Wednesday, April 23, 2008 by Niels Hartvig

Well, a little exaggeration never hurts. Silverlight is a fine piece of software, but the marketing and the perception of Silverlight is really wrong. Microsoft claims it’s the new black and the chorus of MS MVPs and fanboys goes “yeah, baby lets use it for everything”.

I think Silverlight is fantastic at handling multimedia – high def videos and fancy animations. It’s like the new Macromedia Director meant in a very positive way. It’s not the new HTML (as in html+js+rest). Just like Abobe AIR isn’t. But I see more and more people thinking of it as the new HTML – maybe because they never really understood HTML. Maybe because they never spend R&D hours on what’s possible with HTML and JS. Or maybe because there’s just too many drag’n’drop cowboys in the Microsoft world, that are excited about being able to finally do animations in a webbrowser because a new Developer IDE lets them. Yikes!

HTML has come really far and with HTML v5 it’s close as everything we wanted for creating reliable webapps that can replace the desktop. And HTML is a standard. An open standard. Silverlight is a proprietary tool from a company whose desperate at getting back control over the web. Something they lost years back when they dumped the IE team after making IE 6. Microsoft still got the biggest market share in OS and in browsers, but they’re not controlling the browser space anymore. They’re forced to keep improving the browser due to the pressure partly from other browser vendors, but more importantly the increasing numbers of web based apps that are making the OS less and less important (Vista adoption rate, anyone?).

The fact that we’re getting closer and closer to a software market space (the web) where there’s no gatekeeper is incredible and makes it possible for small companies and open source projects to innovate and make a big impact without worrying about keeping “the mom happy”.

Open standards like HTML are the foundation making this paradigm shift possible. They’re not controlled by a single company that needs to keep their shareholders happy. They’re controlled by an independent organization who wants to give us the best possible tools for creating cross-browser, cross-platform and cross-device applications. This is why it’s crucially important that we do our best to support HTML. And this is why I like and dislike tools like Silverlight and Adobe AIR. We really don’t need them. And if the amounts of resources spend on Silverlight instead was spend on improving the tools for creating standard based web apps and making a complete implementation of HTML5 and CSS3 in IE8, we would have come really far.

So use Silverlight for multimedia, but don’t drink the Kool Aid. It would make the web sick.

12 comment(s) for “Silverlight is the worst piece of junk ever from Redmond”

  1. GS2K1 Says:

    Amen!

  2. Simon Justesen Says:

    I think that it was about time Adobe got some competition in this area.

    About open standards:
    "They’re not controlled by a single company that needs to keep their shareholders happy..."

    Maybe not directly - but take a look at this fine member list: http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Member/List

    Some of these companies on that list aren't there just for charity. They would patent the internet if they could.

  3. Alexey Rusakov Says:

    Thankfully web is full of reasons why and in which ways websites made entirely in flash suck.

    But some new people have to listen.

  4. Paul Says:

    Niels -

    Got my attention! Nice take on the issue at hand and I agree with you that HTML is the 'right' choice for most web UI's. Video and RIA is great, fun, and exciting - but it's doubtful that it actually improves the user experience.

    -Paul

  5. Kenneth Auchenberg Says:

    Hey Hartvig

    Well.. I'm the author of the thread you are linking to, and its actually quite funny because I agree with almost everything you are saying but..

    First of all I don't see Siverlight as "the new HTML", or a replacement of our established standards. I'm seeing Silverlight as a great addin, because its fills the gab between HTML & multimedia - Just like Adobe Flash. (finally some competition here!)

    I'm not saying that we should replace the hole Umbraco UI with Silverlight, but I'm open for Silverlight to create a "enhanced" user experience, because our standards doesn't allow us to this a the time.

    We could use a silverlight-embedded video-player (yeah, multimedia!) to create a interactive help-section in Umbraco. It could also be used for some nice uploading controls, etc..

    In my opinion we could use silverlight/flash to create custom-controls for Umbraco, as long it has a value for the end-user.

    I don't see a problem in the use of "non open standards" and sometimes proprietary technologies as long its enhancing the over-all user experience.

    But you have a great point. As long there are users of Silverlight, Air, Flash and such, the companies behind these technologies would spend more time on development at these technologies, instead of supporting HTML.

    But should we as developers stop using these 'new' platforms/technologies at the web just because its proprietary?

    I think not. We should use the technology as comes. Get the experience with the (new) possibilities and use that to make the web and the open standards better.

    Just my cents...











  6. Naval Arya Says:

    I would partly agree with you. I think HTML is great and HTML, JS combination works good. But what HMTL and JS are doing today was never meant to be. Remember those old days of static pages. Html was basically meant for doing such stuff. Time has advanced and so does HTML.

    Web users today want more and more desktop like functionalities from web apps and HTML and JS cant do that. We need some means (Silverlight/Adobe Air... or anything open source ) that will cloud os a reality .

    My guess is HTML will never take it there.

  7. Niels Hartvig Says:

    @Kenneth: I think making a Silverlight based video player is a fantastic idea. I even think that one is going to be made at CodeGarden this year. As I said I like Silverlight (or Flash) for multimedia, but just drinking the kool aid is a very bad idea.

    MS made some cool demos for what Silverlight is capable of, but the danger is that people who hate html and javascript but loves their .net language (and there's a ton of those), use Silverlight for complete applications (like the new Silverlight based download section at MS - that's horrible IMHO).

  8. Niels Hartvig Says:

    @Simm: The beauty of W3C is that Apple, Microsoft, etc. is only one member among 400+. Those big companies are great, realy great, especially when they don't have vetos

    @Naval: W3C have innovated HTML deeply from the level of static pages and with HTML5 we get the posibility of checking if connections are lost, saving data locally (temporarely) and much more. HTML is getting much closer to the desktop and there's some good samples outthere. My GMail account for instance is much faster than my outlook 2007 - now that's a big change :-)

  9. derk Says:

    And since when "open" = "good"? Google is going to open the source of its search engine any time soon, so does it make them bad?

    You can deny all you want, but most users would love to have much better experience than junk built on top of DHTML/AJAX/CSS, which is proved by the fact that Google Docs scored little success despite its cheap price. Why is that? B/c that DHTML crap sux big time and cannot even get some video or animation correct. Users want sth better to support future web experience and M$, Sun and Adobe are working on it. Ah yes, the average customers do love drag & drop and many other desktop like experiences. If XAML replaces HTML then be it!!! I'd rather have an advanced proprietary format suits customers' need than an "open" out-dated piece of crap. Better join the plan for future instead of getting stuck on deadend bandwagons and finding fulfillment in bashing M$.

  10. Niels Hartvig Says:

    @Derk: As I said, if you need multimedia then RIA frameworks is a good fit, whether it's Above AIR or Silverlight. But the average app doesn't get better just because you add video or animation.

    And I'm not religious and I'm not talking about open source in this post. I'm talking about that relying on open standards is better for any business in the long run (except those pushing proprietary standards).

    I don't care about Google opening up it's search engine. In fact, I couldn't care less. The Google Search Engine is a stand-alone product, not something that other products rely on.

    I think you'd be surprised just how far HTML has come if you took the time to try a true web app with an open mind.

    And in terms of desktop experience and metaphors, those are relatively easy to replicate using html/js (treeviews, drag+drop, etc) and since Silverlight is running in a sandbox, you wouldn't be able to drag items from other apps (or filesystem) into a Silverlight app anyway.

    The area of the desktop is close to an end, so you'd better take a deep breath and then do a bit of catching up, if you don't want to end up as a mainframe-guy-2.0 ;-)

  11. Thomas Hansen Says:

    Holy *crap* we just MUST partner up together...!! :D
    Read these and then send me an email ;)
    http://ajaxwidgets.com/Blogs/thomas/halloween_documents_explained_.bb (December 2007)
    http://ajaxwidgets.com/Blogs/thomas/web_2_0_or_activex_2_0___was_g.bb (September 2007)
    http://ajaxwidgets.com/Blogs/thomas/7_reasons_not_to_consider_usin.bb (September 2007)
    and finally;
    http://ajaxwidgets.com/Blogs/thomas/adobe_flex_sucks__use_powerpoi.bb (September 2007)

    As you can see, I think we definitely share a LOT of common opinions about the future... ;)
    BTW our widgets have so far been 100% compatible with every .Net based CMS system we've tried them with...

  12. Jason Says:

    Actually, Neils, I think you may have it backwards - the end of the Browser Application era is close at hand…at least closer than it ever has been. These new RIAs represent the ongoing beginning of the end of separate worlds for desktop and browser apps. The future is an app in which the user doesn’t know or care if it is running in a browser on the desktop…it will just perform smoothly with a well rendered UI and posses the capabilities which today are typically only available to desktop apps. Which major player will win the platform battle – Adobe or Microsoft – who knows? Why wasn’t it Sun with the java applets? Short-term html/js will still play a major role but it isn’t realistic to think that this will be a long term solution. HTML was developed for marking up text not for implementing user interfaces.
    Web apps are still clunky and users want a better experience. Like it or not, their ‘better’ typically means the type of experience they have when using a desktop application. Web apps are only capable of implementing a ‘subset’ of the functionality available to a full-fledged desktop application, as such, making them *better* means bring the full set of desktop capabilities to a browser app. The current crop of RIA frameworks may not be the html killers their proponents are suggesting but that day isn’t too far off.

Leave comment:


(not shown)


(optional - remember http://)