[TETENAL]

Did anyone try Microsoft Silverlight, their new Flash competitor, already? They do have a Mac OS X version of the browser plug-in available, but I didn't install it yet. I will first wait for reports of people who installed it to see what it does (messes up).

Unfortunately their demo-video doesn't seem to work on Mac, so I can't see what's supposed to be great about it.

http://www.microsoft.com/silverlight/

[mac128k-1984]

I haven't heard of it, until you posted this thread. I was wanting to start "playing" with flash. I'm not sure what would be the compelling reason for people to stop using flash. It seems to me that flash now has critical mass and people may not want to jump ship - its everywhere so why drop it.

[design219]

As long as YouTube uses Flash, Flash will live on.

[TETENAL]

Originally Posted by mac128k-1984 

I'm not sure what would be the compelling reason for people to stop using flash

Probably laziness. With Silverlight being preinstalled (if Microsoft does that at some point in the future) and Flash not, Silverlight might gain critical mass quickly.

[andreas_g4]

Silverlight, what a crappy name. Sounds like a super hero or something.

[design219]

Silverlight, what a crappy name. Sounds like a super hero or something.

As opposed to "Flash"

[olePigeon]

Don't worry. Microsoft will release Silverlight as a "critical update" to Internet Explorer... just like they did with Internet Explorer 7.

Since I really hate Flash, I wouldn't mind trying out Silverlight. Maybe Microsoft can make it run decently on a Mac.

[Mithras]

What it sounds like is a flimsy knock-off of Flash.
"See, it's still like this bright thing that amazes you, but it's all silvery and stuff..."

[olePigeon]

Originally Posted by TETENAL 

Unfortunately their demo-video doesn't seem to work on Mac, so I can't see what's supposed to be great about it.

It doesn't work on Windows, either. XP SP2 with the latest WMP and I get this: Windows Media Player can not play this video. You need the "WVC1" codec. Click Web Help to download this codec.

*click*

The codec you are missing is not available for download from this site. You might be able to find it on another site by searching the Web for "WVC1" (this is the WaveFormat or FourCC identifier of the codec).

[Mithras]

It's odd, though. The "Why Silverlight" page:
Microsoft Silverlight

says:

* Deliver media experiences and rich interactive applications (RIA) for the Web that incorporate video, animation, interactivity, and stunning user interfaces.
* Seamless, fast installation for users, thanks to a small, on-demand, easy-to-install plug-in that is less than 2 megabyte (MB) and works with all leading browsers.
* Consistent experiences between Macintosh computers and Windows-based personal computers without any additional installation requirements.
* Create richer, more compelling Web experiences that take greater advantage of the client for increased performance.
* Stunning vector-based graphics, media, text, animation, and overlays enable seamless integration of graphics and effects into any existing Web application.
* Enhance existing standards/AJAX-based applications with richer graphics and media, and improve their performance and capabilities by using Silverlight.

all of which sound exactly like what Flash offers. You'd think their "Why Silverlight" page would try to explain why you should use it instead of Flash.

[TETENAL]

Originally Posted by olePigeon 

Maybe Microsoft can make it run decently on a Mac.

I guess they could, if they wanted to. Office is an example of good software they make for Mac. But with regard to Windows Media they have shown that they don't want to. And if they do it's another Sword of Damocles over Mac just like Office.

So the question is: should Apple jazz up QuickTime to compete with Flash and SilverLight? It's a key Internet technology that Apple can not afford to loose on the platform. And they suffer from mediocre implementations. See all the "Safari is slow, leaks, crashes" complaints.

[Super Mario]

Originally Posted by andreas_g4 

Silverlight, what a crappy name. Sounds like a super hero or something.

mini vibrator

[mduell]

Hopefully it will be a lot more efficient than flash... it's annoying to be using 80% CPU to play back some 320x240 clip when I can play 720p H.264 with the same CPU usage.

I'm actually surprised that Apple hasn't released a Quicktime plugin that is more suited to web video... but then again they always want to gimp the free version (like no fullscreen, no saving, etc) to help sell the pro version.

[analogue SPRINKLES]

5 years ago they might have had a chance but now there is no way flash can easily be beat.

[goMac]

They're calling it Silverlight now?

This has been out for a while. I have the older public betas on my Mac. Basically, it's an implementation of Vista's graphics layer running in a web browser.

I got a few demos working with it, but it wasn't too exciting.

[Oisín]

Office is an example of good software they make for Mac.

What, in regards to applications that run well? No way! Office might be fairly well thought-out and fairly efficient apps in OS X, but they run like crap. Crashes every five minutes, clicking pretty much anything resulting in spinning ball of death, and just general slowness. Bah!

[nonhuman]

Originally Posted by design219 

As opposed to "Flash"

[Gossamer]

Originally Posted by Oisín 

What, in regards to applications that run well? No way! Office might be fairly well thought-out and fairly efficient apps in OS X, but they run like crap. Crashes every five minutes, clicking pretty much anything resulting in spinning ball of death, and just general slowness. Bah!

On an Intel or PPC machine? It runs "fine" on my iBook G4. By "fine," I mean it doesn't crash, but there's lag as I type, Powerpoint tells me I've misspelled a word before I'm even done typing it, etc. On an Intel machine, it's a gamble. For the most part it's been fine for me, but I have a user with a C2D MacBook with 2 gigs of RAM, and Word and Entourage crash pretty much hourly for him. I've done a complete wipe and reinstall only to have the same problems.

[nonhuman]

Originally Posted by Gossamer 

I have a user with a C2D MacBook with 2 gigs of RAM, and Word and Entourage crash pretty much hourly for him. I've done a complete wipe and reinstall only to have the same problems.

Entourage will do that regardless of the system it's running on. I hate that ****ing piece of ****. I hated it before, but having had to support 200+ users running it on hardware ranging from G3s to Intels, most of them basically computer illiterate and most of them over the phone, I just won't touch that festering pile of garbage anymore.

[Visnaut]

And of course, you can only develop Silverlight content on Windows.

No thanks.

[Gossamer]

Originally Posted by nonhuman 

Entourage will do that regardless of the system it's running on. I hate that ****ing piece of ****. I hated it before, but having had to support 200+ users running it on hardware ranging from G3s to Intels, most of them basically computer illiterate and most of them over the phone, I just won't touch that festering pile of garbage anymore.

My boss hasn't had any problems with it on his Mac Pro (Quad 3.0, 8GB of RAM), and I haven't had any problems with it unexpectedly quitting on my CD iMac. But you're right, it's total garbage. Everyone here hates it, we swtiched from Eudora because the dean wanted something that would sync with her phone or palm, so everyone in the building had to switch. It's awful. Luckily I have remote desktop, so support isn't entirely over the phone. I can actually look at their screen and see what Entourage is doing wrong.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by design219 

Originally Posted by andreas_g4 

Silverlight, what a crappy name. Sounds like a super hero or something.

As opposed to "Flash"

That was classic.

[goMac]

Silverlight looks interesting. It seems to have several advantages over Flash, the biggest of which is that it's files are in an open text based format. That way you could generate a Silverlight file on the fly on your web page.

They'll never be able to topple Adobe though,

[olePigeon]

Originally Posted by mduell 

I'm actually surprised that Apple hasn't released a Quicktime plugin that is more suited to web video... but then again they always want to gimp the free version (like no fullscreen, no saving, etc) to help sell the pro version.

Apple - Final Cut Server

Check that out. It's an embedded QuickTime move that kinda looks like a Flash video.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by olePigeon 

Apple - Final Cut Server

Check that out. It's an embedded QuickTime move that kinda looks like a Flash video.

You can skin QuickTime or embed Flash in QuickTime. Looks like that is a Quicktime skin.

[brassplayersrock²]

*thinks* "oh great, another thing that people will have to make sure the other person receiving the file will need"

[kick52]

Originally Posted by olePigeon 

Maybe Microsoft can make it run decently on a Mac.

I don't think there is a chance of that.
Messenger is still only on version 5 or something, with no decent features.

They probably would never update it, or just make it amazingly slow.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by kick52 

I don't think there is a chance of that.
Messenger is still only on version 5 or something, with no decent features.

They probably would never update it, or just make it amazingly slow.

It actually runs very well on the Mac. They're using the same code base for both builds iirc.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by goMac 

You can skin QuickTime or embed Flash in QuickTime. Looks like that is a Quicktime skin.

Looks to me like a JavaScript-based interface to a QuickTime movie with no controls.

[stevesnj]

Originally Posted by TETENAL 

Probably laziness. With Silverlight being preinstalled (if Microsoft does that at some point in the future) and Flash not, Silverlight might gain critical mass quickly.

...and virus makers will have a field day with it...they'll try to port a virus to this somehow.

[nonhuman]

Originally Posted by Gossamer 

My boss hasn't had any problems with it on his Mac Pro (Quad 3.0, 8GB of RAM), and I haven't had any problems with it unexpectedly quitting on my CD iMac. But you're right, it's total garbage. Everyone here hates it, we swtiched from Eudora because the dean wanted something that would sync with her phone or palm, so everyone in the building had to switch. It's awful. Luckily I have remote desktop, so support isn't entirely over the phone. I can actually look at their screen and see what Entourage is doing wrong.

That's probably the worst thing about it: sometimes it actually works right! I, personally, never had a problem when I was using it (well, I don't like the program in an aesthetic sense or from the point of view as a programmer, but I had very few technical problems), and neither did the other, more tech-saavy people. But it seems like the less someone is able to deal with computer problems on their own, the more likely they are to have them. A lot of it had to do with people not listening to me when I told them they needed to keep their inbox sizes down, and a lot of it had to do with people not believing me when I told them they needed to rebuild their database now rather than wait until they started having more serious problems (the whole database thing sorta boggles the mind, really). But even those trends aren't that reliable. The sheer inconsistency just kills.

[kick52]

Originally Posted by goMac 

It actually runs very well on the Mac. They're using the same code base for both builds iirc.

cool.

[Oisín]

Originally Posted by Gossamer 

On an Intel or PPC machine? It runs "fine" on my iBook G4. By "fine," I mean it doesn't crash, but there's lag as I type, Powerpoint tells me I've misspelled a word before I'm even done typing it, etc. On an Intel machine, it's a gamble. For the most part it's been fine for me, but I have a user with a C2D MacBook with 2 gigs of RAM, and Word and Entourage crash pretty much hourly for him. I've done a complete wipe and reinstall only to have the same problems.

Both, actually: a G4 PowerBook 17” (1.67 GHz, 1 GB RAM) and a MacBook (CoreDuo 1.83 GHz, 2 GB RAM). Worst on the G4, though; it’s slightly less slow and unstable on the MacBook.

It’s especially Word. Certain things (like pasting content that contains a table) just make it crash quite consistently; others sometimes make it crash, sometimes not (like simultaneously expanding the font/paragraph and table/borders ‘boxes’ in the, uh, wuzzitcalled, the ‘formatting palette’ thingy on the right); and other times, it just crashes for no apparent reason (like, when trying to open a document or in the middle of typing a word).

Crapplication.

Edit: Damn. Already exists—and I thought I was so inventive here!

[Calimus]

Originally Posted by goMac 

Silverlight looks interesting. It seems to have several advantages over Flash, the biggest of which is that it's files are in an open text based format. That way you could generate a Silverlight file on the fly on your web page.

They'll never be able to topple Adobe though,

While it would be easier to generate than flash, there are already automated server tools(even open source ones) for generating flash files on the fly.

[Kevin]

They can't pollute flash like they did Java, so they are trying this.

MS isn't what it used to be in the 90s early 2k. They are still using tactics they used back then. Only now people are ready/used to it. And MS doesn't have the pull it once did. Not to mention it's public image has been tarnished.

[andreas_g4]

Originally Posted by design219 

As opposed to "Flash"

Um, well, you're right. Guess I'm just used to it…

[design219]

Flash can be very useful.

[xMetal]

flash has roughly 98% penetration in the browser market. Microsoft seriously should waste their time.

Compared to flash, they have no penetration. In fact, they're like a really geeky kid, wearing a chastity belt, wrapped head to toe in plastic wrap. They can't even come close.

[OwlBoy]

Adter putting it in and playing with the test videos, I went over to 1up, and it crashed Safari…

Does this thing try to read .swfs?

-Owl

[mduell]

Originally Posted by xMetal 

flash has roughly 98% penetration in the browser market. Microsoft seriously should waste their time.

Compared to flash, they have no penetration. In fact, they're like a really geeky kid, wearing a chastity belt, wrapped head to toe in plastic wrap. They can't even come close.

All they have to do is release it as a "critical update" like they did with IE7 and *bam* they've got 60% of the installed base.

[design219]

Originally Posted by mduell 

All they have to do is release it as a "critical update" like they did with IE7 and *bam* they've got 60% of the installed base.

I don't think 60% would cause many content developers to retool anytime soon. Maybe, but Flash is so far in the lead they would really have to show a need for the product.

[pheonixash]

Originally Posted by nonhuman 

Entourage will do that regardless of the system it's running on. I hate that ****ing piece of ****. I hated it before, but having had to support 200+ users running it on hardware ranging from G3s to Intels, most of them basically computer illiterate and most of them over the phone, I just won't touch that festering pile of garbage anymore.

Well to be fair Apple Mail isn't that much better either. It crashes atleast once a day, sometimes twice in succession, in a span of 5 minutes. And I don't think 500 e-mails should be too much to handle for an e-mail client. Especially on a Dual Core machine with a GB of RAM.

[Gossamer]

Originally Posted by pheonixash 

Well to be fair Apple Mail isn't that much better either. It crashes atleast once a day, sometimes twice in succession, in a span of 5 minutes. And I don't think 500 e-mails should be too much to handle for an e-mail client. Especially on a Dual Core machine with a GB of RAM.

It doesn't crash for me on my PPC or Intel computers. I have over 500 messages in the inbox, over 1000 sent, 500ish in the trash, and an addition 700-1000 in the other boxes. It's rock solid (and yes, I should clean stuff out).

[Chuckit]

My mail currently has over 40000 messages between all the mailboxes I handle (yeah, the majority is spam that's snuck through the filters). I can't remember the last time it crashes.