has hit version 1.0, there is still no Linux, no Opera and no x64 support, which definitely hinders on who can visit the site. It is currently unclear whether Microsoft will completely replace the current site with the Silverlight version, but if that were to happen, it definitely would not be soon. Here’s a detailed article about what Qixing Zheng, from Microsoft Canada, believes Silverlight can do for the Microsoft Download Center.

View: Microsoft Download Center: Silverlight or not?

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Dell gives Geek Squad the Thumbs Up

Next Story

MySpace and Attorneys General Promote Internet Safety

30 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

does anyone have a cartoon silverlight animation that we can view? if it makes cartoons easier, then count me in!

People, you need to get with the times, if you are running anything other than a microsoft OS then you might not need silverlight at the moment, if you are running win 95/98 on an old computer with 50mb hd, I understand a 14mb download is too much for you, but with todays computers running windows there are no problem running silverlight,

vista COMES with .net framework, other OS can download it, which you should anyway, silverlight or not, lots of awesome software made using .net.

HD space, if you dont have enough you are crazy, HD are sooo cheap now... just get with the times...


and all you mac and linux people whining, why are you on MICROSOFTs webpage downloading stuff anyway?? and you guys only represent 10% of the marketshare anyway... who gives a **** about silverlight not working on your OS?? they have promised support and you will get it, but maybe not right away...

I do however feel sorry for you if other websites go silverlight only on your ass and you really want to use that webpage, but thats not microsofts fault.

thankfully very few websites use Silverlight and lets hope it stays that way.

And by your comments on other OS, then its not really going to help Silverlight OS.

Isn't this basically like flash? What's wrong with Java, as well? Seems a bit unnecessary aside for the publicity MS gets etc etc.

Harreh said,
Isn't this basically like flash? What's wrong with Java, as well? Seems a bit unnecessary aside for the publicity MS gets etc etc.

As with office own format.

As with there own XML format

as with there own media format

as with there own version of Javascript

As with non standards internet browser

its about control

evo_spook said,
its about control

Think before you speak. It's meant to offer higher end controls than Flash, thanks to its C# support and it streams videos using the new VC1 codec (Microsoft was part of the team for this).

There are things Silverlight can do that Flash couldn't dream of.

mrmckeb said,

Think before you speak. It's meant to offer higher end controls than Flash, thanks to its C# support and it streams videos using the new VC1 codec (Microsoft was part of the team for this).

There are things Silverlight can do that Flash couldn't dream of.

ROTFLMAO !!!!1 so you are saying, that non of it is not about controling a medium??

HA haaa....

mrmckeb said,

There are things Silverlight can do that Flash couldn't dream of.


Tell me these things that Silverlight can do that Flash don't, tell me what standard of your flash knowledge is aswell

evo_spook said,

As with office own format.

As with there own XML format

as with there own media format

as with there own version of Javascript

As with non standards internet browser

its about control

They're, their, there - it''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''s all the bloody same, ain't it?

mrmckeb said,

Think before you speak. It's meant to offer higher end controls than Flash, thanks to its C# support and it streams videos using the new VC1 codec (Microsoft was part of the team for this).

There are things Silverlight can do that Flash couldn't dream of.

Streaming videos? That's totally new! I guess you haven't heard about...

YOUTUBE. I bet no one dreamt about that already.

But yeah, C# support, totally awesome. Their own language implementation. Isn't that control again?

Java + Ajax + PHP + Flash. Silverlight is not filling any gap.

EDIT: What's wrong with the edit stuff? I see some weird breaks...

Azmodan said,

Streaming videos? That's totally new! I guess you haven't heard about...

YOUTUBE. I bet no one dreamt about that already.

But yeah, C# support, totally awesome. Their own language implementation. Isn't that control again?

Java + Ajax + PHP + Flash. Silverlight is not filling any gap.

EDIT: What's wrong with the edit stuff? I see some weird breaks...

As far as I know Flash can be integrated with C#

When you say no x64 support, you mean no x64 Internet Explorer support. It works fine in Vista x64, as long as you don't load the x64 version of IE (which doesn't work with a lot of plugins).

Thats not the problem, most of the sites using silverlight, are pro MS ones pushing the new technology, getting the graphic designers and new media designers is going to be much much harder, for the moment at the very least they will stick with Flash, I can't think of one MS technology thats being widely embraced by the Designer community

mrmckeb said,
Because they all ues Macs hahaha.

Not all, no, and there is no MS product beyond the operating system of the ones that do.

It will take a long time for them to take over from Flash, programmers might prefer Silverlight, but I'm reckoning Designers will stick with Flash and the integration with Illustrator and Photoshop.


Take the MS version of PDF, might have being a good format, but PDF has a strangle hold on print shops

I have x64 XP and I'm having so many issues with it, i'm going back to 32-bit XP as this, flash sites sometimes crash on me and many programs I use have issues sometimes. Which I never had in 32-bit. I don't see why x64 isn't bein adopted more in the software industry, what's the point on having x64 Windows out. Ergh!

thenay said,
I have x64 XP and I'm having so many issues with it, i'm going back to 32-bit XP as this, flash sites sometimes crash on me and many programs I use have issues sometimes. Which I never had in 32-bit. I don't see why x64 isn't bein adopted more in the software industry, what's the point on having x64 Windows out. Ergh!

I don't know how this relates to this, but any application that's full 32bit should work as well or a bit slower as in 64bit. I've never had that kind of issues with flash, it's never crashed on me while I'm browsing a "heavy" flash site. If you don't have more than 4GBs of Memory, then I can't find a good reason to migrate to x64.

thenay said,
I have x64 XP and I'm having so many issues with it, i'm going back to 32-bit XP as this, flash sites sometimes crash on me and many programs I use have issues sometimes. Which I never had in 32-bit. I don't see why x64 isn't bein adopted more in the software industry, what's the point on having x64 Windows out. Ergh!

Flash (which is only available in 32-bit form) works the same on x64 versions of Windows as it does on 32-bit versions. It only runs in the 32-bit version of IE, but the 32-bit version of IE is the default version and the one that everybody uses.

64-bit IE really isn't necessary, since IE isn't compute or memory-intensive enough for it to matter. Of course the main reason to stick with the 32-bit version is that all your add-ins and plug-ins still work.

Flash and Silverlight are just two of many examples.

This article says "x64 isn't supported" which is not entirely true. Silverlight works great on x64 versions of Windows. The fact that there's no 64-bit version isn't really a big deal at this point.

Not a fan of Flash itself, especially when it makes a site 5 times as long to load and when it has loaded, theres no visible sign of why they didn't just use good design with xhtml, so I'm especially not in favour of what is essentially a poor mans flash. Designers are snobs, it will take years for many to move onto silverlight, if you went to a studio saying I'm well trained in silverlight, they'd look at you like a amateur much the same as if you used painter instead of PS, coral instead of Illustrator/Freehand and MS Publisher instead of Quark/Indesign.

poor mans flash ?

have you even tried silverlight. I absolutelyhate flash sites, but silverlight I've come to really like. as long as it's not used for the entire site anyway.

it faster and smaller to load than flash, and it's a lot smoother, actually providing smooth animations where flash tends to have these nasty ugly ass jerky stuff.

t's also a lot more powerful at it's core than flash.

it depends on what microsoft is trying to do with using sliverlight for the next version of the download center...

are they trying to demonstrate and advertise the power of silverlight?
or
are they really lazy an refuse to use xhtml, css, and ajax techniques?

HawkMan said,
...
it faster and smaller to load than flash
...
I don't know about the media (output file) size, but a flash player isn't that much to add. Silverlight (or Moonlight, in my case), however requires me to add in the .net framework (Mono, in my case). You cannot have Silverlight without the .net framework.

I seriously find it hard to believe that this whole support system to run silverlight is using less resources than Flash. On my system, Flash 9 is a 1.4MB RPM download. Just the Mono core (don't know what other components may be required) is a 14MB file. That is a factor of 10 for the executables (no, I didn't cheat and use source code size). Once that is in place, then I can go get Moonlight. I don't think so.

My story might be different if I required or used .net for anything else. But I sure has Hades don't need it just to play Sliver/Moonlight.

Incredible that Hawkman's still on the site, throwing random, pro-Microsoft comments without any cite, source or even if he goes against all odds, spreading nonsense FUD like a rabid dog on a kindergarden, while I got banned for a while because of some random rant against this type of sermons.

Anyways, Silverlight will gain bigger support, and it will be on Windows 7 by the looks of it, ergo the client availability won't be a problem. What it's going to be a problem, is making something to compete with Adobe Flash CS3, because Expression Blend isn't that easy to use. But, again, this might change when Windows 7 gets out.

There is nothing wrong with being "pro-" anything. As long as you can discuss things in a factual reasoned manner, it's all good. I didn't see anything offensive in his post. I was just discussing one point of it.

markjensen said,
I don't know about the media (output file) size, but a flash player isn't that much to add. Silverlight (or Moonlight, in my case), however requires me to add in the .net framework (Mono, in my case). You cannot have Silverlight without the .net framework.

I seriously find it hard to believe that this whole support system to run silverlight is using less resources than Flash. On my system, Flash 9 is a 1.4MB RPM download. Just the Mono core (don't know what other components may be required) is a 14MB file. That is a factor of 10 for the executables (no, I didn't cheat and use source code size). Once that is in place, then I can go get Moonlight. I don't think so.

My story might be different if I required or used .net for anything else. But I sure has Hades don't need it just to play Sliver/Moonlight.

Silverlight DOES NOT require .NET framework to be installed; the 2MB file is all you need to run Silverlight apps.

tntomek said,

Silverlight DOES NOT require .NET framework to be installed; the 2MB file is all you need to run Silverlight apps.

On Linux remember.......

evo_spook said,
On Linux remember.......
I forgot to specify "Linux" for my example. Several of the items I mentioned were Linux-specific (RPM, Mono, Moonlight), but I can see someone not familiar with Linux might not know.

markjensen said,
You cannot have Silverlight without the .net framework.

Interesting how all that works, isn't it? It all leads back to promoting Windows over all other operating systems. This isn't an antitrust violation?

The US DoJ and FTC are asleep at the wheel as usual, while Microsoft continues its monopolistic terror.

Azmodan said,
What it's going to be a problem, is making something to compete with Adobe Flash CS3, because Expression Blend isn't that easy to use.

<quote name="Jame Gumb" src="The Silence of the Lambs">You don't know what pain is!</quote>
You think Expression Blend is hard, try hand editing XAML.