Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Microsoft's SkyDrive Drops Silverlight

CmdrTaco posted more than 3 years ago | from the well-thats-not-good dept.

Microsoft 358

mikejuk writes "Microsoft's SkyDrive, a web service that provides cloud storage for end user files, has just acquired a revamped user interface — and it is HTML5 based. Yes, another Microsoft website has dropped Silverlight. How can Microsoft expect independent developers to base their future on Silverlight when Microsoft itself is abandoning it like a sinking ship? Whatever happened to 'eating your own dog food'? It seems that now Microsoft would rather eat dog food made elsewhere..."

cancel ×

358 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

MS hate (5, Insightful)

cgeys (2240696) | more than 3 years ago | (#36517756)

So Microsoft starts using standards compliant HTML5 instead of Silverlight on their sites and you bash them for it? Seriously?

And regardless, HTML5 was nowhere to be seen when Silverlight came out. It was needed back then, if only as a competitor for Flash. Have you noticed Silverlight hasn't even had the same security concerns and exploits as Flash?

This is a good thing from Microsoft, not bad. Stop bashing them for everything they do, even if its a good thing.

Re:MS hate (5, Funny)

The MAZZTer (911996) | more than 3 years ago | (#36517794)

Have you noticed Silverlight hasn't even had the same security concerns and exploits as Flash?

You have to be fair; noone will exploit a plugin nobody has installed or uses.

Re:MS hate (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36517912)

No one other than those 23.6 million subscribers of Netflix...

Given how few PCs are connected to televisions (2)

tepples (727027) | more than 3 years ago | (#36517978)

How many Netflix subscribers actually use the PC version? Given how few PCs are connected to TV-sized monitors, I'd guess that most Netflix streaming happens on Wii, Xbox 360, PS3, or BD players.

Re:Given how few PCs are connected to televisions (1)

HaZardman27 (1521119) | more than 3 years ago | (#36518154)

I'm not positive on this, but I imagine the Xbox 360 Netflix client uses Silverlight, judging by the presence of the .Net framework on that platform, so that probably counts for a significant portion of Netflix users.

Re:Given how few PCs are connected to televisions (2)

Riceballsan (816702) | more than 3 years ago | (#36518642)

true but how many people browse to easily exploitable webpages on their x-box. A succesful attack requires 2 things. 1. a user that can be suckered into going to where your exploit is, and 2. a hole in the system or a user dumb enough to poke one themselves (Ie opening an untrusted application etc...). Having flash on a system that never goes anywhere other then hulu.com is also a system that would almost never be compromised, that dosn't speak for the security of flash itself, just the benefit of a system the users don't feel compelled to explore uncharted territory on.

Re:Given how few PCs are connected to televisions (1)

McGuirk (1189283) | more than 3 years ago | (#36518174)

Vizios make damn fine monitors. Much cheaper per inch than actual computer monitors.

Re:Given how few PCs are connected to televisions (1)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 3 years ago | (#36518226)

Unfortunately, they are still TVs, not monitors.

You can tell by the pixels.

Re:Given how few PCs are connected to televisions (1)

JordanL (886154) | more than 3 years ago | (#36518334)

I'm a bit of a video geek, so please don't take this as me saying you're wrong, but I can't stand looking at Vizios. They, essentially, are a warehouse in California that receives the reject parts from several other manufacturers, then puts it together into a TV. I, personally, notice it quite a bit... I wish I could use something like a Vizio as a monitor without going crazy, because they are VERY inexpensive.

Re:Given how few PCs are connected to televisions (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36518202)

A lot of people stream Netflix on their PC, myself included. I have a feeling that most of us will be celebrating the day Netflix drops their oh-so-crappy Silverlight player.

Re:Given how few PCs are connected to televisions (1)

TelavianX (1888030) | more than 3 years ago | (#36518224)

I stream netflix through my PC on a 55" TV. It works very nicely.

Re:Given how few PCs are connected to televisions (1)

wmbetts (1306001) | more than 3 years ago | (#36518304)

I use mine on the PS3. I would use it on my computer, but I refuse to install Silverlight. However, I'm guessing I'm in the minority.

Re:Given how few PCs are connected to televisions (1)

b0bby (201198) | more than 3 years ago | (#36518536)

I use it all the time, so that's one. I bet a lot of laptop owners use it too. I would use it on my Ion/Atom HTPC, but Silverlight still doesn't have GPU acceleration so I use my BD player in the living room.

Re:MS hate (2)

Joce640k (829181) | more than 3 years ago | (#36518110)

Netflix can continue to use Silverlight even if Microsoft deprecates it.

As for the "developers", I'm pretty sure Microsoft has a good idea of the real numbers. Apparently they don't think it's enough to worry about.

Re:MS hate (1)

Eponymous Coward (6097) | more than 3 years ago | (#36518532)

Microsoft isn't afraid to move on when they need to. There are still a lot of people who rely on VB6. I bet there were a lot more VB6 developers when they dumped it for .Net than there are Silverlight developers today. I think it's pretty clear that HTML5 is much more important to the tech sector than Silverlight and it would be silly for them not to fully embrace HTML5.

Now they need to get rid of their XPS document format and use HTML5 or at least PDF.

Re:MS hate (1)

sjames (1099) | more than 3 years ago | (#36518232)

Next to flash, that's a drop in the bucket. I offer you two boxes. One contains 1 million dollars, the other 1 billion dollars. I will give you one and only one, no tricks. Which do you take?

Re:MS hate (5, Insightful)

Fjandr (66656) | more than 3 years ago | (#36518470)

Captive audience for PC users. It made their service worse, an I stopped using it on a PC unless I had no other choice.

I will rejoice when Silverlight dies the death it deserves.

Re:MS hate (1)

Lennie (16154) | more than 3 years ago | (#36518590)

DRM is exactly what Microsoft said Siliverlight should be used for on the (public) web.

Re:MS hate (2)

kwerle (39371) | more than 3 years ago | (#36517918)

Have you noticed Silverlight hasn't even had the same security concerns and exploits as Flash?

You have to be fair; noone will exploit a plugin nobody has installed or uses.

Netflix is still using Silverlight, right? Doesn't that mean it has a reasonably large user base?

Re:MS hate (2)

NuShrike (561140) | more than 3 years ago | (#36518106)

No when you count the users on iPhones, PS3s, Androids, Rokus, Boxees, Wiis, Xbox 360s, TiVos, Wimpy7s, etc etc.

No Silverlights there, and becoming practically irrelevant except for PCs.

Re:MS hate (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36518246)

http://riastats.com/

Silverlight is actually on 75% of Internet browsers.

Re:MS hate (1)

Eponymous Coward (6097) | more than 3 years ago | (#36518662)

They left out a couple of pretty big operating systems: iOS and Android. This is weird considering they listed Symbian and Windows Mobile. The real percentage is going to be significantly less than that. But for the sake of argument, pretend it's accurate. That means that it isn't on 25% of internet browsers.

If you are building for the web, that's a huge number to ignore. Especially when there are competitive technologies available with far better numbers. Why would you chose Silverlight for anything but the intranet?

Re:MS hate (4, Insightful)

Richard_at_work (517087) | more than 3 years ago | (#36517800)

This is a perfect example of "damned if they do, damned if they don't".

Oh, and typical Slashdot bullshit :)

Re:MS hate (4, Insightful)

Kamiza Ikioi (893310) | more than 3 years ago | (#36518360)

How is this an example of "damned if they do, damned if they don't"? Microsoft made Silverlight, pushed a lot of sites to use it at the displeasure of many (Netflix), now they are dropping support?

This is rather an example of MS making crap, MS pushing crap, and MS not being able to support their own crap, but still wanting everyone to use it. That's not damned if you do or don't, that's just everyone saying "It sucks, stop pushing it when you can't even use it."

I.E. - Windows Vista

Re:MS hate (3, Insightful)

denis-The-menace (471988) | more than 3 years ago | (#36518390)

Actually, there is no hate.

It's more of a Ha-Ha http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rX7wtNOkuHo [youtube.com] to the developers that dared to try to make $ on a MS technology.

Almost every company that has worked with MS has gotten stabbed in the back.

Re:MS hate (4, Funny)

Tetsujin (103070) | more than 3 years ago | (#36518426)

Almost every company that has worked with MS has gotten stabbed in the back.

Look on the bright side. At least you get to keep the knife.

Re:MS hate (0)

GameboyRMH (1153867) | more than 3 years ago | (#36518450)

If Microsoft is really turning a new leaf and ditching their proprietary crap for standard open tech, then that's a good thing.

But it's going to take a lot more good to get people to stop assuming the worst from them after decades of terrible behavior.

Re:MS hate (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36517830)

True. It's more of them "using the appropriate tool for the job". Silverlight might have other / better uses elsewhere, not a Web UI, what with tools like HTML 5 and CSS3. This is good news.

Re:MS hate (2)

Shados (741919) | more than 3 years ago | (#36518336)

Yup. Silverlight is just poorly marketed. When originally it was called WPF/E (WPF Everywhere), and .NET devs were begging for it, it was to be used for line of business applications and optimized for browser experience in a _somewhat_ cross platform manner.

This was in contrast with XBAP, which is pure WPF (the newer UI tech of .NET), which works in a browser sandbox but only on Windows, but isn't really designed from the ground up for it.

But then someone at Microsoft decided they wanted to take on Flash. The first version of Silverlight didn't have the .NET parts OR the line of business parts, they had to wait for Silverlight 2.0 for that...and even then, it kept being marketed as a Flash killer (not even a Flex killer, which it was much closer to).

Marketing killed WPF/E, nothing else. Silverlight IS the right tool for the job it was meant to do...just not for the one it was marketing for.

Re:MS hate (1)

gilesjuk (604902) | more than 3 years ago | (#36517868)

It's good for the public and the browser makers. But damned annoying for the developers who believed the Silverlight evangelists preaching about how it was going to kill Flash.
It's also a bit irritating for those who invested time building Silverlight chart engines and other rich controls for reporting tools.

Re:MS hate (3, Interesting)

TheCRAIGGERS (909877) | more than 3 years ago | (#36517990)

Sometimes we bet on the wrong technology. Shit, like change, happens. All you can do is see it coming and move on to what did win.

Hell, I remember going through the same thing after putting a bunch of time into learning Borland OWL, back when it was competing with Microsoft's MFC. I was too evangelical myself at the time to see what was going to happen and I paid for it.

Silverlight, Flash, and vector animation (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 3 years ago | (#36518036)

But damned annoying for the developers who believed the Silverlight evangelists preaching about how it was going to kill Flash.

I knew Silverlight was never going to kill Flash. It might have killed Flex and Flash Builder, but not Flash CS. Did Microsoft ever make a tool for authoring vector animations (e.g. Homestar Runner or Weebl's stuff) in Silverlight?

Re:MS hate (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36517874)

And regardless, HTML5 was nowhere to be seen when Silverlight came out. It was needed back then, if only as a competitor for Flash.

If that would have been the case somebody would have actually used it. I haven't seen a single non-Microsoft site that used Silverlight. Even on MS sites it was just for optional fluff.

I agree though that the article is overly bash-happy. I'm sure MS had a lot influence on HTML5 so they're still eating their own dog food.

Re:MS hate (1)

hasbeard (982620) | more than 3 years ago | (#36517902)

I have to agree with the original poster. Usually Microsoft is criticized for taking someone else's work and adding their own proprietary elements (e.g., their own version of Java) which is incompatible with what everyone else is doing. It may not please their developer community, but it may lead to other people willing to develop for their platforms.

Re:MS hate (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36517924)

Hear! Hear!

I love me some MS bashing now and then - especially when they deserve it - as much as the next /.er. This is not one of those times. MS embracing open standards and specs is a good thing. Here's to hoping that this is a sign of things to come (I do know better but what the hell..)

Re:MS hate (1)

Ruke (857276) | more than 3 years ago | (#36517984)

I certainly agree that Microsoft using HTML5 over Silverlight is a good thing. I can also see how shops who've invested heavily in Silverlight would be upset that Microsoft seems to be phasing away from the format. Can we treat this like a news topic, where we discuss potential implications, instead of assuming that Slashdot is a hive mind and has to come to a "THIS GOOD" or "THIS BAD" consensus?

Re:MS hate (2)

NuShrike (561140) | more than 3 years ago | (#36518254)

Shops that heavily invested in Silverlight deserve getting razed for it.

When all the post-PC news does not involve MS nor MS technologies to any significant degree, going SIlverlight to shortcut real development is pure, moronic suicide. In fact at this point, heavily investing in any MS-technologies without hedging (such as DirectX while the rest of the mobile world is OpenGLES 2.x) is just daft.

Re:MS hate (4, Insightful)

Un pobre guey (593801) | more than 3 years ago | (#36518530)

Investing in MS technologies has always been foolhardy. This is just one more episode in a long history of them pulling the rug from beneath their customers' feet in order to make them buy yet another full line of "new" software development tools. It has happened before, it will happen again. It's a suckers' game, and it's baffling how so many people fall into it again and again, especially in the presence of a large, diverse and stable palette of FOSS development tools that evolve in a generally orderly and predictable fashion. Has this ever happened to Perl, Python, PHP, or Ruby developers?.

Re:MS hate (4, Funny)

pandrijeczko (588093) | more than 3 years ago | (#36518024)

Yep, they can have a pat on the back for this one... though I still haven't forgiven them for the 1997 bailout of Apple [nytimes.com] .

Re:MS hate (2)

sexconker (1179573) | more than 3 years ago | (#36518030)

This is a good thing because MS is using Silverlight when it makes sense, and HTML 5 / canvas when that makes sense.

The problems with Flash were:
1 - Massive, frequent security holes.
2 - Performance.
3 - Everyone using Flash unnecessarily

When Silverlight came about / was in the works:
1 - People used Silverlight when it made sense (because the people that started to use it were ones that hated Flash but needed its functionality)
2 - Security issues were minimal compared to Flash
3 - Performance was pretty good

When GPU acceleration for browser shit came about, you didn't give a shit about performance.

Now that HTML5 / canvas is around, much of what needed a plugin such as Flash or Silverlight can be rendered by browsers natively.
This doesn't mean Silverlight is dead, it just means that it's not necessary for today's typical content (video and some of the fancier CSS, basically).

Idiots will bitch about MS abandoning Silverlight. They're wrong.
Zealots will cheer about MS using HTML 5 (or, on the fanboy side, laugh at them for taking so long).

Users will be happy that Silverlight is an option, is being used only when necessary, and that interface design in general is looking at functionality and usability before pointless Flashiness.

Re:MS hate (1)

Joce640k (829181) | more than 3 years ago | (#36518056)

Have you noticed Silverlight hasn't even had the same security concerns and exploits as Flash?

It's certainly had its fair share of "critical updates"... ...none of which have managed to install itself on any of my machines.

I'm pretty sick of saying "don't install this" after it fails for the umpteenth time (but still asks me to reboot my machine anyway).

Re:MS hate (1)

locallyunscene (1000523) | more than 3 years ago | (#36518064)

That's what I was thinking too. If silverlight had wide adoption they would have stuck with it. But if they can't have the vendor lock in they don't want anybody to have it so HTML5 it is.

Re:MS hate (1)

drb226 (1938360) | more than 3 years ago | (#36518186)

Have you noticed Silverlight hasn't even had the same security concerns and exploits as Flash?

In fairness, the lack of "security concerns" in Silverlight compared to Flash in this case is rather similar to Linux's lack of "security concerns" compared to Windows. It's just not used nearly as much.

Re:MS hate (1)

TheNinjaroach (878876) | more than 3 years ago | (#36518234)

So Microsoft starts using standards compliant HTML5 instead of Silverlight on their sites and you bash them for it? Seriously?

The submitter must be one of many bitter developers who bought into Silverlight to begin with.

Re:MS hate (5, Insightful)

ron_ivi (607351) | more than 3 years ago | (#36518258)

> So Microsoft starts using standards compliant HTML5 instead of Silverlight on their sites and you bash them for it? Seriously?

No, we bash them for pushing one technology on their customers for the sake of getting them locked in, while internally they know those technologies suck and they use better stuff for themselves. The way Bing uses Hadoop is another example. And the way they're soon to be a big postgres shop (skype) yet another.

They know what the right technologies are. But they keep selling their developers on other stuff.

Re:MS hate (2)

Andy Dodd (701) | more than 3 years ago | (#36518296)

Yup. It's simple - Silverlight has failed, and it is a mixed fault between the developers and Microsoft. Anyone targeting Silverlight at this point is an idiot - the writing is on the wall and it has been for a long time.

Things that are Microsoft's fault - Not making clearer specs so third-party implementations (Moonlight) could maintain parity with Silverlight in terms of support, instead of lagging behind like Moonlight has. Moonlight has been a failure because it has never supported anything other than example galleries full of backlevel Silverlight examples.

Things that are the developer's fault - Jumping immediately to the latest Silverlight release, cutting off access to anyone using a non-MS platform, making Silverlight less relevant.

The only thing keeping Silverlight alive at this point is Netflix, and that's just a matter of time - PC users are probably a small fraction of Netflix Instant Streaming users. Silverlight was supposed to allow Netflix to reach a larger audience than their old Windows Media based solution, but it utterly failed there.

As others have pointed out, Silverlight is a solution to a problem that no longer exists. It was supposed to break Adobe's Flash stranglehold - It failed to do so, instead, HTML5 and iOS did that.

Re:MS hate (1)

jellomizer (103300) | more than 3 years ago | (#36518298)

It is probably from a Linux user who thinks the Desktop still has a bright future too. Being that the desktop is the only Market where Microsoft Dominates, (Other markets Microsoft may lead, but with competition close behind where they can just run away with it), but in the rest of the industry Microsoft while a major player isn't as big as it use to be, and cannot survive with the Embrace, Extend, Extinguish anymore, they kinda need to play by the standards and do what the standards say.

Silverlight "developers" never really got a good market mindset, and I think only Netflix is the major app that used it. Sorry for the people who expected it to be the next big thing, life sucks bet get over it. HTML 5 seems to be the winner here, As you can code for different platforms.

Re:MS hate (2)

dskzero (960168) | more than 3 years ago | (#36518488)

I honestly expected something slightly interesting, but seeing TFA stealthly bashing .NET I decided this wasn't worth my time, and instead, I typed a complain here.

Re:MS hate (1)

obarthelemy (160321) | more than 3 years ago | (#36518494)

I think the issue is not them dropping Silverlight per se, but them selling Silverlight to partners like the best thing since sliced bread for a few years, and then dropping it like hot potatoes when management at last realized that nobody wants Yet Another Plugin (tm), especially one that does not much but duplicate pre-existing plugins, only with an MS badge and less multiplatform support.

Nobody ever really needed a competitor to Flash. We needed Flash to get better, and/or vanish. Not Flash Jr.

Re:MS hate (1)

obarthelemy (160321) | more than 3 years ago | (#36518534)

sorry, missed a cut and paste.

All that why not really, frankly, appraising developpers of what the outlook for Silverlight is.

Re:MS hate (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36518528)

I'd rather bash you, faggot. Go die somewhere.

Best option (2)

Flyerman (1728812) | more than 3 years ago | (#36517776)

Sure, it's stabbing their "Developers! Developers! Developers!" in the back, but isn't it a positive that they moving to more widespread technologies?

Re:Best option (1)

DWMorse (1816016) | more than 3 years ago | (#36517818)

stabbing their "Developers! Developers! Developers!" in the back

They've simply updated their motto: "Die! Die! DIE!"

Re:Best option (2)

Stewie241 (1035724) | more than 3 years ago | (#36517910)

It isn't stabbing anybody in the back until they drop support for the platform.

Responding to the market and building stuff that will work on the machines of your target market is called flexibility and responsiveness.

If you can deliver a better experience with HTML5, then it makes sense to do it. Developers might look at this move and get the sense that it may (though in some cases maybe not) be wise for them to follow suit - not because Microsoft is dropping the platform, but because you can get better results in HTML5.

Re:Best option (0)

GameboyRMH (1153867) | more than 3 years ago | (#36518546)

I'd say it's positive, and I can't feel bad for the developers who wasted time training themselves on MS-proprietary tech. The best possible outcome they could have had was to get a sub-par-paying programming job while being stuck on Microsoft's planned obsolescence treadmill.

Re:Best option (2)

GrumblyStuff (870046) | more than 3 years ago | (#36518554)

It just makes me think they're up to something nefarious with HTML5. You know, embrace, extend, etc.?

Objectivity (3, Informative)

AndOne (815855) | more than 3 years ago | (#36517812)

Whatever happened to posting stories that aren't filled with FUD and hate? Maybe HTML5 is more standards compliant and more widely available on other things... like say... Mobile devices... Which are probably one of the places many people would want to access the 'cloud' from. Or perhaps silverlight is too heavy for the task of being a portal UI... Whatever happened to using the right tool for the right job?

Re:Objectivity (0)

Missing.Matter (1845576) | more than 3 years ago | (#36518204)

Since when has a story regarding MS not been filled with FUD and hate?

The obvious (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36517820)

Man, they want it to be accessible from every device, inclusing those that don't support Silverlight. It's called "picking your fights". So yes, please stop bashing and get a life.

They don't (3, Insightful)

geoffrobinson (109879) | more than 3 years ago | (#36517834)

"How can Microsoft expect independent developers to base their future on Silverlight when Microsoft itself is abandoning it like a sinking ship?"

They don't expect people to base their future on Silverlight. Why would anyone think that at this point?

As an end user, bravo! (1)

jaskelling (1927116) | more than 3 years ago | (#36517850)

I applaud this as an end user. The fewer idiotic plug-ins and crap I have to have installed, the better. As a programmer, between this and the vagaries around how things will be done with Windows 8, I'd be getting more and more irritated at the lack of clarity & communication from MS regarding where things are going. Training and coding isn't a cheap investment & there's not much of either that can afford to be wasted in this economy. Personally, I never had a problem with Silverlight. Unlike Flash, it never crashed my machine into oblivion while trying to load an ad.

Re:As an end user, bravo! (1)

Narnie (1349029) | more than 3 years ago | (#36518294)

That's because few ads are based on Silverlight.

I don't say it often (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36517896)

but, good on Microsoft this time.

Netflix (3, Insightful)

gatzby3jr (809590) | more than 3 years ago | (#36517900)

Now all we need is Netflix to abandon Silverlight...

Re:Netflix (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36518134)

Why do you need it to drop silverlight? so it can be a studdery resource hog like flash based players? or so it can have almost zero features that HTML5 affords streaming media?

Re:Netflix (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36518312)

So that I can use it on linux?

Re:Netflix (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 3 years ago | (#36518486)

So it can work as well everywere as it does on my PS3 and Droid. Neither one of those uses silverlight.

Re:Netflix (1)

b0bby (201198) | more than 3 years ago | (#36518602)

Flash on my Revo HTPC actually works quite well - Silverlight's lack of GPU acceleration makes it a non-starter. 5 is supposed to have it, but no sign of it working yet & if MS ditches it it might never happen.

Re:Netflix (1)

NuShrike (561140) | more than 3 years ago | (#36518320)

As soon as HTML5 has a DRM alternative for PCs. It's easier to control on embedded devices, on the other side.

Re:Netflix (1)

katz (36161) | more than 3 years ago | (#36518478)

DRM, that's the kicker. Talk about HTML5 all we want--fact is, there still ain't a standard video type. I can see MS continuing to pull all sorts of nasty lock-in strategies even with open standards.

Good for them (1)

torgis (840592) | more than 3 years ago | (#36517944)

If they're trying to sell this as a cloud service, why limit yourselves to Windows machines? Microsoft is in the business of making money, and they're quite good at it. Apparently, there is more money in using open standards and having more customers, as opposed to being force-fed your own proprietary standard and limiting your userbase as a result. Certain other huge megacorps (Sony, for one) could learn from this.

Re:Good for them (1)

Shados (741919) | more than 3 years ago | (#36518214)

Indeed! Why would you limit yourself to Windows machines!

Which is why they were using Silverlight, since its no limited to windows machines!

Silverlight on intranets (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36517960)

Silverlight is finding its way to corporate intranets.In an MS shop, many times it just boils down to choosing between Silverlight and ActiveX.

Re:Silverlight on intranets (2)

jellomizer (103300) | more than 3 years ago | (#36518352)

Sounds like doomed either way?

Most corporations don't need Silverlight anyways even with HTML 4 and ASP.NET you were able to make apps that needs to get done on a corporate level.
AJAX killed ActiveX, To bad those Old guys at IT in those corporations don't know that.

Oh noes! (2)

LordStormes (1749242) | more than 3 years ago | (#36518012)

Microsoft is embracing a STANDARD that isn't tied to a closed language they invented. Oh, the horror. I know, it's terrible for coders that learned Silverlight. Once upon a time, I learned Pascal. I used it. It did stuff for me. And the industry moved on, and Pascal is useless to me now. It's not even on my resume, because it's pointless. We're sorry that the world's progress risks making the time you spent learning that language/tool obsolete. Please move on.

Re:Oh noes! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36518346)

I'm sure that after Microsoft "embraces" HTML5, they will see its limitations, and therefore need to "extend" its functionality. Do they already have a seat on the HTML5 steering committee?

Re:Oh noes! (0)

frank_adrian314159 (469671) | more than 3 years ago | (#36518432)

I know, it's terrible for coders that learned Silverlight. Once upon a time, I learned Pascal. I used it. It did stuff for me. And the industry moved on, and Pascal is useless to me now.

Yes. And every time that a vendor decides that it needs to use a language or technology to lock in some subset of the market, you'll have to do it again, wasting your time and effort to learn a "different" - not new, not better, only "different" - way to bring up a window or code a for-loop. There's a word for people who fall for things over and over. I think it's called "gullible". Oh yeah, and the time-wasting part... I think it's called "inefficient".

Re:Oh noes! (1)

Whyzzi (319263) | more than 3 years ago | (#36518628)

Yeah, eh - > Move along, nothing to see here!

They had to drop the beast... (1)

bogaboga (793279) | more than 3 years ago | (#36518016)

...and I am happy to have been a [small] contributor to the outcome.

You see, I have resisted installing Silverlight on my Windows machines whenever I would be prompted to have it installed.

Microsoft must have gotten the message that Silverlight was not flying.

Good, they 'smelled the coffee'. I would like to hear what Microsoft zealots have to say about this.

Re:They had to drop the beast... (2)

TelavianX (1888030) | more than 3 years ago | (#36518150)

I do develop in silverlight and like it quite a bit. I think it is much easier to develop in than a web app any day. Sometimes the better technology does not always win the fight. We have to embrace was does win and go with it. Welcome back to the days of this app only works in browser X version Y.

Re:They had to drop the beast... (1)

bogaboga (793279) | more than 3 years ago | (#36518448)

I did not bother with Silverlight because I just could not keep up with the speed in technology. I have stuck with Java and like it over here.

The presence of Android has made Java even more relevant no matter how one looks at it.

The overall problem with Microsoft is this: They are trying to get into every business by 'locking users in'. People do not like this. With all these blogs saying lies about Microsoft, the company should change and do it fast.

Here's my suggestion: Fire Steve Ballmer as an initial first step.

Re:They had to drop the beast... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36518670)

Let us know when you can Silverlight apps in the browser on the Nokia N9. Good riddance I say.

Well actually... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36518092)

I only tried out this new HTML5 verison of the site this morning. I didn't know it used silverlight before but it still uses silverlight for uploading files.

dog shit (0)

Lehk228 (705449) | more than 3 years ago | (#36518102)

Microsoft does eat their own dog food, the issue is that silverlight is dog shit not dog food

Option C (0)

cforciea (1926392) | more than 3 years ago | (#36518128)

I personally tend to not eat dog food, no matter the owner.

slightly off topic... (1, Interesting)

swan5566 (1771176) | more than 3 years ago | (#36518256)

Maybe this has been mentioned before, but why is Bill Gates still the icon for MS? He stepped down quite down quite some time ago. Maybe this exposes not just /. bias against MS in general, but for him personally? Along with that, maybe this is an attempt to freeze-frame MS as "The Man"? Ballmar might make a more interesting (funny) icon anyway.

It still uses silverlight (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36518314)

Just not for UI.

HTML5 still has no good way to stream large files to a server, with progress and whatnot. Enter silverlight and/or flash.

I wish there were more coders who could look past the fucking canvas tag and see the service level for what it is on the browser.. nonexistent, and/or broken and all fucked up..

On trusting MS (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36518330)

I've been developing for over 20 years and I learned early on that MS cannot be trusted to maintain any tech for more than a few years (long enough to destroy it). They did pretty good with .net, but the collective memory of MS developers obviously doesn't span more than a few years. Either that or young people (new developers) are very forgiving.

IMHO, MS developers deserve what they get. The world has had to support the crap MS has doled out for years (IE anyone), because developers keep buying their crap.

Enough with the FUD (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36518350)

Microsoft offers a free 25GB cloud storage service and even uses modern web standards instead of their usual proprietary tools, and what do /. contributors do? Complain! The nerve!

Slashcode bashing?! (1)

rwa2 (4391) | more than 3 years ago | (#36518396)

Ooh, is this finally a thread in which Slashcode [slashcode.com] bashing isn't offtopic?

What would you use to write slashcode in today if not mod_perl?

Actually, are there any viable alternatives to javascript? Other than, you know, flash?

Netflix please (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36518490)

Can Netflix do this please?

Silverlight is dead. (1)

PinchDuck (199974) | more than 3 years ago | (#36518512)

Get over it.

Don't blame the snake for acting like a snake (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36518568)

This often happens when you buy into a proprietary framework/language/OS/whatever.

Well (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36518578)

I'm sure that both of the Silverlight developers will be upset.

About Silverlight (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36518618)

Stopped using Silverlight? Today I sent some files and is still using Silverlight ...

Dog food is good when your a dog (1)

Sla$hPot (1189603) | more than 3 years ago | (#36518634)

The REST is up to you :)

Well that explains it (1)

kevinNCSU (1531307) | more than 3 years ago | (#36518640)

Well that explains a lot of the conditions you see with your stereotypical programmers (pale, unhealthy looking, bad smell). Why have they not considered the option of, you know, not eating anyone's dog food?

Silverlight still being used... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36518644)

Silverlight is still required to add files...honestly don't know why, its not like they allow you to drag and drop a folder from your machine. Honestly, who designed this?

NetFlix uses Silverlight (1)

lazyforker (957705) | more than 3 years ago | (#36518652)

I believe NetFlix uses Silverlight for their streaming service. (I suspect it's because Silverlight has DRM support and NetFlix probably couldn't get permission to stream DRM-less media.) But Silverlight is also one of the major platforms for Windows Phone 7. So I doubt Silverlight is going anywhere. Plus - as other commenters have noted: we shouldn't bash MSFT for moving towards standards-based solutions, we should applaud!

Obsolescence (1)

Tofino (628530) | more than 3 years ago | (#36518674)

If I wrote a bitter submission to Slashdot every time a technology I learned and used became obsolete, this site would be called Tofinodot. Learn HTML5 and move on.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>