John I don't know about that post. He makes a lot of good points but is definitely slanted. I really don't want to post a whole "you're wrong here, here, and here" type response but he did make a few points that weren't exactly correct or were slightly off.

Now, as for SL losing ground, etc. I'd say I agree it has. Initially it was this big FLASH KILLER and everyone who hated Flash rooted for it. Now, not so much so.

In the grand scheme, after the smoke was gone, I think SL installs are going to stay steady and grow strategically as SL 2 releases but SL will never see a massive increase until MSFT provides a full set of development tools for Mac. You seriously can't expect a cross-platform technology to take off without allowing multiple platforms to build products/projects.

Just my 2 cents.

People don't mind installing any kind of plugin if there is an immediate payoff, like watching some video for the Olympics, youtube or somebody's wedding photo gallery.

But the bigger challenge facing Microsoft and Siverlight is getting the design community to switch over from an established platform (Flash) and support any technology that is from Microsoft. The mac faithful are pretty negative toward Adobe but they're even more rabidly against Microsoft.

The barrier for serious adoption for Silverlight is some good content and a reason for people to install it. I've yet to stumble across any Silverlight content whatsoever. It's pretty much invisible and will never make any serious run against Flash.

I too agree the problem is getting developers and content providers to switch. All efforts in that regard (Olympics, Inauguration) were done due to Microsoft's "financial support" and you can't keep on doing that forever, it's just not viable to burn the money.

Microsoft has to convince developers and honestly it has been doing a very poor job. I've been a Flash developer for 10 years, and while I have looked at SL as a viable technology once and have learned C# in advance because I thought I'd be using it, every time I see Microsoft talking about it, it distances me more and more from it simply because their narrative is full of exaggerations and lies. I'm a developer, I don't need to be lied to to "get" a technology. When I see Microsoft saying something about SL and trying to argue that this is the first time such a feature is available, or worse, when I see Microsoft comparing SL with Flash and coming out with the notion that SL is the clear winner on every regard, it strikes me as desperate attempts to gather support from less knowledgeable developers, not from people who know what they're talking about and who know they're not true.

Microsoft is ignoring the negatives the platform currently has, like a lack of certain features and low penetration, and pretending all is perfect and well. This is what really pushes my buttons. If they had acknowledged they had a good start but still needed to do a lot, it'd be pretty different. I may be an anomaly, but I prefer a more transparent evangelism - it sort of molds how the development community at large behaves. And in that regard, the Actionscript community is wonderful to work with, be it when looking for help or when looking into third-party open-source libraries to use; with its FUD, I'm not sure Microsoft is seeding that same kind of attitude.

That may change in the future, I've seen MS-led communities with a much more positive attitude (XNA). But right now, as /humane/ as this sounds, I really think Microsoft's communication with SL to the community must change. They must acknowledge we're not all retards and if they want people to adopt or switch from similar technologies, they need to stop lying first.

Again with this whole "my platform is better than your platform" crap. When is this nonsense going to stop? Everybody should use the tool that best solves the issue at hand.

I have used Flash since version four. I am not locked into it nor in love with it. It just works. It solves my problems nicely. One day Silverlight may be the best choice for something I'm working on. If that's the case then I'll use it, until then I have no reason.

I really wish people would stop using the whole "Flash makes things pretty but is useless otherwise" argument since it makes no sense. Flash started out as a designer's tool. It wasn't until recently that Flash started getting into enterprise type applications. Therefore most of the features would be designer oriented. Then there's Flex. Most people who make the Flash pretty argument totally ignore Flex as if it didn't exist.

People don't know what Flash is? That's a good thing. The player is so common and so widely used that people just think it's another part of the web. You can ask these same people about javascript and you'll get the same response. People don't care what the technology is, they just care if it works or not. You can ask ten people what browser they use and I bet a good number of them have no clue.

"You mean I can just advertise for a C# developer when I need more talent?" You can just advertise for a Flash or Flex developer as well, what's the point?

You know why I haven't started using Expression yet? Because I haven't won it at my local user group or trade show because, apparently, I'm not supposed to consider paying for it. The question is how much, a proper answer goes a long way.

What's the guy talking about the design shop controlling the code? Just request it! If they won't hand it over then fire them and replace them with someone that will! And I guess any company out there that might use Flash on their website won't have Flash people in-house but would have Silverlight people in-house? What?

Javascript was not created for designers!

"Flash has ten years on Silverlight" Which is true but he points out Silverlight is built on .Net which is close to ten years old, which is true.

But...

"Flash has more features" Now he points out that Silverlight is just two years old. Now I'm confused, which is it? He tries to cover this by pointing out the features that Flash has over Silverlight are just "pretty" features which is that same old tired argument.

Bah, I could go on forever and it's pointless. I feel bad for even ranting this far.

What would I like to see? I would LOVE to see some examples of real-world projects and a break down of why Silverlight is better than Flash/Flex for that project or vice-versa. You know, something with no corporate or fan boy bias already in place. For example, why couldn't the Olympics have been streamed using Flash? Why was Silverlight the killer app of choice for that particular instance?

I agree all this platform war stuff is boring.

Silverlight == .Net == will get some market share.

Flex/Flash == Java == will get some market share.

Wait, now there is JavaFx too. Well maybe they become the Java and Flex becomes its own thing. Either way they are all going to have some impact (well Fx could fail maybe).

The one thing I don't think is likely to change is the Design community will use PS, FW, AI for a while. Too many keystrokes are known to switch.

Now if Mac were to create a design tool.... maybe that could change. But Expression on PC isn't going to get anywhere with the hipster designer crowd I am familiar with.

" will people install Silverlight "
I wont, because I have the nerve (in MS' eyes) to run Linux, which can only run Silverlight v1 apps (via the Moonlight project), when the vast majority of content is in v2. And MS will deliberately make sure it *always* lags.

And if I don't install it, I'm unlikely to convince anyone else too...

I see Silverlight more as a replacement for ActiveX/COM the best thing that it has going for it is that its cross-platform.

I don't see Silverlight replacing Flash for animation. CSS and Javascript on the other hand are going to give Flash a run for the money as they are open standards.

On the video side Flash is the embedded player of choice next to Quicktime. With Quicktime X around the corner things will get interesting. I see Silverlight competing with Windows Media player for video versus Flash or Quicktime.

I used to think too that SL won't take off because users won't install the plugin, but it turns out if you install SL on IE, it automatically appears on other browsers - at least in Windows. Sure enough, it's on all my browsers IE, FF, Chrome, and Safari, and I'd only installed it on IE.

And MS is going to make sure of course that all new Windows come with IE and SL pre-installed. So, looks like this whole "users won't install SL" is moot, at least on Windows (which is on nearly 90% of all computers). Could someone confirm this?

Flash has basically beat SL this round. But it really is true that .NET is the real power of SL. MS will probably forever be playing catchup with the Adobe crew visually, but functionally even today SL can blow Flash out of the water. I mean completely. Yea yea I know AS has OOP as of 3.0 but c'mon can anyone really claim it's nearly as robust as C#? WCF? Crypto? LINQ? Not to mention probably the biggest factor of all: you can viably use the same .NET on server and client. code reuse anyone?

So the lack of built-in features in SL (which is a real point... H.264 wru) needs to be tempered by the reality that you can roll some serious code in C# with impunity. In other words, you can build better features. Not for everyone, but let's face it. We're returning to 2-tier. Flash is not the vehicle for that. But for today, flash is just plain better looking and since this is about enriching user experience, it remains a dominator.

Flash has basically beat SL this round. But it really is true that .NET is the real power of SL. MS will probably forever be playing catchup with the Adobe crew visually, but functionally even today SL can blow Flash out of the water. I mean completely. Yea yea I know AS has OOP as of 3.0 but c'mon can anyone really claim it's nearly as robust as C#? WCF? Crypto? LINQ? Not to mention probably the biggest factor of all: you can viably use the same .NET on server and client. code reuse anyone?

So the lack of built-in features in SL (which is a real point... H.264 wru) needs to be tempered by the reality that you can roll some serious code in C# with impunity. In other words, you can build better features. Not for everyone, but let's face it. We're returning to 2-tier. Flash is not the vehicle for that. But for today, flash is just plain better looking and since this is about enriching user experience, it remains a dominator.

Interesting article indeed! Thanks for sharing. It's hard to beat Flash but maybe it will some day

regards,
Mark

GOTO THE WEB SITE AND WATCH THE POWEWRPOINT PRESENTATIONK