Skip to main content
Home Forums Silverlight Programming Programming with .NET - General Justification request: Silverlight vs. Flex
130 replies. Latest Post by jackbond on June 30, 2009.
(5)
DotNetAd...
Member
80 points
53 Posts
05-03-2007 1:21 PM |
First, let me preface this by stating that I am not trolling. I am a pretty big Silverlight cheerleader, but what I'm looking for is a bullet list of concrete points that justify the use of Silverlight instead of the use of Flex. Obviously with Silverlight you get XAML and you get C#, but, I need more. I've got a lot of skeptics around me, and I've been coming up dry when they're asking me "Why would I want to use Silverlight instead of Flex?"
So, hopefully those of you in the know, or maybe the MS team themselves, can answer this one. Why do I want to use Silverlight instead of Flex? I have my own personal reasons (C#, XAML, etc) but I need more than that. I'm looking for some concrete value-add.
oneworld95
12 points
2 Posts
05-03-2007 2:25 PM |
I've been playing around with Flex recently but found that tying .NET data to it is not as straightforward as I'd hoped; simple tasks can be quite painful. One great reason to use Silverlight is that it ties into the .NET architecture, without having to come up with any kludges. There are 3rd party tools (WebOrb and Flourine) that might make the task easier, but it shouldn't require any 3rd party tool to begin with.
I'm new to Silverlight, but if developing within Visual Studio is easy, then that's another great reason. Flex doesn't tie into Visual Studio; you have to either write the MXML in Notepad and compile or use Flex Builder. I've also seen some resistance on the part of the folks at Adobe to do webcasts on .NET + Flex; they do Java but not .NET.
With Silverlight, we can expect countless how-to articles to come out in the coming weeks and months; not so much with .NET and Flex.
forthangol
2 points
1 Posts
05-03-2007 6:57 PM |
Great question. I am having the same issue. First of all I do not understand what exactly is going on in Silverlight world. There seem to be too many buzz words going around for technology and applications. I am a visual studio user for ages. It appears to me that this is only a small start and MS is expecting its legion of developers to embrace it. The least they could have done is to deliver something better structured. And a more complete technology. How the hell can I not use Flex or a competing technology when I don't even understand what I need to do work with let alone get things done in a simple way. And the ones available seem to be long way off target in terms of usability. Silverlight may be great but the MS guys running the show better get dumber to understand their potential clients in this area better.
adobeted
16 points
8 Posts
05-04-2007 2:53 AM |
I can talk about the Flex side...1. Flex is available today and works.
2. Flex 2 is viewable in 85+% of web browsers, Flex 2 SWF files run in Flash Player 9.
3. You can use any HTTP Server and any backend technology (.NET,JAVA,PHP,Ruby,CF, Python) with Flex via XML, SOAP, Sockets, ZLIB, Etc.
4. Flex 2 has a mature and growing component set. There are lots of developers creating open source components for Flex and the source code for all components is available today in the Flex SDK. See: Flexbox, FlexLib, FlexComponents for details.
5. Flex does not integrate well with .NET on the backend. We are working on a great solution to make .NET integration seamless. Additionally strongly typed SOAP Web Services support coming in Flex 3 (very soon) including full support for .NET SOAP encodings.
6. Real-time data push with Binary Sockets using any TCP/IP Socket server. FTP/NNTP/SVN/POP/XMPP Example: http://webmessenger.yahoo.com
7. Graphical and Programatic skinning with Illustrator/Flash/Photoshop/CSS
8. There are many large companies actively developing RIA's with Flex, from JPMorgan/Chase to Yahoo to Google to many Web 2.0 start-ups.
9. If you develop using Flex or AJAX you can port your app to the desktop using Apollo. Apollo allows you to build desktop applications for WIN/LIN/OSX deployed as a single .AIR file cross-platform. One toolset for Web RIA and Desktop RIA development.
10. Flex has gone fully open source Mozilla Public License. All compilers and framework will be available for extension and embedding within the Flex 3 SDK.
Plus all the minor video advantages that SL1.0 has will evaporate in weeks.
It is an easy choice for me but I am pretty biased.
Regards,
Ted Patrick (ted@adobe.com)Flex Evangelist, Adobe Systems
winston1000
78 points
31 Posts
05-04-2007 7:29 AM |
ummmm I'm really not trying to start a flame war but..at least one thing struck me as frankly uninformed and overly biased. In what world will the "minor video advantages" ever be evaporated... Adobe has had enough time to try and best Windows Media for years and frankly it will never happen at this point in the game. Now that microsoft is fixing the one advantage flash has had in cross browser embeding, any chance of Adobe catching up is about to evaporate. The Windows Media VC-1 standard is being used by more professional and enterprise entities than any other standard in the world. Flash does what it does and Silverlight is playing catch up to flash, but frankly MS is attacking a completely different problem in the end game... to think Adobe will ever have the enterprise scalability, DRM, Compression size, Bandwidth management, CDN support, HD quality, live broadcasting, developer api's, hardware device accessibility (including STB's, Mobile devices, XBox360's, and HD-DVD players), is wishing for something that frankly the war is over on. Just ask Jeremy Allaire over at brightcove about why he's supporting VC-1 and Silverlight as soon as he can?
Ohh in case you forgot... In 1995 Jeremy D. Allaire co-founded Allaire Corporation with his brother JJ Allaire, creating the web development tool Cold Fusion. When Macromedia acquired Allaire in March 2001, Jeremy became Chief Technology Officer. At Macromedia, Jeremy helped create the Macromedia MX (Flash) platform.
....END OF LINE.
05-04-2007 7:43 AM |
Silverlight:
So seriously, does anybody have any facts on why I should use silverlight instead of Flex. I already have a plethora of reasons why I should use Flex instead of Silverlight... what I'm looking for are hard, concrete reasons why I should use Silverlight instead of Flex.
05-04-2007 10:24 AM |
Don't all flame wars star with "I'm really not trying to start a flame war...". I do not mean to disrupt the conversation, Flex was brought up on this thread and I am happy to answer any questions about Flex as this is my role at Adobe.
Here is what is supported today in Flash Player 9:
Enterprise Scalability - CHECK (Supported today)
CDN Support - CHECK (Supported today) - All major CDN's support Flash Streaming today.
Live Broadcasting - CHECK (Supported today)
Developer API - CHECK (Supported today)
The other items you listed will be addressed soon. It has been too long since a major update to our video solutions but that time has come and we have some great things in development. Additionally there is a nice eco-system around Flash Video from a production/platform standpoint. Expect that things will change in this area.
I cannot speak for Brightcove but they use Flex 2 for many customer facing applications. They showcased a new video editor made with Flex at Adobe Engage and are very actively involved in many Flash/Flex based projects. They have stated publicly that they will continue to support Flash ongoing given the market demand for the format is very large.
Ted Patrick (ted@adobe.com)
Flex Evangelist - Adobe Systems
05-04-2007 10:36 AM |
Flex does not require any backend technology. It has always been just HTML, JS, SWF files. You can optionally exchange data with any existing backend in the formats of XML, SWF, AMF, ASCII, and Binary (ByteArray support).
You can double click an HTML file on OSX, WIN, Linux and it works in all browsers today including FireFox, Safari, Opera, IE.
Regarding "Flex is older" - We have seen a nice ecosystem form and many open source components are being created for the toolset. My point was rather, that an eco-system has formed and is thriving.
Glad you like flash.net.Socket! I will be posting some Twisted Python servers for Binary Socket support on my blog in a weeks time. Nothing like a free server for chat, im or the ability to write your own binary protocols.
Again not trying to upset the discussion here, I am just trying to addressing the Flex aspect of this discussion. If Flex/Flash hadn't been brought up then I wouldn't be posting at all. :)
clung
45 points
24 Posts
05-04-2007 11:29 AM |
adobeted:Glad you like flash.net.Socket! I will be posting some Twisted Python servers for Binary Socket support on my blog in a weeks time. Nothing like a free server for chat, im or the ability to write your own binary protocols.
[Ears perk up, smile hits face] - I'd love to see that, I've been too lazy myself to work on such a thing so I'm glad to see someone has done it. I believe the fact Silverlight 1.0 and 1.1 not supporting real sockets like Flash/Flex does have me a little disappointed. It looks like Silverlight 1.1 has a chance of getting support for WCF which would be nice, but I really want socket capability like Flash's binary sockets.
I look forward to seeing your blog post about the Twisted server.
m3taverse
186 points
88 Posts
05-04-2007 11:35 AM |
I think the biggest advantage to SL + related tools and services is that you get to work with a robust, scalable, flexible and cost effective platform that works all the way from script kiddie level up to full on enterprise scale apps.You get to code in Javascript all the way up to multithreaded C# applications, bringing processing power to the UI that we have not seen before on the web.
As opposed to the make-believe enterprise readyness that we've been hearing about for years, make believe scalability and flexibility where video is concerned, the complete lack of cost effectiveness, and the akward single threaded scripting language in competing technologies. Not to mention the lackluster state of development tools.
It was time for a new kid on the block in the RIA space. Now that it's here we'll see how many people are really that much in love with the competing way of doing things. Of course there is going to be some resistance against SL because it comes from Microsoft, but in the end people always go with what makes the most sense, is the easiest and cheapest to make, maintain, deploy and support. The choice is fairly simple really, and obvious at that.
svdoever
10 Posts
05-04-2007 7:14 PM |
One of the biggest problems of new technology is not the coolness of the technology, but the possibility to utilize this technology in a productive way.
Developer resources get sparse these days. Silverlight supports multiple languages, both static and dynamic languages, and a well known framework, and you develop in a well known development environment. So I think it is easy to find developers who can get productive quickly on Silverlight. Another thing is that there is a lot of code out there already written in C#, VB, Ruby, JavaScript, Python etc, that can be easily ported to Silverlight.
Only a small group of people knows ActionScript (I know it is a JavaScript implementation with some cool extension like the XML extensions), but JavaScript is really the domain of web developers, not of application developers that can now jump on the RIA bandwagon.
I must say I'm impressed by Flex 2 and Flash Player 9, but it is a steep learning curve for new developers (ActionScript, other framework, Eclipse, ...)
Serge van den Oever [Macaw]http://weblogs.asp.net/soever
WilcoB
672 points
117 Posts
05-04-2007 9:13 PM |
Some of the reasons why I think you may want to consider Silverlight are:1. Unification. If you already invested in .NET, the learning curve will be much lower. You can use what you're familiar with. Also, you get new technologies (such as LINQ) often for free (whenever those technologies are useful in both environments anyway).2. Integration. While Silverlight runs on other platforms/browsers besides Windows/IE, it's fairly obvious to expect tight integration with ASP.NET/VS/etc. Context switches are generally rather expensive and painful.3. Extending the browser programming API. There is plenty of stuff already in Silverlight that you can use to raise the bar on the client. I'm talking about things like AsyncFileUpload, client storage, interoperability between JavaScript and managed code, etc. You can expose those services to JS if you want, without sacrificing any of your existing client-side development technologies/practices. Please refer to my site where I'll be writing more about this.
Roy Batty
10 points
7 Posts
05-04-2007 10:04 PM |
I guess Adobe is getting worried (and rightly so), if they've got "flex evangelists" trolling the Silverlight boards. The only advantage that Flash has right now is the penetration rate. The real problem with Flash/Flex though is that you're forced to program in ActionScript, and it doesn't have a VM like the CLR. Wake me up when I can program Flash in C#, VB, Ruby, Python, F#, Nemerle, Boo....for Flash. On a technical level, there's the no comparison between Flash and Silverlight. Flash is way behind.
MSMossyBlog
98 points
35 Posts
05-05-2007 4:38 AM |
The real question lies in where do you want to shift your development direction going forward. I've been in the Flex trenches among folks like Ted since 2003, and while it sounds clean / cut and dry as Ted would project it, it's not exactly true.
Flex takes time to learn, the ramp-up is quite extensive and when you take into account re-wiring brains to ActionScript 3.0, then exploring the framework and fully immersing yourself with the concept of a "mix-in" approach to life (Decorator pattern for OOP folks). Then you've probably hit the point of mastering the language in question. If one was to weigh up black and white approach to which direction one was to head, I'd look at it more from a direction of self-paced ROI. C# + XAML can get you open ended access inside the Microsoft product stack, ranging from IIS7.0 to Sharepoint through to Powershell, it's your passport into many things.
This is important thing to note, as if you find that Silverlight (Great Experience) isn't your cup of tea then you could always revert back to ASP.NET AJAX (Good Experience) or better yet upscale to WPF (Ultimate Experience). There is a degree of depth in which you can move in and out of the product stack. I should also point out that this is Version 1.0 and the level of complexity and degree of interoperability between our existing product offerings, one can only imagine what 2.0 and so on are going to be like.
Flex has a set of issues surrounding it's use, and there are a lot of pro's and con's around choosing it no matter which of path you choose. I can honestly say from experience that Flex isn't just about picking top 10 features from a glossy brochure, as it has what I would call "devil in the details". It's something you should really speak to other Flex developers that aren't from Adobe Staff (as well as Microsoft Staff) as they will give you a true unbiased transparent answer.
http://www.mossyblog.com is a personal blog I had pre-Microsoft, feel free to look over it's archives as you'll notice I developed a love/hate releationship with Flex over the years.
I personally think Silverlight is a wise investment either way you choose as Microsoft are committed to making it stronger and have a solid history of building the right tools for developers.
MarauderzMY
597 points
258 Posts
05-05-2007 5:32 AM |
Ooo.. touchy subject.
But I think the comments from people from both sides of the fence have been pretty constructive so far.
To me the best reason for going with Silverlight is of course being able to reuse my VB skills and experiences to deliver a cool interactive experience, before Silverlight I already know about Flex, and I already know about how powerful ActionScript can be if I took the time to delve into it. But that's what I dont have.. time to learn yet another language. :P
I would have to say that Flash is definetly the stronger animation tool right now since Blend is unable to do animation for Silverlight yet, but Silverlight is on familiar ground for me so that's where I'm going to go.
I do hate the fact that I have to wait till 1.1 to be able to use VB for code though!
05-05-2007 5:37 AM |
Yup, it's an emotional issue and the only real answer to any Flex vs Silverlight thread has more to do with the context of a project going forward. You could actually also look at ways of combining the two if you're keen on both but want each world as that's the power you have right now. There is no black/white decision to be made here?
Ahh but the power of interoperability :)
05-05-2007 6:56 AM |
Some of the posts have been talking about being able to leverage VB and C# skills as an advantage. I agree with that, but don't count out IronPython and IronRuby as a big magnet - especially Ruby. I'm having fun just playing around with Python in the SDK samples just using Vim (no compile needed), but I drool at the thought of having top notch Ruby support in VS. Flex just has no answer to these things.
Of course, there's more than just geek-developer coolness for choosing a platform, but as someone already pointed out, you have the entire stack with Microsoft (ASP.NET Ajax, Silverlight, and full-fledged WPF).
If I was running the Flash/Flex division at Adobe, I would sponsor someone to write a Java compiler for the Flash VM, along with a port of some of the libraries......like yesterday.
sl101
34 points
19 Posts
05-06-2007 9:51 AM |
I have been working with Flex since 2.0 beta, and I speak from experience. Here is why I am so ready to move to silverlight. Excuse my tone here but as a dotnet developer Adobe's ignoring of dotnet means, no love lost here, and I am going to tell it like it is...
5. Building modular apps is a pain in Flex Builder, especially if you have used Visual Studio. I hate opening the IDE and actually do most "scripting" for flex in VS using code generation. You really need to spend some time with Flex Builder, at first it looks cool, but when you get beyond the simplest of tasks it bites back, and hard.
6. Exchanging data between Flex and dotnet is not for the faint of heart. I am not talking about simple stuff here, true data management, sync, concurrency, etc.. In flex if you have 10K to spend on weborb or FDS for java and you are only half way there. In silverlight we can now share dotnet business components and leverage WCF, VAB, share sync and validate data in a way that meets the domains needs.
hanschri...
8 points
05-09-2007 8:28 AM |
Interesting topic. I work for a large video producing news company. We encode video for Windows Media and Flash depending on our syndication client's needs. My opinion is just my opinion and may not be the opinion of the company.
With the above disclaimer stated, a lot of our clients (internal and external) are wanting to produce interactive experiences by integrating video and app code. When evaluating both here are some of the findings/comments:
1. Resources - We have been evaluating Flex and attempting to find additional resources to address the development needs. We have found that the learning curve is very steep and good resources are almost non-existent in our market place. Those that claim to be Flex experts seem to only be a few pages ahead in the manual. I had been evaluating SilverLight aka WPF/E for the last several months and when the execs came back from the Broadcaster's meeting in Vegas they were singing about SilverLight and not Flex/Flash. They quickly realized that our internal C# group could and have produced proof-of-concepts for justification for more research into SilverLight.
2. Video - Big for us.
A. Creating a Flex/Flash video player is very simple. Creating a SilverLight video player is even easier. Both can do easy overlays and produce nice controls. However, we found the video brush in SilverLight with Matrix calculations to be superior and simple to manipulate which caused the creative wheels to begin moving.
B. Codecs/Encoding. This could be one of the biggest for us. FLV (Flash Video Files (latest versions)) uses On2 proprietary format with very steep royalties [Sidebar: One thread mentioned BrightCove - Their client encoder uses On2's client APIs that encodes on the local machine before uploading to server and may cost 5 to 6 digit royalties. A major reason.] We understand that future versions of FLVs will be based on H.264 to hopefully address this very issue. It's current version makes it difficult to justify developing around this platform. The server version of On2 is less expensive but more resource intensive creating another set of issues. We can also leverage C++/C# encoding expertise in-house to produce VC-1/WMVs at higher quality.
C. Resource Intensive. Our own analytics has shown that encoding for Windows Media is less stressful on our infrastucture than encoding FLVs.
D. Full Screen. This is a great feature. The ability to manipulate the canvas without hindering the playback is huge as far as user experience goes.
I could continue but the point is ROI and quality of experience. We have stopped our search (temporarily - hopefully for good) for Flex experts while we continue our evaluation. Our results so far are proving that SilverLight could be a platform of choice moving forward.
[NOTE: Xaml represented its own learning curve but the level of documentation is incredible.]
Thanks,Hans
dondotnet
5 Posts
05-16-2007 4:43 AM |
I think personally the big advantages I see to Silverlight beyond the things mentioned here is that it does integrate well with .NET.. I downloaded and took a look at the ASP.NET futures release and was very pleased to see a very configurable video player asp.net control as well as one for XAML, not to mention that it integrates well with ASP.NET's support of ADO.NET databinding and of course it's completely integrated with AJAX. I think it's an apples to oranges comparison to compare flex to silverlight alone. It would be more fair to compare flex to asp.net with the silverlight integration.
hanzalah
03-05-2008 10:12 PM |
Well, I personally prefer Silverlight, as both provide same kind of functionalities like RIA, Web 2.0 but if I can develop RIA using .Net supported languages like C#, why one should learn Action Scripting, which really take long time to learn.
The good point about flex is that, its flash based (swf) so users are quite fimiliar with it and almost all browser have flash player installed.
mchlsync
Star
14566 points
2,730 Posts
03-05-2008 11:01 PM |
hanzalah:The good point about flex is that, its flash based (swf) so users are quite fimiliar with it and almost all browser have flash player installed.
I understand that point. but sooner or later, people will have Silverlight installed just like they have Flash player installed. I heard that the next version of Windows after Vista will have Silverlight installed by default.
jackbond
Contributor
2806 points
722 Posts
03-06-2008 12:28 AM |
DotNetAddict:So seriously, does anybody have any facts on why I should use silverlight instead of Flex.
Well first off, Flex Builder 3 is a complete joke compared to Visual Studio, its features suck, and debugging in it is like you are running on a 386. Secondly, Flash is a dead technology, yep, dead. Ask yourself, how is a platform going to survive when its single programming language is an antiquated feature incomplete POS compared to what is available in .NET. The controls and code that development community is going to start putting out for Silverlight is going to be like a tidal wave. I can pretty much predict now that Adobe will be suing to prevent Microsoft from bundling Silverlight into the next Windows release(they'll make up some crap argument about it being bad for consumers, and find some moron Fed judge that sucks it up.) This release is the beginning of the end for Flash. Ted, you might want to start looking for another job.
03-06-2008 1:04 AM |
Jack,
Flash Player is installed on 98% of machines today, 95% are Flash Player 9 where Silverlight 1.0 is on maybe 2-3% tops. Chosing Silverlight would be like opening a donut shop in the desert. Who is going to see your content? Who is going buy your donuts? Now mind you if MSFT is funding my donut operation, it just might make sense, free capital, few customers, whhhhheeeee party in the desert! It will take well over 2-3 years from today for Silverlight to get over 80% installed if it gets there at all. Where do you think Flash Player will be then? (hint: Installed on 98% of machines)
75% of advertising online ==> Flash Player
70% of video ==> Flash Player
A few enterprise applications ( Oracle, SAP, SalesForce ) ==> Flex3 with Flash Player
Give me a break man, it will be a very long time before Silverlight makes sense from a market perspective. Regardless we are not sitting idle. Flex will get better as will Flash Player, shoot the WPF shader features announced today at MIX will be shipping Flash Player 10 come Oct. Full hardware acceleration and we will have very good support for other languages, programming languages that is. :)Keep an open mind Jack and stop eating everything Microsoft feeds you, it has been known to make people and companies very sick. Regardless it makes for good competition and great forum conversation.
I love my job and Flash Player isn't going anywhere! Ted :)
03-06-2008 3:11 AM |
adobeted:Flash Player is installed on 98% of machines today
Hmm, about the same percentage as Netscape, until it had competition. You guys have never had ANY real competition, so you've gotten by with what is quite frankly crap software. Ask yourself this, do you really think you can compete with Microsoft in a platform war, because that's what you've got yourself now.
adobeted:It will take well over 2-3 years from today for Silverlight to get over 80% installed if it gets there at all.
Ever heard of Windows update? I imagine you'd say something the same about PDF in regards to XPS? I ask you then, why did your lawyers sue to keep "Print to PDF/XPS" out of Vista? Adobe argued that it was bad for the consumer, it was like newspeak right out of 1984. Microsoft wanted to give something away that your company charged money for, and you argued it was bad for the consumer. It was at that point that I decided your company SUCKS. And you have the audacity to tell me to "stop eating everything Microsoft feeds you." What arrogance! I pointed out why I think Flash sucks, a POS language and horrible dev tools, which you quite conveniently didn't address. Tell me, when will ActionScript have generics and linq? What's really telling is that I said Flash sucks, and about your only response was, "hey, we've got installed base, and yah, we'll have shaders in 6 months" Some evangelism.
Bottom line, if you are counting on your installed base to save the day in your fight against Microsoft, I've got a few words for you: Wordperfect, Notes, Netscape, 1-2-3, Netware. Might as well put Flash on the list.
P.S. Will I be able to watch the Olympics in Flash?
P.P.S Stop regurgitating everything your bosses feed you
Cass
3157 points
654 Posts
03-06-2008 4:07 AM |
Topic is side tracked a bit, but anyways.
I am equally loyal to Adobe and Microsoft, been using Adobe and Microsoft products for a long time, and this is what I have to add the argument.
You are bragging about the install base of Flash (98%) just ask yourself if Microsoft had not included Flash player in Windows XP/Windows Vista if you would have had that install base.
Scott announced today that Silverlight plug-in was downloaded on an average of 1.5 Million/Day and he was referring to Silverlight 1.0/Silverlight 1.1. Not many people are interested in Silverlight 1.0 so you haven’t see the tidal wave of Silverlight application on the web yet, the reason that Silverlight 2.0 have go-live licence allows us to deploy meaningful applications., again Silverlight is giving you goose bumps while still in Beta (one day into beta actually) just wait till Summer, and then we will discuss the plugin ubiquity. I say Microsoft should include Silverlight in IE8 they always did include Flash, who would be laughing then?
I have used Flash/Flex and I completely agree that the learning curve is just too steep, they announced programming in C# for Flex/Flash to be migrated to AS3 but I really don’t see it helping the learning curve in anyway, the fault is not just AS3 it the complete platform, and when are you going to go beyond defining objects in OOP? Again Silverlight controls are released as open source, ever heard of open source? Adobe has every line of code patented, or pending.
The only leverage Flex have over Silverlight is the graphic and media engine, I have see some pretty flash sites (my personal best, PlanetInNeed , and http://www.gettheglass.com/ make sure you watch the Messages on Brittlelactica on PlanetInNeed to get what I mean) and I completely agree that Adobe got a higher hand in Imaging and Media compatibility, even in Beta Microsoft didn’t impress me with the imaging and media engine there is a lot left to be desired, but that might change in Final version if not in Beta 2
My verdict - Never touched Flash/Flex after tasting Silverlight and don’t ever want to.
radekg
43 points
21 Posts
03-06-2008 8:36 AM |
There is no simple answer what to choose. I am using Flex since version 1.0. I really like it and would love to see event model from Flex in Silverlight. For a long time I wasn't able to build socket connectivity in .NET by myslef - using all these async methods is just horrible while in ActionScript you just to addEventListener - job done.
About ActionScript 3.0: good language but has some fatal concepts. I need strong typed language. Adobe says AS3 is strong typed language. Well... not everywhere. Why there are things like Object od dynamic classes? What is the point of creating classes and then making them dynamic so I can declare properties at runtime? I don't get it. It breaks the whole idea of strong typing in AS3. And I'm even more scared when I see proposals for AS4. Replace var with let at some places, compound types (forgot the name of it) but basically to one variable I will be able to assign int or string but not Date - ???, triple-quoted string - OMG. On the other hand nice features like typed collections, operator overloading, method overloading. But when they drop them into one bag with Object and dynamic classes they will make huge mess there. For me it looks like guys at Adobe think: oh - this feature in Ruby looks cool, lets add it to AS, oh - and that from Python/whatever other language looks cool so lets add it too :)
Another point - Flex SDK goes open source. Nice, but if I understand the license correctly (license notes in source files) I can't just take the compiler out and build my own compiler on it. I can just improve it for Adobe which then sell it to me when I will need more than BlazeDS for example. Thats not all. When my potential client will send request for some job to be done, Adobe Consulting will offer their services. That means Adobe may steal my job. So I rather pay for the tools and stay on closed platform but at least I'll be sure I am doing my job, no one else.
I am more into Silverlight right now. I can see progress made by Microsoft on Silverlight during last year. I really appreciate it. It just proves Microsoft is learning and listening.
At the end: sorry for my English. It's not my first language.
Sopheap Ly
Participant
902 points
205 Posts
03-06-2008 8:53 AM |
As for Silverlight vs Flex debate:
adobeted:1. Flex is available today and works.
adobeted:2. Flex 2 is viewable in 85+% of web browsers, Flex 2 SWF files run in Flash Player 9.
adobeted:3. You can use any HTTP Server and any backend technology (.NET,JAVA,PHP,Ruby,CF, Python) with Flex via XML, SOAP, Sockets, ZLIB, Etc.
adobeted:4. Flex 2 has a mature and growing component set.
adobeted:5. Flex does not integrate well with .NET on the backend.
adobeted:6. Real-time data push with Binary Sockets using any TCP/IP Socket server.
adobeted:7. Graphical and Programatic skinning with Illustrator/Flash/Photoshop/CSS
adobeted:8. There are many large companies actively developing RIA's with Flex
adobeted:9. If you develop using Flex or AJAX you can port your app to the desktop using Apollo.
adobeted:10. Flex has gone fully open source Mozilla Public License.
From a .NET developer's perspective, Silverlight 2.0 is a great value-add to his/her existing knowledge.
Ciaran M...
157 points
71 Posts
03-06-2008 10:47 AM |
One word... Speed
Silverlight is way way faster. The 1.1 alpha was about 5 times faster than flex on my quad core machine using bubblemark (standard benchmark for RIAs). Silverlight uses all processors and I'm sure will use hardware acceleration in all its graphics (think only does for HD... but could be wrong on that).
However, thats the RIA market. Most of Flash's success is built on video and web designers drawing nice graphics. I think MS have a way to go to make Expression more attractive to designers. While MS have given us the optimal for a mixed team of developers/designers, many designers just want to do small little throwaway jobs that require a lot of canned interactivity. Expression is good but the chasm to VS2008 is far greater. I know lots of designers who lead sullen frustrated lives but use ActionScript coz its quick 'n' dirty... and that in many cases is what they are after.
So if MS would improve their lives a bit more then they would start moving over wholesale and adoption would be much faster.
And if they turn then Silverlights mindshare will increase.
03-06-2008 10:48 PM |
This link said ~
Open sourcing Flex is a really good start in the right direction... unfortunately, Flex was built on top of the wrong platform from the start (something I told the Flex team while Flex was still in Alpha),
Is it true? What is wrong platform? Why does it wrong?
CrackJack
3 points
05-14-2008 12:43 PM |
Adobe has completely ignored dotnet, big mistake, and probably will change, but by the time they do the game will be over. If you already invested in .NET, the learning curve will be much lower. You can use what you're familiar with. Also, you get new technologies (such as LINQ) often for free (whenever those technologies are useful in both environments anyway).d
sladapter
All-Star
17181 points
3,133 Posts
05-14-2008 1:58 PM |
mchlsync: hanzalah:The good point about flex is that, its flash based (swf) so users are quite fimiliar with it and almost all browser have flash player installed. I understand that point. but sooner or later, people will have Silverlight installed just like they have Flash player installed. I heard that the next version of Windows after Vista will have Silverlight installed by default.
If people are worried about installation base of Silverlight vs. Flash, maybe we should refresh our memory of how IE beat Netscape. Microsoft products has at least one advantage that is to get the most user's adaption, because they can pack it into the operating system.
05-14-2008 2:57 PM |
sladapter:If people are worried about installation base of Silverlight vs. Flash
I don't think anyone here is worried. It's the folks at Adobe that are worried, and if they're not, they 're either clueless or delusional.
ALXS
6 points
4 Posts
05-21-2008 10:13 AM |
I am learning about "go off-line" and all tha i understand, that today i do not want to use silverlite and google gears products, couse i have to support not only IE and FF but also Opera, safari etc. This two technologies do not support this browsers. But it is not a main couse why not. Adobe Air is beeter couse it has own browser (?safari build-in?) and all applications are avaliable for all clients. Flex+Flash is not a very good instrument i think, but AIR is only one of this technologies which we could use right now, i think. I do not mean that Gears and silverlight is a trash, of couse. I thing today is not a time to use it widely, We should to wait what technology give us the best variant of solving go offline problem, and then choose it. For example i do not want spend time and money only becouse it is MS or Google. I mean Google and MS prefix are meanless in. I want to see the product full power before i fully learn and understand that it is not an instrument i realy want. Whaiting is material losses so i suggest to use JS\AJAX\HTML\CSS etc. and FLEX\FLASH ( as it is popular swf format) in AIR variant, and wait what MS and google will offer us in future, couse today it solve off-line problem not ideal. ALX. with best wishes
bsmith.zhao
05-22-2008 4:00 AM |
Support Silverlight.
In the Expression area, no need to compare Flex and Silverlight, they both will act
perfectly.
In the Rich Internet Application development area, Silverlight will win in my
opioion, and if I do the decision, either I am boss or developer, I choose
Silverlight, why? because of the followings:
1. Programming Language. ActionScript language in Flex is an *EXPERIENCED*
language, which means we need pay more to employ or we need to study hard to
control that, and application based on *EXPERIENCED* language is hard to maintain
and team members are aslo hard to collaborate, may be you are the only one who can
understand your code. But C# or other .Net language is not, especially C#, like
Java, that is why many enterprise systems are written by C# or Java.
2. Programming Library. In Flex, you can only use the Flex library, if you find
something Flex dones't have, you must create one, but in ActionScript you will find
not every thing you can create or it is not easy to achieve that, eg, complex
arithmetic, like RSA encryption or something else, in .Net, there are many vendors
and .Net itself is extendable.
3. Development Tools. No doubt that Visual Studio is the best development platform in the world, it is easy to use especially for enterprise developers.
But there are many things that Silverlight need to improve:
1. IO support, Mouse, Keyboard and Input Method in Silverlight 2 beta 1 sucks too much.2. Control Library enhancement, there are only few controls in Silverlight 2 beta 1, and Silverlight is almost streaking now.3. Application Cache, if I develop an application that has 2M, if everytime I need to download this, it is bad thing, even more worth, if I update my application after I distributed, can user only download the differ segment?4. Development Platform enhancement, now in Silverlight 2 beta 1 with Visual Studio 2008, I can't drap and drop the control to the design window.
So, there are many expectations on Silverlight, if Development in Silverlight has the same happiness as Development in Windows Form Based Application, I think Silverlight own the competition.
jochen168
06-30-2008 4:20 PM |
I agree that currently Flex/Flash is the best choice over Silverlight and JavaFX. There are more 96% of browser having installed Flash plug-in while Silverlight is still in Beta version. JavaFX is still a vaporware though. Comparing the performance, Flex is more run more smoothly than Silverlight, showing Flex is a more proven technology in RIA area. Flex Builder 3 is also an easy tool for average developers too.
Becoming parents? visit http://lucascom.webng.com
girlsontop
3 Posts
07-01-2008 4:09 PM |
hi i am web designer or web developer my personal opinion Silverlight i better than Flex coz i think flex to complicated than sliver light silver light easy to use or user friendly
vkj
14 points
08-05-2008 11:24 PM |
I will start using Silverlight when it reaches 90% install base from it's current 2%.
Till then I will use Flex only.
08-06-2008 3:16 AM |
vkj:Till then I will use Flex only.
You joined to let us be aware of that? LMAO. In case you missed it, someone else made the same devastatingly brilliant observation. But hey, thanks for stopping by, your presence will be sorely missed.
Sorry, couldn't resist...
08-06-2008 3:29 AM |
come one now, be nice :) hehe.
Choice is a good thing, and sorry vkj Silverlight is not for you.
08-06-2008 3:39 AM |
MSMossyBlog: come one now, be nice :) hehe.
Hi Mossy, haven't seen much from any of the MSFT guys lately, you must be pretty busy. Any word on on Beta3/RC1?
vraopoli...
08-13-2008 10:23 AM |
After the release of SL 2 B2, I have not seen Ted Patrick (ted@adobe.com), Flex Evangelist, Adobe Systems, any where here. He is worried about himself and I think trying to learn Silverlight!.
08-13-2008 10:38 AM |
lol, I think they're busy at the moment copying XAML into flex gumbo.
08-13-2008 1:29 PM |
"They keep dragging me back in!"
Personally, I am not worried about myself and truth be told I already know SL and C# pretty well, know thy competition. I actually got promoted and am now running developer communities and events for Adobe. This helps keeps me out of the Silverlight forums...somewhat.
The key difference with RIA technologies in that they are not mutually exclusive. We could see a day far far far away when both Silverlight and Flash Player have over an 80% installation rate. Flash Player 9 is installed on 97% of computers today and in 8 months Flash Player 10 will follow the exact same deployment profile. Additionally we have some special features for developers going into Flash Player 10 that we will showcase at Adobe MAX
If anyone is interested in going to MAX, (many of the MSFT SL dev teams have already registered for MAX), I would be happy to provide a discount code for any Silverlight developer who emails me at ted@adobe.com with a subject of: ADOBE MAX.
Cheers,
Ted :)
08-13-2008 4:28 PM |
That will do folks, leave Ted alone, he's quite a passionate person and believes in his companies ability to do more than just PDF documents, which frankly is where all roads lead with Adobe anyway.
Ted, you appear to be neutral, but your posture online and aggressive state indicates that you firmly believe Adobe has sole custody of the RIA space and are the rightful owners. The fact is, Adobe neglects to mention when they throw the stats around and at times call Microsoft a "Convicted Monopolist" that Macromedia made it's success from our supposed "monopoly" and continue to make success out of it.
My point is simple, You don't have to be 98% to be successful, iTunes/QuickTime and Real One have done quite fine out of not having the ubiquity Flash has today, furthermore Adobe's put their customer base through a large amount of constant upgrades, that in a way you've actually trained the 98% of the world that its ok to constantly install a new version of the plugin.
98% of the worlds Enterprise environments don't have Flash 9+ installed. 98% of your customer base doesn't use ActionScript 3.0, a large portion are still in ActionScript 2.0. These are all facts obviously left out and the a-typical posture around "throw stats on the table, call them monopolists" attitude is not only poor form and overly aggressive, but something that is not only transparent, but I'd consider a fools errand.
All the best in your new role, and I am glad Silverlight offers choice, this is what we do.. an alternative to the Adobe PDF way of life..
08-13-2008 7:01 PM |
Scott,
No need to get all defensive....
I think you will agree that Adobe Flash Player is the single most widely deployed software runtime in the history of software. Shoot even Microsoft's uses it when trying to reach customers. They even required Flash Player 9 and used ActionScript 3 and Papervision to build this video portal deployed weeks ago (Great site BTW):
http://www.mojaveexperiment.com/
When Microsoft continues to choose Flash for delivering marketing and video experiences for their own projects over Silverlight, it should strike a nerve with anyone. When user expierience really matters, even Microsoft chooses Flash Player.
Right tool for the right job, right?
Ted Patrick - Adobe Systems
08-13-2008 7:17 PM |
hheheh still milking that cheap shot for all it's worth. Even though your own staffers echoed the following:
Whoa, Ted that seems harsh. Makes you sound worried and defensive.The format of marketing material doesn't seem like it should be so big an issue, such emotional words.jd/adobe
We're committed to using Silverlight (as Tim Sneath stated in a response to you, which you aggressively responded to), and if a marketing division used an external agency at the time, chooses to use Flash, than so be it, it happens and may happen in the near future. Just like back in the day Adobe/Macromedia used to use ASP.NET for a lot of their websites, even though Coldfusion was their main dynamic language product. Technology gets used for a variety of reasons, and bending it to suite your own agenda is not only weak, but as per JD's comments - Makes you sound worried and defensive.
We offer choice and alternative to a FuturePDF - err Flash :)
(P.S)
This sounds like a fun beer chat at MAX :)
08-13-2008 9:58 PM |
I am thinking of buying a Mac. I know SL runtime is available on Mac, but is the development tool for SL available on Mac. Can I develop SL application on Mac.
Thanks in advance.
luojing
9 points
27 Posts
08-13-2008 10:12 PM |
I choose silverlight because it's a technology supported by microsoft,and it can supply HD vedio than flex,that is flex can't provide.
08-14-2008 1:57 PM |
adobeted:When Microsoft continues to choose Flash for delivering marketing and video experiences for their own projects over Silverlight, it should strike a nerve with anyone. When user expierience really matters, even Microsoft chooses Flash Player.
Perhaps this would be a valid point if Silverlight 2 wasn't still in beta. In fact, Flash 15 must really suck because Adobe itself is not using it.
adobeted: I would be happy to provide a discount code for any Silverlight developer who emails me at ted@adobe.com with a subject of: ADOBE MAX.
Hmm, already giving discounts to Silverlight developers? You guys must see the writing on the wall.
As an aside, is it me, or when runtime installations take only a few seconds and are completely automated, isn't "installed base" an almost worthless metric? We don't even talk about the "installed base" of say www.msnbc.com, because loading (aka installing) the homepage is virtually instantaneous. Instead the number of views is the essential metric (as it is tangentially related to revenue). So, instead of looking at "installed base", might as well look at the amount of traffic runtime X is generating.
samcov
930 points
360 Posts
08-14-2008 5:29 PM |
I've tried Flash, and I didn't like the experience as much as I love doing Silverlight, but I have nothing against Flash. Obviously some developers can create interesting products using it.
On another note, has anyone used the SL player for the Olympics? My experience was similar to the article below, but I still hope the runtime gets a wide distribution so that internet apps become more possible with SL. It's a start.
Silverlight: A Good Thing, Served Badly
08-14-2008 7:45 PM |
vkj:Can I develop SL application on Mac.
Great news everyone, Silverlight has reached 90% installed base, otherwise vkj wouldn't be using it. Ted will be disappointed. Oh, and yes, vkj you can do SL development on a Mac, you just need to put a real operating system on it.
08-14-2008 8:58 PM |
The NBC has had amazing reviews, mixed feelings and most of the negative criticism has been more towards NBC etc. Silverlight though has stoodup to the full might of what the interent can throw at it and hasn't faltered. Yes, we don't have 98% ubiquity but millions upon millions of folks are not only downloading Silverlight, but they are enjoying the experience, which also further proves my point that 98% isn't the only measure of success, what you do with the technology is.
If you provide compelling content and folks need to download a technology in order to view it, for whatever reason folks will. We see this in gaming situations where you buy the game, you install it and the first thing that happens is you kick off a "patch" download process. You do so, because you know at the end of the day the reward is at the other end. It's not fun downloading, but as long as there is reward, you accept it.
NBC in this case, was no easy effort as getting the streaming content out of china and deployed to the whole of the US, required specific approaches to the infrastructure and technology behind it. That's why all high quality live streaming on the internet at the moment is basically using Microsoft technology in one way or another. Flash is being used for video on demand in pockets of the internet, but the quality isn't even using Flash HD, so again, we are still a relatively young runtime and yet we are handling the full might of not only deliverig high quality video, but in a way that we've not faultered.
Is the site optimally designed to suite everyones need? probably not or probably. The only news we hear online is bad news, as most folks rarely volunteer good news and it at the same time gets reported? So, I'm kind of the glass is half full guy on this one, as yeah I'd love the ability to have the content narrowly focused on say Australia (as that's where I'm from), but i'm still able to get my reward and watch the womens 2x400m break the world record (sorry we kicked US butt here heheh).
That all being said, the best that Ted's folks can come up with is the ubiquity card in response to Silverlight? well.. millions of people are proving that it's not important today and that's ultimately the figure we care about the most. Customers whom are satisfied with what they download is what counts and so far, good news!
08-15-2008 7:07 AM |
@Ted: you say: "Flash Player 9 is installed on 97% of computers today and in 8 months Flash Player 10 will follow the exact same deployment profile."
I have been always curious how that is measured. Could you please explain how Adobe knows it is 97% and not 96% or 50%? And how do you know it is Flash Player 9 and not 8 or 7? Because we have some clients who can't upgrade to Flash Player 9 and are still using 8. Is it based on peopple who visit adobe.com?
08-15-2008 9:33 AM |
What is a real operating system ? Is Apple OS X qualify for a real operating system ?
Once again, thanks in advance jackbond.
08-15-2008 9:36 AM |
jackbond: vkj:Can I develop SL application on Mac. Great news everyone, Silverlight has reached 90% installed base, otherwise vkj wouldn't be using it. Ted will be disappointed. Oh, and yes, vkj you can do SL development on a Mac, you just need to put a real operating system on it.
08-15-2008 10:49 AM |
Well if you REALLY really want to develop in OSX then yes you can. There are lots of ways... the simplest of course is to use Parallels in Coherence mode (I do this) and it works quite nicely.
But if you hate windows completely then yes I'm sure you can write XAML and C# in any highlighting text editor, draw in illustrator and export the XAML and the only MS part needed would be MSBuild. But that's all a bit painful!
Hmmm.... maybe the question should be... Has anyone released an integrated set of OSX native tools for Silverlight?
Nope!
But I could see a time when someone releases a Silverlight developement environment written in Silverlight and delivered via the browser.
As part of an internal project I'm pretty close to having a WYSIWYG dialog editor (similar functionality to Visual Studio Form Designer) all set up with command pattern undo, aligning, sizing , snapping to grids etc. Ok ok I know I'm only daydreaming... but conceptually 'SilverStudio' would be possible!
jzabroski
70 points
08-15-2008 2:05 PM |
Some of this debate between Ted Patrick and Scott Barnes overlooks the first thing you learn when you graduate from college with a CS diploma and enter the Enterprise world:
The golden lesson is businesses will pay you to throw away their software so long as you can preserve their data.
If you didn't learn this lesson, then you should've learned it. Even if you didn't learn this golden lesson, it was taught to you and you can remember it, but you weren't involved enough to learn it. It's not the kind of lesson you can learn in college, either. Someone can't just tell you that you will graduate into the field of Enterprise software development, because you'll forget what they told you.
Lastly, you can't create a flowchart or rubric that compares code features. I see this mistake all the time. A particular example of this is comparing WPF applications to XBAP. Often, the rubric mentions WPF supports using the Windows Registry. This neglects to overlook the fact that you shouldn't use the Windows Registry, and that applications running in Administrator mode are why our machines are slowed down with Virtual Machines emulating software that needs to be put in a sandbox, because it doesn't play well with others.
Where I work, we're getting ready to throw away VB6 and ASP Classic legacy applications and replace it with WPF + something for the Web. That something for the Web isn't going to be determined by some rubric or flowchart that makes my decision for me. It is going to be determined by experimentation and prototyping. Where I work, we're building the same small, but sufficiently complex application in SL2B2, Flex 3, and Ext.js.
The question you should be asking isn't how to make a big flowchart comparing Silverlight against Flex or even against Ext.js. The question you should be asking is, where should I start experimentation and prototyping? What kind of people should I hire that can do novel experimentation and prototyping?
Lastly, there is a theme throughout this thread that people on both sides are hitting on, but just aren't saying: Microsoft and Adobe aren't that interested (just yet) in solving problems most of us have. However, vendors never want to solve your problems, they want to sell licenses. Solving your problems is a side-effect. As a demonstration of this point, in his book Essential WPF, Chris Anderson writes: "With these four major platforms [User32/GDI32, Ruby (Visual Basic's UI model), Trident (MSHTML.DLL), and Window Forms] a large percentage of [Microsoft] customers' needs were met, but they were all islands. The ability to mix and match parts of the platforms was difficult and error-prone. From a purely selfish point of view, Microsoft management (well, I'll name names: Bill Gates) was tired of paying four teams to build largely overlapping technologies (page xxxi)." Where I work, we feel the same way: we don't want to pay two teams to build largely overlapping UIs.
We are hoping Silverlight 2+ is our solution, but realize the solution would be a side-effect of Microsoft's internal strategies. It is very possible in "subsetting" the WPF API, that Microsoft doesn't pick the right subset for us. That's because they need to sell licenses. It's nothing personal, and we're not wasting time complaining.
08-15-2008 2:32 PM |
Interesting lesson ;) but one I'm not sure you're teachings are entirely accurate on.
Firstly, the hardest balance for us is to ensure Silverlight and WPF are platforms, to bring balance back to the force if you will. In that we've had a fragmented story in the past, but the entire strategy and idea is to consolidate the UI client into two pockets of strategy.
First being WPF, which gives you depth. In that in the near future our plans are to provide folks the ability to write desktop UX that adheres to the same principals as we have in HTML/XAML that at the same time gives access to the operating system level (ie USB devices etc). That's our Depth Play.
Second is Silverlight, which is breadth. We understand that at times building a desktop client can be like driving a porsche to the local shops, so with Silverlight it can provide enough smarts and capabilities that allow folks to build a UX story around breadth. It will not give you access to USB Devices for example, but it will carry enough of the burden to get you out of trouble.
The core pitch to these parts is the "write once, apply anywhere" as the objective is to allow you to re-use not only skillsets but also code throughout the two. So if you want to migrate to the desktop or device, you have the flexability to do so.
Obviously WPF will have a dependency on Windows, as to get access to the Operating System you've got to make agreements somewhere to adhere to security concerns etc. However, the Silverlight product itself will not have dependencies in any way shape or form with other products other than Silverlight.
That all being said, that's all we are doing, a platform for which ISV"s to build up from and carve out their own future using two simple technologies that can access any Microsoft or 3rd party solution to support them.
eg: PHP Client for Silverlight is being made by a 3rd party, yet another example of folks taking the technology beyond Microsoft's borders if you will.
08-15-2008 5:22 PM |
MSMossyBlog:I'm not sure you're teachings are entirely accurate on.
The reaction from people who don't understand my motivation is almost always apathy or confusion, a symbolic puzzlement: "What's this fool after?" A common denominator among RIAs is that most programmers don't know what's important. Especially young programmers: They lack experience to know there is a large gap between Issue #1 and Issue #278, and that any rubrics/flowchart they present will be looked on with disdain by experienced people who've been burned by rubrics/flowcharts, and now know they need to see what is possible. Some people in this thread have mentioned doing experimentation and prototyping, but people focus on the results rather than the underlying best practice getting those results: experimentation and prototyping.
Judging by your blog, you've got a wealth of experience with Flex and Silverlight. Your ability to separate the wheat from the chaff is experimentation and prototyping. But your conclusions may not be the same as someone else's. Also, don't underestimate the value of cross-pollination of ideas when you get the chance to experiment and prototype.
This is why rubric/flowchart is inferior to experimentation and prototyping. You should jump at the chance to drive the porchse to the local shops, at least once, if you've never driven a porsche before. Gain some experience with a porsche before you tell me its an inferior Grocery Getter to a Chevy Impala.
I am aware of MS's Depth Play vs. Breadth Play: "Plays" are plans to sell more licenses, and MS's plays could work in my favor, but I need to judge if MS's plays align with my plays. I'll determine that by experimentation and prototyping. Any debating between you and Ted focuses on plays, and is therefore ignoring the big picture, and the right advice: actually building software has a strange way of giving you the best feedback moving forward. If Adobe's developer tools are inferior to Microsoft's, then experimentation and prototyping will prove it. I can't be more pragmatic. If you want to be a stellar Product Manager, then tell me more about the product Road Map rather than the train tracks you've laid down so far. People get excited when they hear the Continental Express's goal is to reach California. They're not so excited to know they can travel to Oklahoma. I can't experiment and prototype with Silverlight 3.0, so focus on Silverlight's direction, purpose and motivation going forward. And do it in concrete terms.
Two of the best product teams at MS, SQLServer Team and the C# Language Team, are stellar at this. I.e., I know the focus on C# 4.0 is concurrency and parallelization, and that Eric Lippert is attempting to make C#'s typing system at least as good as the CLR's.
Debating technicalities is really only useful in narrow circumstances, like where the customer's perception of "best practice" is way off. A good example of fixing way off perceptions is Josh Smith's blog post, Thinking in WPF. Even here, Josh gives you a technical outline sighting what your goals should be, and comparing them to what your goals probably currently are (and why they are wrong). Rubrics/flowcharts/outlines are great at helping you realize you need to unlearn what you have learned. Your debate is trying to convince people to bend or break to or from Adobe/Microsoft. People don't need help bending or breaking, they need help recrystallizing. Rubrics/flowcharts/outlines/notes are supposed to present a clear message: “Your perception is antiquated and doing it this other way will work better anyway.”
Letting others tell you what is and isn't possible will only allow you to build something 95% similar to what everyone else is doing. It's the 5% that is the blood, sweat and tears. Experimentation and prototyping is everything in your fight corner: your trainer, your cut man, your sweat rag and spit bucket. It's far more important to know "why you choose a platform" than "why the average group of people choose a platform". In software, the average project fails. Having seen some of the 33% of projects that succeed, one lesson I've learned is that they all realized software is about customization and applying averages simply doesn't work.
Rubrics are just really worthless. They're an attempt to insert processes to make up for incompetencies or the fact work isn't done yet. Such people value flowcharts over their own personal experience. I know some people love rubrics/flowcharts to tell them what to do. In fact, I once met an executive who wanted a flowchart to follow to know when to fire people. He was a nice man, but totally incompetent when it came to evaluating his subordinates, and as such a horrible executive. I was glad when I heard he was fired.
08-15-2008 6:29 PM |
Allow me to retort :)
The point of my overall post is, you can’t expect Microsoft to not only tell you the start of the story, but how it end as to do so will not only starve innovation for one and secondly removes the prototyping stage as you elegantly have outlined. Our purpose is to lay the tracks, it's up to you to figure out how you want to build the engine and where you want to drive the engine. We’ll provide guidance as best we can on how one should build them, or which direction to head and at the same time we’ll promote the technology so others can maybe even meet you half way, should the need arise. Yet, our goal is to platform, not own verticals that our customers dwell in – at times we enter the verticals to stimulate growth, but our core business is platforms + tools.
Adobe's pitch is "we coined RIA, therefore we own it", our pitch is "What you do with the UX Platform today, will define what RIA is tomorrow" in its simplest form, the hidden message there is You Define RIA.
I watch daily as folks struggle to define what RIA is, I hear from all walks of life on what they think RIA is our should be in the long term and what you appear to be pitching is how we determine the outcome or ways in which we settle on the said outcome.
As a Product Manager, I'm looking to shape and ensure that as you, the customer or prototype determine the next steps, I will in turn respond in kind by ensuring the products themselves have the appropriate level of pieces in place to accommodate your desires or needs.
Yes, we're a company and we’ll look at ways to monetize the said products that we implement, as this in turn will fund the next steps you uncover, as without funding, the technology research & development will starve. Features like Deep Zoom came from out of the box thinking and we’ve got more of this happening in the various teams now, some of which I’d love to talk about here on a public forum, but can’t just yet. As well, they’re still prototyping, figuring out what could work and where, and how the customers can then take that said piece and innovate further on top of it. Innovation is actually one of Microsoft’s core strengths, we take a few beatings here and there on this as sadly, most of the things we innovate hardly reach the surface and when they do, folks sometimes look past them for what we didn’t do?
That all being said, Adobe are a competitor in this space, so it would be great to work in harmony on a few pieces of the overall puzzle, but sadly they've made it abundantly clear that they not only have no intent to work with anything .NET but they've gone out of their way to remove all .NET pieces to their entire story.
What do we do in response? we can decide one of two things, firstly we could look to take an aggressive posture as well, but with that comes a large tax, the customer. As when two companies take an aggressive posture with one another, it's like two parents fighting - there is rarely any good that comes from it.
Instead, we'll look to fork innovation, let them focus on what they think their mission in life is, and we'll in turn go an alternative direction (Deep Zoom, Adaptive Streaming etc), as this in turn will give hopefully enough pieces for folks to build up from. This is the most palatable solution for us, as in the end we not only don't confuse or annoy our customers by taking an aggressive stance, we more importantly look to encourage alternative thinking, choice of different ways to attack the problem if you will.
We aren’t looking at our new features with a me to rubber stamp, it’s more how does this go beyond what’s available today, how can we provide an alternative view of how to solve this said problem or albeit provide the baseline foundation for which customers can then innovate without the existing constraints?
Which in turn, underpins your believe system that prototyping, looking at the patterns along the way to the result will determine new paths in not only solving future problems but identifying ways in which to solve the said problem. In turn, you define the outcome, we in turn are simply the enablers to help you along this path.
08-15-2008 7:10 PM |
Thanks for your reply. I was mainly trying to focus on encouraging experimentation and prototyping, not further the differences between Adobe and MS.
MSMossyBlog:Innovation is actually one of Microsoft’s core strengths, we take a few beatings here and there on this as sadly, most of the things we innovate hardly reach the surface and when they do, folks sometimes look past them for what we didn’t do?
I recognize the innovation, and more importantly the integration. Microsoft is one of the few large tech companies pushing technology to new limits.
MSMossyBlog:the hidden message there is You Define RIA.
Well put.
MSMossyBlog:Yes, we're a company and we’ll look at ways to monetize the said products that we implement, as this in turn will fund the next steps you uncover, as without funding, the technology research & development will starve.
I'm not criticizing this at all. If I were, I'd be a hypocrite. :) I'm just pointing out that some conversations go down rabbit holes that aren't worth pursuing in the grand scheme of things. Advertising is all about sending a clear, consistent message over and over again. You Define RIA is a provocative sales pitch ;)
That's pretty much the point, too. If you want to decide that RIA means using the web browser to display a "green screen terminal", then that's RIA to you. If 1960's style UIs sell more widgets for your company, then more power to you. If your ISV sells licenses, it doesn't matter what RIA stands for to other people.
MSMossyBlog:you can’t expect Microsoft to not only tell you the start of the story, but how it end as to do so will not only starve innovation for one and secondly removes the prototyping stage as you elegantly have outlined.
True, but we hear vague rumors of tracks going all the way to the site of the gold rush. These rumors come from what we've seen from WPF... In fact, my hope is you largely copy WPF and that the innovation a few years from now is solely dedicated on stuff I can't effect as a platform developer, such as how fast a triangle gets rendered.
thosebug
273 points
70 Posts
08-16-2008 8:02 PM |
I'm a Flex developer, and I love to do that, but we need to be honest, Silverlight offers .NET, and .NET means C# (VB, etc), .NET means Visual Studio, that's all.
the problem with Flex is the IDE, Flex builder socks, and nobody do nothing, programmers like me we learn to live with bugs. And Adobe needs to improve Action Script if they want to be in the next years with their 90..% stand.
I'm sure Ted will read this, hey..instead to be loosing your time here..why you are not participating on flex forums to listen what Professional Programmers need? don't think that SL is a simple "thing", SL it's a real opponent, and it's getting only better each release, watch out, or next MAX will be spreading SL instead of Flex.
flash_guru
08-25-2008 10:22 PM |
thosebug: I'm a Flex developer, and I love to do that, but we need to be honest, Silverlight offers .NET, and .NET means C# (VB, etc), .NET means Visual Studio, that's all. the problem with Flex is the IDE, Flex builder socks, and nobody do nothing, programmers like me we learn to live with bugs. And Adobe needs to improve Action Script if they want to be in the next years with their 90..% stand. I'm sure Ted will read this, hey..instead to be loosing your time here..why you are not participating on flex forums to listen what Professional Programmers need? don't think that SL is a simple "thing", SL it's a real opponent, and it's getting only better each release, watch out, or next MAX will be spreading SL instead of Flex.
Shhhhhh!!!! Do you guys know that the Democratic National Convention is using Silverlight on its website. If you want to see HD Video you must install Silverlight. Let's not tell our Ted (adobeted). He goes all nuts about this. He will even say that Microsoft owns Democratic party!. I really do not want him to loose sleep over this.
Have fun!
Flash_guru.
broward
08-26-2008 1:18 PM |
"encouraging experimentation and prototyping"
I created an ID here because I couldn't read the full text of responses without clicking "reply'.
I'm reading this forum as a post-purchase exercise, we decided to use Flex several months ago after evaluating several competing products (including Silverlight, although I rarely review MS development products). I never intended to reply but after reading some of the comments....
Nine years ago, I left the MS development for several reasons, many of which are apparently still in play. I have a team of java developers who prototyped an application with Flex within a few days. I see that Silverlight supports a myriad of marginal languages which I avoid for cost/benefit reasons, but not the primary language which is important to large enterprises.
And I grew tired of the masked arrogance from MS, the belief that tons of money can force the use of tools and that promises don't really matter much if there's a fountain of revenue, that "we shall crush you" attitude. C# is a copy of Java because Sun understood scalability, design and legacy issues which MS ignored. I've seen that Adobe understands some of those issues. It's possible that MS may jam enough money into the community to force widespread adoption but for now, I'm comfortable with my initial decision. It's possible that Adobe may fumble the ball but I suspect that IBM and Oracle won't.
kwatts
2129 points
436 Posts
08-26-2008 1:50 PM |
I hope to see Silverlight emerge as the dominant RIA platform, although it does have an uphill battle to fight. The problem with flex is that it is a kludge of poorly designed technologies and the only thing that keeps it going is its massive install base. The flash player was originally created as an animation player and was never really intended to be used as it is presently, and actionscript is really just a scripting language, not a fully featured object oriented programming language like the many that are supported by Silverlight. Java had a real opportunity early on to be the front-runner in this area, but they have consistently dropped the ball by not delivering an applet viewer that worked well across multiple platforms and have always lagged behind in support for multimedia. It's too bad that MS did not get the ball rolling sooner with Silverlight, which is a well thought out and smartly designed platform that inspires me as a developer to want to create content for it. But if any company has the resources to compete with the likes of Adobe and Sun, it is Microsoft.
08-26-2008 2:01 PM |
broward:C# is a copy of Java because Sun understood scalability, design and legacy issues which MS ignored.
I always love it when I read quotes like this. Please sir, explain to me 1 thing, 1 single thing that java innovated. Just about the only thing that distinguished Java (for a new language) was how BADLY it was implemented. Sure it cobbled together some ideas from other truly innovative languages, but yikes, what were they thinking?
So you're telling me that I must layout my source files in the same physical structure as the namespace layout? Oh, ok, now they go into jar files? How does it find the Jar files? I see, it relies on the system's environmental variables, wow great idea. Oh, and if two vendors include the same class file in their jar which does it use, oh the first one, spectacular. Hmm, where is the language support for properties? Ah, just do some get/set methods, gee whiz, brilliant. Oh, how about events? What do you mean I have to implement an interface just to handle a button click? Delphi has these cool things called bound method references that make things so much cleaner. Oh those are evil, um, ok, whatever. I could go on and on.
C# really didn't introduce all that much either in its initial release, but man was its consolidation of ideas from existing languages (not Java) a 1000 times cleaner. We'll see how long it takes Java to introduce features like Linq, I'm guessing it will be a while.
08-26-2008 2:02 PM |
"The flash player was originally created as an animation player and was never really intended to be used as it is presently, and actionscript is really just a scripting language, not a fully featured object oriented programming language like the many that are supported by Silverlight." There are 2 virtual machines today in Flash Player. One supports the prototype based model of ActionScript 1&2. The other virtual machine is very different supporting a fully object oriented programming language called ActionScript 3 based on the ECMA 4 spec. AS3 supports all the OOP bells and whistles in C#, Java while also supporting dynamic classes. There are 2 different API sets within Flash Player 9. One is the legacy APIs for the AS1/AS2 vm while the other was rewritten from scratch for ActionScript 3. Flex is built using the AS3 APIS in Flash Player 9 and higher. At Adobe we will continue to innovate and add API's and features that leading customers like Microsoft need to be successful online. Regards, Ted :)
08-26-2008 2:40 PM |
I think no one should say bad word about Flash Player. It is fantastic piece of software. Works fast, stable and almost everywhere. Thta is where Macromedia made their homework when it comes to Java. But Flex framework is different story. I have seen many datagrids for example which are hell slow while displaying only 50 rows simultaneously. Many components are half-baked (combobox, datagrid, datepicker). Layout engine is slow. It doesn't work well with big applications. I've seen some samples where one screen takes 10 seconds to initialize.
Regarding OOP features of AS3. As I said somewhere before. What is the point of having strong typing language which supports dynamic classes? Specially the way AS3 implements them. It just allow lazy developers be more lazy. I would love to see generics in AS3 or at least have the way to define that array (arraycollection?) contains only strings, integers and so on. Lack of this is painful. Next thing is databinding. It just suck ass. Another point is events architecture. C# events work much better than AS3. At least the syntax. There is many more.
Last and the biggest problem is Flex Builder. Slow monster taking 500MB of RAM. Error messages and compile-time errors in many cases different than what we see in FlashPlayer. No way to get code hints when class isn't referenced in the app. Inaccurate compiler which very often requires executing "Clean...". That is just annoying.
This is what comes to my mind in just 5 minutes.
08-26-2008 3:09 PM |
adobeted:AS3 supports all the OOP bells and whistles in C#, Java while also supporting dynamic classes.
Excellent Ted. I'm having a little problem with the AS3 documentation. Can you point me to the section that documents threads? Also, I've become rather attached to Linq, can you send me a link to that as well? Also when I'm debugging in Visual Studio my custom visualizers have become a life saver, how do I implement those in Flex? :)
08-26-2008 3:21 PM |
Jack, Language and API's are different things. Threads in Flash Player 10 are implemented as an API. We are supporting a new green threading and component model with our newer compilers (yes multiple). We will talk about this at MAX in Nov 16-19 in San Francisco. MAX.ADOBE.COM I am not sure about LINQ support but if it is open (SPEC?) and socket (HTTP/TCPIP) based writing an AS3 class to support it shouldn't be hard. Our tooling will get better over time. VS didn't become great overnight and a few VS and .NET architects are now working at Adobe. Ted :)
08-26-2008 4:11 PM |
Ted,
If you're in the middle of looking up the information that Jack requested, please send me a link to the documentation that talks about as3 support of generics.
Also, it seems that in an effort to make actionscript more like a real programming language in order to try to make programmers happy, adobe is alienating their core users - designers:
http://digg.com/programming/Why_Flash_Sucks
http://turbidwater.blogspot.com/2007/12/flex-sucks-ass.html
-Ken
alexmont...
74 points
41 Posts
08-26-2008 6:08 PM |
I wonder if this thread is gonna hit million view?
Personally I couldn't care less about the Flex vs Silverlight debate. The way I see it, people's preference is largely due to experience with either product. Flex/Flash developers who have been using flash for years are sticking to their guns, and .net developers such as myself are also staying with .net technology.
I don't know anything about ActionScript, Flex and Flash so I can't really comment on the platform. I can however, comment on the evolution of .net since I've been following it since the .net 1.1 days. I've seen C# get more use in our tools teams here at Ubisoft and it is now being used in the majority of our tools pipeline. And now since VS2008, LINQ has become an integral, and important, part of .net and I couldn't think of writing data driven applications without it. Even though I don't always aggree with Microsoft starting their own standards instead of using existing ones (like XAML), I think they are in the right direction this time with Visual Studio working hand in hand with designers tools like Expression and Blend.
Alex
08-26-2008 6:15 PM |
adobeted:Jack, Language and API's are different things.
Ted, obviously I was being a little sarcastic. The fact that AS3 supports things like polymorphism and inheritance is great, but it's lack of features for things like generics, linq, reflection, dynamically loaded assemblies, real threads, etc is not something that you guys are going to be able to overcome in the near future. Now you are doing your best to point out that even Microsoft currently uses Flash, you wouldn't be doing your job as a zealous advocate otherwise, but you are in a technical forum, so you're gonna have to raise your game beyond the standard rhetoric. We're all developers and are the first to realize that changing platforms isn't like flipping a switch. The fact Microsoft rolled out the olympic site on a VERY feature incomplete beta is evidence enough of where the platform is going.
adobeted:VS didn't become great overnight and a few VS and .NET architects are now working at Adobe.
When you get Anders Hejlsberg, I'll take note. :)
JavaSimon
08-27-2008 3:58 AM |
sorry jack, but i have to tell you that you seem not to be a good developer! you are so narrow-minded, a developer should never be! you are just writing stuff $MS hammered in your head. you are not able to see, that all of these languages (java, c#, flex/flash) has their advantages and disadvantages. i tell you: a good developer has an open mind and is not that stupid to focus just on one technology!
btw: it's not so difficult to turn all of your arguments around and use them in the other direction:
jackbond:Please sir, explain to me 1 thing, 1 single thing that java innovated
what are the innovations of c#? linq? i don't think so! these are also just old ideas, newly assembled! what else? nothing! it's just a copy of java!
jackbond:Just about the only thing that distinguished Java (for a new language) was how BADLY it was implemented
what was not good? sure, not everything was perfect in the beginning (in the early 90s!), but now? please tell me, what exactly is that bad?
jackbond:Sure it cobbled together some ideas from other truly innovative languages
exactly the same did $MS when they developed c#
jackbond:So you're telling me that I must layout my source files in the same physical structure as the namespace layout?
why not? this is really practical and gives me a clean folder structure. i hate such god-folders that contains thousands of files!
jackbond:Oh, ok, now they go into jar files?
aren't .net assemblies actually the same then jar files? it's also precompiled source, isn't it?
jackbond:How does it find the Jar files? I see, it relies on the system's environmental variables, wow great idea
do you think it's better to register all of your assemblies in the GAC? i don't think so!
jackbond:Oh, and if two vendors include the same class file in their jar which does it use, oh the first one, spectacular
it uses exactly this one that i tell it to use!
jackbond:Hmm, where is the language support for properties?
there was a big discussion in the java community (yes, there is a community! it's not just one company that constitute the future of the language). so, it's not a fault that java has no properties, it was a decision!
jackbond:Oh, how about events? What do you mean I have to implement an interface just to handle a button click?
no, you don't have to do that if you don't like to! you do also have the possibility to make use of anonymous methods. and btw: delegates are a bad replacement for that!
jackbond:I could go on and on.
me too!
so you see jack; everyone of us can now go on and on, slam c#, java or flex. but that is just a religious war, can't you see that? that is not constructive! so start so be s smart guy and use the right language for the right project. and believe me; that'll vary from project to project!
greez simon
08-27-2008 5:31 PM |
For the sake of decorum, I'll ignore your rudeness.
JavaSimon:what are the innovations of c#? linq? i don't think so! these are also just old ideas, newly assembled! what else? nothing! it's just a copy of java!
I'll quote my initial post, "C# really didn't introduce all that much either in its initial release, but man was its consolidation of ideas from existing languages (not Java) a 1000 times cleaner." There it is, no where in my post did I claim the original c# had any innovations. I would claim that Linq is fairly innovative, as I am not familiar with any general purpose programming languages that have integrated query capabilities. What would your argument be that Linq is not innovative?
JavaSimon:what was not good? sure, not everything was perfect in the beginning (in the early 90s!), but now? please tell me, what exactly is that bad?
I listed the things that I thought were flawed or could have been implemented better in a new language.
JavaSimon:exactly the same did $MS when they developed c#
No disagreement. The point I was making in my initial post was that Java was not innovative but simply built on ideas established in existing languages. Which is why I asked him to name an innovative Java feature. Interestingly enough, you took the trouble to create a user account, flame me, but did not in fact answer the question. I'll happily answer yours, just be kind enough to answer my 1 simple question. What innovative feature did Java implement?
JavaSimon:aren't .net assemblies actually the same then jar files? it's also precompiled source, isn't it?
Having actually worked with Java (at Sun Microsystems) and C#, I can assure you that .net assemblies are more than just a simple container of files. And my point wasn't with jar files themselves, but how the java runtime resolved which class files to use in case of a conflict. It's likely the tools have improved today, but in the past, if you added a 3rd party jar file to your path, that file could include a class that was already in some other jar. Which led to some extremely annoying class resolution issues. The packaging of java assemblies is an area that wasn't given great attention, the initial release didn't even have jar files. This is one of the reasons that I said for a new language, Java was implemented very badly.
JavaSimon:do you think it's better to register all of your assemblies in the GAC? i don't think so!
Nope, and I never said so.
JavaSimon:why not? this is really practical and gives me a clean folder structure. i hate such god-folders that contains thousands of files!
Well this is rather ironic. You're complaining about thousands of files, and yet Java requires you to have a separate file for each public class.
JavaSimon:there was a big discussion in the java community (yes, there is a community! it's not just one company that constitute the future of the language). so, it's not a fault that java has no properties, it was a decision!
My point was that they could have been part of the initial language release. The fact that there is a debate in the Java community regarding properties is a pretty good indicator that they are a desireable feature. And from what I have seen, the opposition to adding them revolves around the breaking changes they would introduce, clearly not an issue that would exist if they had been in the language in the first place. Also your claim that Java is not controlled by a single company is fairly comical. Sun accepts feedback on the language, as does Microsoft, but they're definitely at the helm.
JavaSimon:and btw: delegates are a bad replacement for that!
I can assure you, this statement is going to fall on VERY deaf ears from virtually 100% of the people reading this forum. But if you'd care to explain to us why we should be using anonymous inner classes instead of delegates, feel free.
JavaSimon:so you see jack; everyone of us can now go on and on, slam c#, java or flex. but that is just a religious war, can't you see that?
Actually, you took the trouble of signing up today to start a war. All I asked was for the poster to tell me which features from Java where innovative that Microsoft copied in c#. Personally, I don't browse java forums, take offense because someone "insulated" my language, sign up as c#jack, and pick fights.
JavaSimon:so start so be s smart guy and use the right language for the right project.
Hmm, odd, I don't recall saying that c# was perfect for every job or to not use Java.
08-28-2008 5:16 AM |
ok jack, i have to admit that my post was a bit rude! i just get quite a bit angry when i read such one-sided, unfair statements (even in a MS forum!). it's not the point that i want to persuade you to like java or flex. i just think that every developer has to be open for the advantages of each language!
i don't do that here because i like fighting! a friend of mine sent me the link, asking me if that is true that java is that bad. so i decided to sign up to place another opinion, because you are really one-sided and violent in your posts! btw, i did choose this name, because my favorite one was already used by another one and javasimon was just the first option that i got in mind.
and actually java is not the subject in this thread, but flex is. so i hand over the role of the opposition back to adobeted. ted, you are a hero!
08-28-2008 5:58 AM |
JavaSimon:linq: it is not a new idea to run queries against objects instead of a database, XML or whatever (have a look on hibernate for example). MS did just some enhancements on this idea
Yeah, right - instead of building SQL-like parser Microsoft "just slightly" improved it by making it language feature. Do you see the difference?
JavaSimon:the real innovation of java was, that it was the first OO-language that could be used by a broad range of people and for nearly every problem. non of its features were new, but the composition of them was a revolution! and that it really was one, how else can you explain the rapid worldwide spread of it?
Well - Javascript is most widely used client-side language. Does it mean we should stick to it and never let it go? It does it job very well, it is ver flexible but has many problems also. As Java was revolution C# was also revolution. Languages and environments are evolving. C was evolution of B. That is how the world works. Right?
JavaSimon:the discusion about properties indicates just that it is not clear if they are realy useful/needed. me, i actually like properties, but the absence of them is not an argument for a bad language. it's just another concept.
Yes, it is just another concept. I'm using AS3 and C# very often and when I'm coming back to Java I always miss them. It is so stupid to wrap each property with getter and setter.
JavaSimon:anonymous methods are just practical! one is able to add the logic direct to a button for example, without defining any additional variables, delegates or whatever. the logic behind it can be defined at the very same place then itself. that is a feature i really miss in c#!!
Maybe you should read more about anonymous delegates?
JavaSimon:and actually java is not the subject in this thread, but flex is. so i hand over the role of the opposition back to adobeted. ted, you are a hero!
Heh... Ted is not a hero. He is Adobe evangelist paid to do what he is doing here.
08-28-2008 12:33 PM |
Ok Simon, I'm simply of the opinion that Java didn't innovate anything, and consequently there was nothing in c# to copy, as the original poster claimed.
Ok, we'll just have to disagree here on when an enhancement (as you call it) can be considered an innovation. If hibernate allows Java developers to query an array of integers, then I'd probably be inclined to agree with you that linq is an enhancement.
Ok, thank you for answering my question. No new features, nothing to copy. As to its rapid worldwide spread, well, like many things, it was in the right place at the right time. Here's something to consider though; considering Java's huge head start and its cross platform abilities, why did Flash not only gain foothold, but completely crush Java in the RIA space?
JavaSimon:i actually like properties, but the absence of them is not an argument for a bad language. it's just another concept.
My initial reference to the lack of properties was to highlight that, considering when it was introduced, Java could easily have had them up front.
08-28-2008 3:07 PM |
LINQ is not a new idea, but the comparison and understanding of LINQ as HQL is wrong. LINQ puts monad comprehensions into the language, which means query operators are independent of algebraic structure (relational, object-oriented, hierarchical, etc.) Java does not have an equivalent, but Miguel Garcia is working on something like it. LINQ should not be compared to Hibernate, instead compare it to C-Omega, Kleisli, and Links.
There is only one major weakness to LINQ:
Suppose... a set of collection interfaces: Enumerable - supporting iteration; Finite - supporting a size opertaion and Searchable - supporting a contains operation. It is possible to define the contains operation for any finite enumerable collection of elements supporting equality checking... Instead of relying on the class hierarchy to reflect common functionality, which might require restructuring the system when new interfaces are needed... it is possible to declare (via some form of logic programming) that any abstraction that supports the Finite and Enumberable interfaces also supports the Seachable interface. This connection can be done usingthe type system...Ehum Lamm
Suppose... a set of collection interfaces: Enumerable - supporting iteration; Finite - supporting a size opertaion and Searchable - supporting a contains operation. It is possible to define the contains operation for any finite enumerable collection of elements supporting equality checking... Instead of relying on the class hierarchy to reflect common functionality, which might require restructuring the system when new interfaces are needed... it is possible to declare (via some form of logic programming) that any abstraction that supports the Finite and Enumberable interfaces also supports the Seachable interface. This connection can be done usingthe type system...
Ehum Lamm
HQL doesn't solve this, either, though.
08-29-2008 6:00 AM |
it's really the wrong place here for my position
ok, one last statement:
08-29-2008 7:15 AM |
OMG. JavaSimon:
08-29-2008 7:32 AM |
in my first point it should be "while in .net" not c#.
08-29-2008 3:39 PM |
1. if this thread would limit to Flex v/s silverlight it will be better. There is no point in discussing .net/java here.
2. And in flex/SL also it will be better to limit to tech perpective instead of marketing jargon.
3. Also it will be better to respect others and not to be sarcastic.
4. I do programming in c# and MS SQL server is the only database I have expertise in. At this time, I am not using SL as I am developing in Flex for last few months and I am enjoying flex programming. I see nothing wrong in it (in using technology other then MS). But few people are so sarcastic here that it gives a feeling as if I am doing some sin.
08-29-2008 4:13 PM |
JavaSimon:i said, the innovation of java was the composition of all this features. and that is what MS imitated! VM, GC, Generics etc. don't tell me you can not see the similarity!
So your only claim is that the composition is an innovation. In the case of Henry Ford taking the various components of a car, which had never been assembled in that particular fashion, yah, that's innovation. But when Java copied/stole (your terminology) ideas from existing languages to make just another language, that isn't innovation, that's evolution. You might want to check out this link, http://www.artima.com/weblogs/viewpost.jsp?thread=173229 It makes it fairly obvious that the initial release of Java was a rush job, and suffered from ALL the problems that I outlined in my initial post. Which is why I said the only thing that distinguished it was how badly it was implemented. Seems like the language would have been much better in Bill Joy's hands. When you look back, the fact they made all the comprimises in order to ship a little earlier is just absolutely absurd.
JavaSimon:flex and java are no rivals.
Seems like more spin to me. Flash crushes java on the client (why is that?), so you claim that they are complimentary? What happens when Adobe releases a server version of Action Script?
JavaSimon:i did never disagree that LINQ has more functionality then hibernate. i just said that the base idea is the same!
So Java using the EXACT same ideas as existing languages is innovation, but MSFT integrating query abilities into .NET is just more of the same? I think most of us understand the inconsistency in your reasoning. It might also explain your dislike of delegates, or why you insisted on using the trite $MS. I'm glad you enjoy using Java, whatever floats your boat. I don't use it because (in my opinion) it's a horribly implemented unoriginal patchwork language complemented by feature incomplete horrid development tools. And now that its driving force is "design by committee", its fate is surely sealed (again, in my opinion.)
08-29-2008 11:40 PM |
radekg:VM in .net has different purpose than VM in Java. In Java VM is meant to provide cross-platform capabilities while in C# it is meant to run many languages on with one VM. Look! Java copied multilingual capabilities from MS! http://java.sun.com/developer/technicalArticles/J2SE/Desktop/scripting/AS3 has GC, is it evil then? Does Adobe (Macromedia) borrowed idea from Java? Is that bad? That is called evolution!
Not exactly. The Common Language Runtime (CLR) executes code that has been compiled to an Intermediate Language (IL) that the runtime can interpret. What enables the CLR to interpret many languages are the compilers for those languages. MS provides compilers for C#, VB, and C++, and many others have been developed by .NET enthusiasts. See this link for a comprehensive list of what compilers are currently available for the CLR:
http://blogs.ugidotnet.org/nettools/articles/8060.aspx
Similarly, the Java virtual machine (JVM) executes Java byte code. So a Java compiler compiles Java code to byte code, which gets interpreted by the JVM at runtime. As long as there is a compiler that can compile code from some high level language to Java byte code, the JVM can also be used to execute code written in other languages. Here's a short list of languages that can be compiled to execute on the JVM:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_JVM_languages
Additionally, both environments should be considered cross platform since the point for having a software layer like the CLR or JVM is to abstract code from the underlying hardware, and both are available on multiple platforms.
The advantage that these environments both have over the flash player is the support for multiple languages, not just the one substandard OO "wannabe" language. I'm still astonished that the flash player has managed to stick around as long as it has given all of its shortcomings. If it weren't for its huge install base, it would already be obsolete. I for one hope that Silverlight will make flash obsolete, but that's a mere pipedream!
08-30-2008 5:50 PM |
kwatts: The advantage that these environments both have over the flash player is the support for multiple languages, not just the one substandard OO "wannabe" language. I'm still astonished that the flash player has managed to stick around as long as it has given all of its shortcomings. If it weren't for its huge install base, it would already be obsolete. I for one hope that Silverlight will make flash obsolete, but that's a mere pipedream! -Ken
Flash is indeed inferior, but it does have a HUGE marketshare. I originally thought it would be easy for SL to overcome the installed runtime advantage, but I'm beginning to question just how long it will take to reach 50%.
The important thing is NOT which technology is technically superior, it's which one solves your problem. Right now, if you want to build an application for the internet, you best choice is Flash/Flex. If it's an intranet application, you should look at either WinForms, WPF, or Silverlight, depending on your requirements.
I do agree with you that if not for the installed base, SL would CRUSH Flash in a fair competition, but now, there's room for both.
Sam...
08-30-2008 11:16 PM |
Time to call "Time of Death" for this thread 8:09pm 30/9/2008.
I only say this is that if you were to summarise what the positive lessons learnt form this thread, what would they be?
08-30-2008 11:30 PM |
I can only say - don't kill this thread, let us get back on track and enable paging in this forum! I have the feeling that this tread just starts to be interesting. If you however decide to kill it then thanks for great 6 months discussion.
08-30-2008 11:57 PM |
radekg:.NET is better than Java ;)
Agreed!
radekg:Silverlight will win anyway!
I sure hope so!
08-31-2008 12:09 AM |
There is no winner :)
It's kind of cool to see the press treat this like a prize boxing match, by getting both sides to respond to the others movements (i know, it comes in my inbox at times) but overall, I think once Adobe realises that it's not a Zero Sum Game, I think we'll get back to being normal corporate citizens and produce really interesting and fantastic experiences.
Until that happens however, I'll continue to get a bruised eye everytime I defend Silverlight in the Adobe community, and Ted & his colleagues will get equal measure when they project "Flash or Bust" in the Microsoft community.
I honestly wish the politics would die off :) as it really gets unhealthy..great politican scratch maching fueds to be had (they at times get funny), but its really like watching two parents argue in front of their children... no good comes from it..
Jim Pars...
08-31-2008 3:06 PM |
vkj:I am thinking of buying a Mac. I know SL runtime is available on Mac, but is the development tool for SL available on Mac. Can I develop SL application on Mac.Thanks in advance.
Why? Because of Intel Macs and VMware Fusion.
I do all my Microsoft work on my three OS X boxes. I currently run Vista, Server 2003, Server 2008 etc. on my Mac Book Pro and my Mac Pro and, of course, once those operating systems are up and running you can add any Microsoft tools you wish to them. One thing to remember is to get as fast a hard drive as you can ( Seagate Momentus 7200RPM for instance ) and as much RAM as you can 4GB.
My VM for Server 2008 runs nearly as fast as my native install Server 2008 machine and that is amazing. Also, don't give too much memory to the VMs. Balance is the key here for memory. I have found the VM works better with 2GB of RAM than 3GB as an example. My main Sharepoint image contains so much stuff its scary!
Macs make great platforms for Virtual Machines and they have the memory management and processor scheduling to run multiple VMs at once smoothly.
Oh, and to the person that said you first have to put a real OS on it, that is sad. Don't hate on Macs. OS X is one of the most elegant OSs that has ever been. Showing your ignorance of modern OS architecture is not something that endears your readers to you. Hey, I am a Ferrari guy, but I still like Porsche.
Microsoft and Apple need to work together folks. We both have wonderful products ( Sharepoint iPhone iTunes Silverlight ). Embrace and have balance.
Summation: Macs are great for Microsoft development. VMware Fusion is your answer. Get a fast hard drive and lost of RAM.
08-31-2008 3:08 PM |
MSMossyBlog:There is no winner :) It's kind of cool to see the press treat this like a prize boxing match, by getting both sides to respond to the others movements (i know, it comes in my inbox at times) but overall, I think once Adobe realises that it's not a Zero Sum Game, I think we'll get back to being normal corporate citizens and produce really interesting and fantastic experiences. Until that happens however, I'll continue to get a bruised eye everytime I defend Silverlight in the Adobe community, and Ted & his colleagues will get equal measure when they project "Flash or Bust" in the Microsoft community. I honestly wish the politics would die off :) as it really gets unhealthy..great politican scratch maching fueds to be had (they at times get funny), but its really like watching two parents argue in front of their children... no good comes from it..
vingz
09-12-2008 1:03 AM |
CLR - platform independence - Mono Silver Light - CLR - Mac, Linux , Windows - Platform independence CLR and JVM are VMs... Have u tried compiling a pure .Net Managed code C# application in VS2005 and running it on Mono Linux... Try it ... It works ... Yeah ... Use VS 2005 for Linux Development with Mono ...
dvdaniels
13 points
09-12-2008 1:55 PM |
There is something out there besides Silverlight for rich internet application development?
I used to use a whole slew of stuff to develop until .NET. Now it is the only platform I use. The only problem I can see for you is if there are compressed timelines. The way you could sell it to the managers is download a trial of the other thing and put VS 2008 on another machine and give them both the same goal of design. You will see in the end.
greylurk
09-17-2008 12:20 PM |
What it boils down to for me is this: YouTube, and it's dozens of competitors/collaborators use Flash/Flex. They're not going away, and it's unlikely that they'll change their default runtime anytime soon. Flash will have a continued large install base for at least the next 3-4 years.Flash is multiplatform. It runs on Windows, Mac, and Linux equally well. Silverlight is *theoretically* multiplatform, but I haven't been able to get a Moonlight release to work yet, though I've tried several times. It's just not mature (and not 1.0)Flash delivers compiled binaries (swf) that run on a VM. Silverlight delivers raw text XML and JavaScript, that run interpreted. Yes, Silverlight 1.1 2.0 will fix that, when it's released in March 2007, August 2007, April 2008, Fall 2008. But until that happens, the perceived speed advantage to end users goes strongly to Flash/Flex. The value of streaming HD Video can be argued until kingdom come, but the reality of the matter is that most internet users don't (currently) care about streaming HD. The network speeds and hardware for connecting your internet to your TV just aren't there yet. The Xbox360 comes very close, but the silly "Microsoft Dollars" system means that pretty much only teens who don't understand money are willing to buy videos online. Besides, judging a general purpose application development platform on how well it streams video is a bit ridiculous in my opinion. Flash and Silverlight aren't just platforms for streaming video. They're general purpose application development systems for building applications in a web browser. They happen to be capable of streaming audio and video, but I don't think that's the main advantage of them. Current RIA projects like Photoshop Express, SlideRocket, and Yahoo Maps are where the power of both Flex and Silverlight become evident. Until Silverlight can support that kind of application development (yes, I know... Wait for 2.0....) I'm going to continue to chose Flex/Flash.
Alexande...
436 points
189 Posts
09-18-2008 2:45 AM |
radekg: .NET is better than Java ;)
radekg: Silverlight will win anyway!
radekg: Never say never to MAX discount if you're SL developer!
09-18-2008 3:17 AM |
A bit off topic... but:
HTML 5 will have a Canvas element that allows drawing on a surface, something I wish SL had, but that's another discussion.
At first I thought that wasn't a big deal, but combine that with mouse events, and there exists the possibility of building SL/Flash type components for HTML, along with better animation. It's not that I think it will compete with RIA platforms all that well, but it probably will be enough for a lot of developers.
I can see chart vendors having a field day with that capability.
lucasstark
09-18-2008 8:59 AM |
Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin-top:0in; mso-para-margin-right:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0in; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;}
IMHO, It all depends on what you are trying to build. If you want a rotating ad banner, or a nice animated interactive header, go with Flash. If you are trying to build a LOB application go with Silverlight.
LOB Applications:
The development tools (Visual Studio) for building LOB applications with Silverlight/.NET far exceed the capabilities of Flex Builder. The programming languages available in .NET are far superior to ActionScript in many ways, and provide a much better developer experience when trying to integrate your UI with your business and data layers. I couldn’t imagine trying to write and then maintain a full featured business layer in Action Script. It just doesn’t feel like you are working with a “real” OOP programming language when in action script and MXML. There seems to be a lot more plumbing code needed in Action Script. This probably stems from the fact that ActionScript’s original intent was to add scripting capabilities to Flash, not to build full featured web applications. Adobe has done a good job with AS3, but you still can’t compare AS3 to a more mature language like C#. AS3 does what it does well, working with user interface elements, but if you plan to write significant business logic code, then you’re better off with a .NET language.
Now some might say, well then design your business and data layers as a SOA and use .Net as the backend. Well, again, the limitations of ActionScript make integrating with your backend data servers somewhat convoluted. Just add a reference to a web service, and take a look at all of the additional code that needs to be generated to facilitate even the simplest requests. .NET will also generate code for you, but the C# proxy classes are able to build from the foundation of the solid c# language, so you’re left with much less boilerplate, plumbing code to think about.
Front End, Graphical Experiences
I think that Flash wins this race. The tooling support for flash is much better then Blend, and, well Flash does have more market penetration than Silverlight. Why, if you need a nice banner with navigation buttons on your site, would you build this in Silverlight, when it is faster to do in Flash, and the user will probably already have the plug-in installed. Also, Photoshop, Illustrator, and the whole line of graphic design tools blow Microsoft’s offerings out of the water, so if you need to be able to quickly build and integrate high quality design elements, then you’re better off with the Adobe stack for this purpose. This for Flash though. If you want to compare building the user interface experience with Flex or Silverlight, well they are pretty much the same.
So in the end, I don’t understand why so many developers out there are building all of these Flash clones with Silverlight. Who really cares about games, cross word puzzles, stupid photo albums etc. Let Flash do what it does best, build the entertaining features of the web. Let’s use Silverlight to do what Microsoft tools do best, and build some high quality LOB applications.
andrew.j...
10-01-2008 6:04 AM |
I develop and architect solutions to the enterprise. There are a number of key elements that must be met in any platform.
1. Scalability and Reliability
2. Accessibility - most organisations I work with have quite old PCs with a very tightly controlled desktop. Some extensively use Apple Macs.
So the client side of any solution must be multi-platform and require a minimal set of pre-requisites. The preferred server side solution in the organisations I have worked with is predominantly Windows 2003 Server and Microsoft SQL Server 2005.
Since changes to these environments can be very time consuming and complex in a large organisation we are developing for .NET framework 2 on the server.
I am not biased either way in terms of development language or platform - for me and the organisations I work with delivering the right solution is key.
Over the past couple of years our solution stack is as follows:
Client : Flex developed RIA
Server : .NET 2.0 based Web Services middle tier and SQL Server 2005 backend.
I spent a lot of time looking at Silverlight and Flex (and continue to evaluate btw). My decisions are based on the following:
Multi-platform support, all of the organisations I have worked with already have Flash Player deployed and none were prepared to rollout Silverlight and .NET 3.5.
Anyone who compares Flex with Flash and ad banners etc. has completely missed the point of Flex. Our applications are enterprise quality. The user experience for an online application is second only to a desktop application. Flex and Actionscript 3 is easy to develop in and the IDE is pretty good (VS2008 is much better though). The applications are all event driven and completely modular - this means download times are quick and development can be easily partitioned. I'm not sure why a previous post was complaining about file size since most of our RIAs are around 300-400Kb - unbelieveable for such a all encompassing application.
With the middle tier as SOAP this allows us to change the client deployment at any point or even provide a number of different clients e.g AIR desktop app or even a Silverlight app.
I am very interested in where Silverlight is going and I expect lots of people will develop in it just because it is Microsoft and they are familar with Visual Studio - for me this isn't a good enough reason, actually I think the learning curve for Flex and Silverlight are similar.
Today Silverlight has a long way to go to be a worthy adversary to Flex - I'm sure in time that will change - so I continue to evaluate.
Andy J
10-01-2008 1:51 PM |
andrew.jackson@centrix.co.uk:Multi-platform support, all of the organisations I have worked with already have Flash Player deployed and none were prepared to rollout Silverlight and .NET 3.5.
One wonders about the extent of your evaluation if you are under the impression that you need to rollout .NET 3.5 to run Silverlight applications.
Odegaard
35 points
48 Posts
10-01-2008 4:36 PM |
From an end-user perspective I don't really see any big advantages in Silverlight over Flex. On the contrary the install base is (at least for now) smaller, and they can pretty much do the same things.
However I see a huge benefit when looking at it from a developer perspective. I think the developer productivity is way higher than with Flex. Second, I bet you'll find a lot more .NET developers than Flex developers out there, so from a manager perspective its also easier (cheaper?) to find and hire people who can jump right on it, not to mention reuse code. You can use .NET for desktop, ASP.NET, web clients (Silverlight), Mobile, Services (WCF) etc, and often reuse the same business logic across the board which I think is a big deal, and you should design your software so you can do this. I think what I'm getting at is at the bottom line, the advantages is just about saving money, but usually that's the most important thing in a company.
10-01-2008 6:55 PM |
Odegaard: From an end-user perspective I don't really see any big advantages in Silverlight over Flex. On the contrary the install base is (at least for now) smaller, and they can pretty much do the same things. However I see a huge benefit when looking at it from a developer perspective. I think the developer productivity is way higher than with Flex. Second, I bet you'll find a lot more .NET developers than Flex developers out there, so from a manager perspective its also easier (cheaper?) to find and hire people who can jump right on it, not to mention reuse code. You can use .NET for desktop, ASP.NET, web clients (Silverlight), Mobile, Services (WCF) etc, and often reuse the same business logic across the board which I think is a big deal, and you should design your software so you can do this. I think what I'm getting at is at the bottom line, the advantages is just about saving money, but usually that's the most important thing in a company.
Your post is suffering from a bit of schizophrenia.
End User cost, is directly related to developer productivity. You also outline how companies can save money by using the Silverlight Stack, and I totally agree, but you fail to make the followup connection that those savings will eventually be passed down to the customer.
Make no mistake, the customer will greatly benefit in the short term with competitive advantage, but in the mid to longer term, it will be cost, productivity, and lastly, problem abstraction. When I say problem abstraction, I mean a radical change in the way we do things on the web.
The next generation of apps will really rock once we fully utilize the power we've been given.
10-15-2008 11:21 AM |
Silverlight vs Flex is a matter of personal preference. I'm cool with .NET framework, having created a tons of .NET desktop and web applications. I will definitely go with Silverlight, as it has the shortest learning curve for me. My users will enjoy the fact that I created the applications they consume efficiently in my own ways.
For somebody not cool with .NET will definitely have a completely different preference. Flex would be the most ideal platform. Flex will have the shortest learning curve and most productive IDE for them. Their users will enjoy fact that Flex developers created the applications they consume efficiently in their own ways.
For anyone new who is currently venturing into Rich Internet Application. I would suggest diving into both Silverlight and Flex. You have got to experience the technologies yourself to know what is right for you. Whatever you choose won't matter for me, because who knows some day I might need you to work with me.
For end users, they can install both Flash and Silverlight runtimes side by side, without even the slightest conflict whatsoever. Even if they have installed both, space consumed is merely under 20MB. The war between Flex and Silverlight really does not matter for user. As long as you can create a killer application, they will go as far as installing runtimes and confirming email addresses just to use it. NBC Olympics is a good example to confirm this when millions did just that to watch the events.
For Microsoft and Adobe, they will protect their assets by competition. This is good for everyone. The reason you fight for Flex or Silverlight is because of this. You want to take part in protecting their assets for them. You have fun doing it for them. But deep down, you have the fears that your ideal platform would die miserably if the other side wins. The reality is that the collapse of Flash and Silverlight is not foreseenable any time within two decades, as Adobe and Microsoft are currently pumping millions into both technologies. Remember, you and I still have about two decades to bail out.
Fitti
10-24-2008 12:01 PM |
One important think that I can't find here is if Silverlight is, or will soon be able to handle RTMP, or I have to spend time learning Flex to develop a chat web application.
Can somebody tell me about please?.......
Tks
10-24-2008 12:13 PM |
http://blog.monochrome.co.uk/2008/10/amf-client-for-silverlight-2/
10-24-2008 12:34 PM |
Radekq, thanks for the URL.
The problem with Flourine is, as mentioned in monochrome site, do not support silverlight yet.
The only version for AMF they offer now is FlourineFX, and it require Flex client.
My problem is the existing environment is on MS Sql DB with thousands of records, SP's, and .Net 2.0 interface for agents, and Flex do not support C# nor VB.
Maybe I hae to wait for Flourine.Net and try later. :-(
10-24-2008 12:55 PM |
Not sure if we're talking about the same thing.That posts is about FluroineFxSL which is AMF for Silverlight.
10-24-2008 2:49 PM |
Yes, maybe we are not talking about the same, because monochrome site text is:
"Fluorine.NET authors introduced a project called FluroineFxSL - nothing else but an AMF client for Silverlight 2. At the moment the project is not available for download."
and the link takes you to http://www.fluorinefx.com/ that is about FlourineFX, the one that require Flex for client side.
On the same page, I see below a link to google code and other one to fluorine blog, but I can't find any info related to RTMP, and if I go to
Revision 35: /trunk/Source/FluorineFxSL/Messaging
no info, just a blank page.
Is there something that you see and I can't?
10-24-2008 4:39 PM |
@Fitti: when I go to google code url I can see Bin, PolicyServer and Source directories. Source keeps FluorineFxSL, Flurone Fx and FluorineFx.ServiceBrowser source code. You can check it out using TortoiseSvn, ankhsvn, or visualsvn if you like. There is probably number of tools for mac and linux as well. Basically you need to check out FluorineFxSL, Flurone Fx and FluorineFx.ServiceBrowser to compile the project but it is definitelly there. FluorineFxSL links files from two other projects but it definitely supports RTMP. It does not have implementation of RemoteObject but has implementation of RTMP, AMF3 encoding and decoding.
Hope that helps.
chillqueen
4 points
11-08-2008 12:42 PM |
Can anyone give me just 3 similarities and say 3 differences between Flex and Silverlight. The top 3. Please!
Thanks
11-08-2008 9:54 PM |
Similarities:
Diferences
O f course silverlight is new one, but it's new only as plugin player, we all know .NET.
Hope this help.
11-09-2008 2:03 AM |
Thank you for your reply, that helps a great deal
Eyenstyn
11-09-2008 12:23 PM |
-
11-09-2008 2:26 PM |
@Eyenstyn: in the email I've got containing your original reply you say SL plug-in does not work with Firefox 3. Can you share more info? What is the platform? B/C I'm using Firefox as the primary browser and never had a problem with SL and Firefox.
asp2desi...
11-09-2008 2:37 PM |
Silverlight 3 (aka Alexandria) will put an end to Silverlight vs Flex thread or articles. And will erase any doubts as to what is the best business application platform.
11-10-2008 11:12 PM |
But what will put an end to this discussion?
TheSilent
11-12-2008 8:10 AM |
In the SVN the binaries and source code were already available. The new FluorineFx installer was just released so you can download it from www.flourinefx.com
More about silverlight integration at http://blog.fluorinefx.com/
11-12-2008 11:31 PM |
I agree that .net is a great programming tool. c# is one of the finest/best programming language. So, for some one who knows .net but can not learn any thing else, siliverlight is the right choice. There are many programmers who are actually just intelligent typist. For them, learning a new programming language is a rocket science. So, if you are among them, and happens to know .net then just use silverlight. You do not have any other option. However, if you are a real programmer and enjoy programming, enjoy learning new language then learn Flex also. By learning Flex, atleast, you will be able to appreciate why it's runtime is on 98% of pc and silverlight is on 2% of pc. Hope this doesn't confuse you.
11-12-2008 11:34 PM |
Padawan
01-06-2009 5:48 PM |
Not listing a comparison to SL is a great deterant and obvious bias implication. Please consider your post and your objectives before stating facts without full evidence.
01-06-2009 5:52 PM |
vkj:By learning Flex, atleast, you will be able to appreciate why it's runtime is on 98% of pc and silverlight is on 2% of pc. Hope this doesn't confuse you.
Mmmm, not sure I agree with that statement.
Your "98%" figure has nothing more to do with anything other than many applications use Flash for many years prior to SL, and absolutely nothing to do with pros or cons.
This is like arguing that IE is better than Opera simply because IE controls (guessing) 60% of browsers while Opera controls 3%. that (sarcasm) obviously makes IE a better browser (/sarcasm).
01-06-2009 6:09 PM |
Sopheap Ly:For somebody not cool with .NET will definitely have a completely different preference. Flex would be the most ideal platform. Flex will have the shortest learning curve and most productive IDE for them. Their users will enjoy fact that Flex developers created the applications they consume efficiently in their own ways. For anyone new who is currently venturing into Rich Internet Application. I would suggest diving into both Silverlight and Flex. You have got to experience the technologies yourself to know what is right for you. Whatever you choose won't matter for me, because who knows some day I might need you to work with me
For anyone new who is currently venturing into Rich Internet Application. I would suggest diving into both Silverlight and Flex. You have got to experience the technologies yourself to know what is right for you. Whatever you choose won't matter for me, because who knows some day I might need you to work with me
I couldn't agree less. I am an amateur programmer, and the simple fact that .NET is more widely used than "Flex" I would say that learning any .NET interface is more valuable than Flex. In learning some of the .NET options in VB I have that programming in C# is considerably easy once I learn how .NET works as a "tool". Flex, I'm almost positive, would not help me at all in programming java, html, or especially C#, VB, C++, or anything more "severely capable".
Sopheap Ly:For end users, they can install both Flash and Silverlight runtimes side by side, without even the slightest conflict whatsoever. Even if they have installed both, space consumed is merely under 20MB. The war between Flex and Silverlight really does not matter for user. As long as you can create a killer application, they will go as far as installing runtimes and confirming email addresses just to use it. NBC Olympics is a good example to confirm this when millions did just that to watch the events.
Good point. In the end, if a user is asked to install a free "MS" product, they will likely install it, especially if asked twice or more. The user base for SL will likely grow, and I would think in a few years will be, if not, equal to Flash install bases, simply because "sites use X product", not because "product X is better".
Sopheap Ly:For Microsoft and Adobe, they will protect their assets by competition. This is good for everyone. The reason you fight for Flex or Silverlight is because of this. You want to take part in protecting their assets for them. You have fun doing it for them. But deep down, you have the fears that your ideal platform would die miserably if the other side wins. The reality is that the collapse of Flash and Silverlight is not foreseenable any time within two decades, as Adobe and Microsoft are currently pumping millions into both technologies. Remember, you and I still have about two decades to bail out.
My bias obviously out front, I believe Flash is still a better edge on SL for graphical presenation. There is not a public solution (I've looked) for alpha channels and transparency graphics compared to Flash applications. This is, in my opinion, the most serious flaw. But the prgrammatic superiousness of SL compared to Flex is probably evident to most people. I mean, C#? Even VB9. Who wouldn't choose a -real- programming language compared to a script-like language?
I'm a newbie to Flex, but the way SL uses .NET makes things far more easier to me, and far more applicable cross-language.
Silverlight also runs several times faster than a Flash app, on anyone's computer. That in itself is cause to work with SL. Bandwidth is rarely an issue now. Processing power is an issue with Flash. The equivilent SL apps I've seen run so much faster than Flash apps, online. The small apps I've built, webpages, with SL run so fast my coworkers can hardly believe it's a website.
01-06-2009 6:15 PM |
jackbond: andrew.jackson@centrix.co.uk:Multi-platform support, all of the organisations I have worked with already have Flash Player deployed and none were prepared to rollout Silverlight and .NET 3.5. One wonders about the extent of your evaluation if you are under the impression that you need to rollout .NET 3.5 to run Silverlight applications.
Ahh yes, assumptive bias is always nice. I've had a dozen coworkers install SL2 plugins for firefox, but I never heard of them having to install .NET 3.5. Maybe I'm wrong, or maybe they just didn't care and went along with it. Either way, the issue seems hardly substantial to be an issue.
Wardy
71 points
51 Posts
01-07-2009 1:47 PM |
If i understand this right ...
Compatability ...
I'm probably just being a little naive here but ...
In silverlight 3 I heard there may be a plan to take silvelright and make it so that it runs without the browser being a requirement much like java does.
So to put things in to context ...
And one final point ...
Since "statistics" seem to be important in a healthy debate it's worth noting that the "98%" market share that flash has is due to likely 90% + of that being windows installations that came with it installed and Adobe has no quibble with that.
Odd that as soon as there's a slight mention of Microsoft using windows in a way that it sees fit (eg adding silverlight out of the box) there's a problem.
I'm sure i've seen this before ... didn't firefox raise this ... and those realplayer lot moaned about windows media player.
So is it not worth highlighting that without some kind of browser being installed no user would have either silverlight or flash.
And why do linux distros not get sued?
......
Can I sue Microsoft for including flash and pdf support on my windows installation CD? ... after all it's "bad for consumers" and i'm a consumer ...
....
One bad thing about Silverlight though, it's a pain when you expect something you had for years in winforms to be in there and it's not ... but at least the toolkit guys are fixing that :)
So what are adobe doing about the many problems with flash ? ... the usual ... patenting them, that's about all that matters right? ... didn't Microsoft get sued for owning and selling crapware ... so why isn't adobe being sued right now?
tnylea
02-20-2009 1:00 PM |
I believe the overall advantage of silverlight is the seamless integration with the .Net platform/framework. Many industries have adopted using .NET, many modules and other components previously built would not plug-in well with flex. I am still a strong supporter of Adobe and Actionscript, but technology is ever increasing... Love it or not Microsoft will always try and compete.
http://www.OrangeArcade.com
Wanderli...
03-04-2009 9:27 AM |
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hZ9VHzTMwr8
ULab2.0
37 points
03-12-2009 1:00 PM |
Hi, this discussion is pretty interesting for the most part.
But I'm just wondering, many posts are focussing on similarities or "Silverlight vs .." pro's and what not. I would like to hear the argument a bit differently.
So, can someone tell me what makes Flash or Flex better then Silverlight?
This is a serious question, and I can't get a good answer when looking online so I'm asking directly :) And please, no need to mention the enormous userbase of Flash / Flex, we all know that and it has been said far enough in this thread already. So, to clarify: not what makes them a better choise, but what makes them better technologies ?
03-12-2009 2:28 PM |
Honestly,
Nothing. As you're asking which is better, coke or pepsi? - it depends is the answer.
This thread needs to move on :) i think we've exhausted this topic beyond the norm.
The reality is in order to accurately compare the said products you need to find a group of people whom know both fluently and can put them through their individual paces approaching healthy amount of industry verticals that one could build against. At the same time you'd then need to ensure they have scaleability attached from 1 to 1million users using the said solutions built per vertical.
Once you establish that, come back to this thread and lets analyze the data. :)
Simply put, the actual answer is - you tell me, you're the one has to figure out how to adopt in the next x number of weeks. Go with what you know and feel comfortable with and doesn't impact your budgets.
03-15-2009 12:25 PM |
Hmm, so basicly there is nothing that Flash or Flex can notable do better then Silverlight? Things like speed or animation in general to name something, no features they have that Silverlight doesn't (like how Sl has something like Deep Zoom whereas Flash / Flex doesn't).
So when you say it depends to determine to use Flash/Flex or not, it's about what you or the client prefer the most (like installed base) and not about features?
Btw, since I'm already asking, can you tell me what the current installed base is for Silverlight in general? I think the numbers in this thread are outdated and that since SL 2 release it has increased dramatically. Personally it will not effect my decision to work with Silverlight but it would be interesting to know more up to date numbers.
06-30-2009 3:25 PM |
Stumbled on something this morning, so I figured I'd stir the pot on this thread a bit.
http://blogs.msdn.com/pfxteam/archive/2009/06/30/9809774.aspx
adobeted:We are supporting a new green threading and component model with our newer compilers (yes multiple).
Can you give us any timelines for when ActionScript will have support for parallel programming?
Justification request: Silverlight vs. Flex