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!

Mono Abandons Open Source Silverlight

Soulskill posted more than 2 years ago | from the singing-in-an-empty-theater dept.

Media 336

mikejuk writes "The Mono project is about the only group of people actively talking up .NET and developing it, but in an interview Miguel de Icaza has admitted that Moonlight, the Mono version of Silverlight, isn't worth the effort any more. He said, 'Silverlight has not gained much adoption on the web, so it did not become the must-have technology that I thought [it] would have to become. And Microsoft added artificial restrictions to Silverlight that made it useless for desktop programming. These days we no longer believe that Silverlight is a suitable platform for write-once-run-anywhere technology, there are just too many limitations for it to be useful.'"

cancel ×

336 comments

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

Netflix (5, Informative)

jakimfett (2629943) | more than 2 years ago | (#40145265)

Now, if only Netflix would abandon it so that I don't have to boot into windows to watch movies...if it can be done for android, why not PC?

Re:Netflix (2)

Qwavel (733416) | more than 2 years ago | (#40145303)

How do they handle Android - do they use a completely different technology or do they implement silverlight in their Android app?

Re:Netflix (1, Insightful)

poetmatt (793785) | more than 2 years ago | (#40145521)

What they don't use: silverlight. I don't know what they do, but it's explicitly not that.

I can only wonder how much money was under the table from MS to get netflix to do this, in the face of common sense.

Re:Netflix (4, Informative)

King InuYasha (1159129) | more than 2 years ago | (#40145577)

Netflix on Android and iOS use raw video streams. No DRM or other funny business.

DRM vs. locked bootloaders (4, Interesting)

Rob Y. (110975) | more than 2 years ago | (#40145831)

That's why the Nook Tablet came with a locked bootloader, whereas the original Nook Color spawned a large ROM'mer community. Netflix required it in order to let them use their app. I think I'd rather deal with DRM for paid downloads than have my whole device locked down.

Re:Netflix (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40145837)

ios has built in drm and for android its a drm solution that they built themselves that will also be shared with their NACL implementation.

Re:Netflix (2)

HarrySquatter (1698416) | more than 2 years ago | (#40145875)

That's not insightful. Netflix uses DRM on all platforms. It's a requirement of the media companies.

Re:Netflix (1)

Old97 (1341297) | more than 2 years ago | (#40145911)

Silverlight runs on the Mac too. I had to install it for Netflix.

Re:Netflix (5, Insightful)

ZeroSumHappiness (1710320) | more than 2 years ago | (#40145681)

Netflix isn't getting paid off by MS for this. There are two interesting aspects to the Netflix-on-Linux problem, one obvious, one not.

Obvious problem: Reed Hastings, CEO of Netflix is on the board of directors of Microsoft. This, almost definitely, gives him sips of kool-aid and some self-interest in growing Microsoft's market share for its pet projects.

Non-obvious problem: The studios that actually own all the distribution rights to the videos on Netflix are, for the most part, wary about DRM on Linux, under the belief that obscurity grants security. Now, we all know that's stupid, but we also all know they are stupid.

From what I understand, the actual minds at Netflix wanted a Linux product, know how to make it happen (to the point where they have internally tested it and it works) and would release it if it were feasible but the studios are hogtying them with contracts.

Re:Netflix (4, Informative)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 2 years ago | (#40145913)

LoveFilm in the UK just switched from Flash to Silverlight, because of reason 2: the studios refused to keep licensing them for streaming with Flash, believing that Silverlight was somehow more secure (which it probably is, on the basis that it's so unpopular that no one as yet has cared enough to crack it). This has effectively rendered their streaming useless to me, as neither of the machines that I want to stream video to run a Silverlight-supported OS.

Re:Netflix (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40145935)

"From what I understand, the actual minds at Netflix wanted a Linux product, "

IF it's on Android, it's on linux. It's trivial to move it over to the Linux platform and into a XBMC plugin.

It is the CEO of Netflix that hates Linux and linux users. Otherwise he would green light a XBMC plugin.

Re:Netflix (1)

ZeroSumHappiness (1710320) | more than 2 years ago | (#40146027)

Except, of course, the whole contract problem you are willfully ignoring...

And obviously I meant a general-purpose Linux OS rather than Android or BoxeeBox since every Netflix subscriber who has wanted a Linux product has seen all the "it works on Android/BoxeeBox so it should work on Linux" posts around the net.

Re:Netflix (2)

squiggleslash (241428) | more than 2 years ago | (#40146021)

Non-obvious problem: The studios that actually own all the distribution rights to the videos on Netflix are, for the most part, wary about DRM on Linux, under the belief that obscurity grants security. Now, we all know that's stupid, but we also all know they are stupid.

If that were the case, then surely the same movies wouldn't be available via Amazon's instant streaming thing? Or Youtube's commercial play.google.com video service?

Netflix is very much the odd one out for the major commercial movie streamers in not using Flash. I really don't think the studios are mandating the technology, I think it's a straightforward case of them going to a major technology vendor to get a "solution", and getting the solution that vendor, Microsoft, found most in their interest to sell.

Amazon, YouTube, and, for that matter, Hulu (which streams stuff from different divisions of the same media companies, who are just as obsessive about piracy), are more tech savvy enterprises, being made up of people who were expecting to deliver stuff via the web from the get-go, so it's not surprising they'd go with an established technology like Flash rather than Silverlight. The only surprise, to a certain extent, is that Real didn't ever manage to muscle in on this market.

Yes and No (4, Informative)

pavon (30274) | more than 2 years ago | (#40145627)

Silverlight (and XNA, and Windows Phone 7, etc) basically refer to overlapping collections of .NET libraries (often referred to as profiles) which different environments support. The set of libraries that Xamarin provides for Android development is a superset of the libraries available in Silverlight 4. However the intent isn't for you to write Silverlight applications that happen to run on Android. The idea is to write all your common code using the .NET Base Class Libraries (BCL; which are included in the ECMA standard), and then write your interface using (wrappers) around the native libraries for Android (or iOS or WP7 or Silverlight or WPF or ASP), for each platform you release on.

Re:Netflix (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40145643)

You don't have to implement Silverlight, just the audio/video codecs and one of several possible transports. Silverlight builds on the pre-existing Microsoft Media infrastructure. For example, in many cases I can transcode a Silverlight audio stream by connecting to the legacy RTSP transport and decoding the Windows Media Audio packets. Neither FFmpeg nor GStreamer can do this, because while they have good codec support they have shit transport support.

I've build a custom HTTP/RTSP library and ASF decoder, and then heavily refactored the WMA decoder from FFmpeg. In fact, I've written a daemon which can transcode Windows Media Audio and Flash FLV/FLA audio (plus the easy ones, like Shoutcast and vanilla RTSP), and transcode in real-time for whatever the connecting device requires (various HTTP streaming formats, RTSP, etc; and from, e.g. WMA to Vorbis).

The daemon is both event oriented and multi-process. I can transcode (with resampling) 4 live broadcasts and reflect to 50+ clients while using a fraction of the CPU a browser takes just to playback one stream. Again, FFmpeg, GStreamer, and VLC have all the wrong optimizations for this kind of scaling. Internet media streaming is still in the dark ages.

Re:Netflix (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40145325)

exactly my condition too

Re:Netflix (4, Funny)

Jeremiah Cornelius (137) | more than 2 years ago | (#40145357)

Yeah. OSX, too. HA! A joke. MS spend years and many tens of millions to derail the corpulent and putrid hulk that is Adobe Flash. Instead, they manage to build a custom DRM container for NetFlix, as the sole volume partner/customer.

Anybody else who tried walking out on this limb, wound up getting screwed, per the usual MS bait-and-wait.

Re:Netflix (1)

axx (1000412) | more than 2 years ago | (#40145361)

It would make running XBMC on GNU/Linux even better for those in the areas Netflix covers too :)

Re:Netflix (1)

betso.net (950024) | more than 2 years ago | (#40145407)

I abandon Netflix! First time I visited the website, I was really willing to subscribe and use it. Then I saw this requirement... I never went there again.

Re:Netflix (1)

nukeade (583009) | more than 2 years ago | (#40145431)

Exactly. If it weren't for Netflix, I wouldn't even know what Silverlight is. It doesn't even run reliably on Windows VMs under VirtualBox.

Re:Netflix (1)

Mister Whirly (964219) | more than 2 years ago | (#40145729)

I support about 60 PCs at work and Silverlight is a required application. I haven't had a single Silverlight problem yet that couldn't be fixed by a re-install. Maybe the problem is running in a VM? Although I have a few VMware boxes running Windows and they don't have problems with Silverlight either.

Re:Netflix (2)

DdJ (10790) | more than 2 years ago | (#40145455)

...if it can be done for android, why not PC?

Is that a rhetorical question? I'm not quite sure. I'll play along and assume it's not.

The answer is: DRM. The reason various set-top boxes and iOS and Android devices can do Netflix without Silverlight is because those platforms are locked down enough that they don't need Silverlight's DRM to discourage copying.

Sure, they could make their own dedicated "app" for Windows, and implement DRM in there. I bet under Windows 8, they will.

Re:Netflix (1)

jakimfett (2629943) | more than 2 years ago | (#40145515)

Is that a rhetorical question? I'm not quite sure. I'll play along and assume it's not.

Nope, definitely rhetoric. It was asked in an "whyfor do they shoot themselves in the foot so frequently?" sort of way, whilst facepalming and headdesking.

Re:Netflix (1)

JSBiff (87824) | more than 2 years ago | (#40145505)

I've got mixed feelings about this. It's been my experience that Silverlight/Netflix give me better video streams (higher definitions, good framerates, very few times it needs to stop to buffer), and my PC runs cooler, than Flash videos, for whatever reason.

I especially noticed this when I had a laptop - I would notice the laptop get VERY hot when watching videos from Hulu (which uses Flash), but it only got warm, not hot, with Netflix videos. The Netflix videos consistently seemed to have higher video quality (although, to be fair, Hulu's video quality seems to have gotten quite a bit better, so that's probably less a limitation of Flash and more of the way the videos were encoded by Hulu a couple years ago).

Still, for all that can be said bad about Silverlight, and it does suck that it's Windows-only, it does have some redeeming values.

Re:Netflix (2)

jakimfett (2629943) | more than 2 years ago | (#40145679)

Flash vs Silverlight? I'd definitely go with Silverlight.

But Silverlight vs raw video streams? Absolutely no contest, I'd go with raw video. Why? Because my netbook can't play netflix videos without major stuttering (even when running absolutely nothing else, and at reduced resolutions, when hardwired into my network), and my old Droid 2 Global plays them fine over wireless.

Re:Netflix (1)

Nikker (749551) | more than 2 years ago | (#40145619)

If it runs on dalvik and dalvik is already ported to x86 then what is really stopping us?

Re:Netflix (1)

amicusNYCL (1538833) | more than 2 years ago | (#40145699)

if it can be done for android, why not PC?

That's not the right question to ask. It CAN be done for PC. The reason why they chose to do it that way isn't because it can't be done any other way.

He was told that in the first place. (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40145283)

It just took a LOT of wasted time for him to believe it.

Re:He was told that in the first place. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40145435)

Miguel must be relieved to have one less cock in his mouth.

Same old microsoft (5, Insightful)

LingNoi (1066278) | more than 2 years ago | (#40145285)

1) Create new technology
2) Market the hell out of it
3) Everyone gets hyped up, next big thing etc
4) Microsoft drops technology
5) repeat step 1

This has been their standard order of business for decades. Watch for the same thing to happen to "Metro" Microsoft's latest big thing..

Re:Same old microsoft (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40145339)

3a) Get dumb mexican patsy to create half ass clone of your half ass Java clone

Re:Same old microsoft (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40145421)

Yeah because Microsoft is the only company that does this right?

Here, I'll tell you who else does this because I'm positive that you won't have a clue who I'm talking about since you posted such a stupid response.

Google.

Re:Same old microsoft (5, Funny)

djdanlib (732853) | more than 2 years ago | (#40145557)

Google surely wouldn't create a Buzz in the marketplace unless they were sure their product would be the Wave of the future, would they? ;)

Some of us are in fact non-Plussed by their entirely-too-sanitary products...

Re:Same old microsoft (4, Insightful)

Sarten-X (1102295) | more than 2 years ago | (#40145599)

Like most R&D-heavy companies, Google will promote and hype their new product, but if it doesn't take off, it'll die a quiet death. Their successful products will be promoted continually, as a means to build up the brand.

Microsoft, on the other hand, promotes its new technology, and when nobody cares, they promote it more, deprecate the old system, tack on a new name, integrate it with their next new project, then finally declare it deprecated (but still fully supported) when the new replacement comes out.

Re:Same old microsoft (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40145459)

1a) Make sure it's annoying and useless

Re:Same old microsoft (4, Insightful)

poetmatt (793785) | more than 2 years ago | (#40145575)

Actually, 3 is wrong.

In this case 3 was: nobody wanted this shit ever, forever and ever. People warned and warned and warned it was horrible, and Miguel along with Florian were the only people pushing for "oh, this is great, and it's open source!" (while not mentioning it was like 2+ years behind the entire time and MS would deliberately only support the latest versions) 4 and 5 still occur.

Same thing with windows ME, windows 8, the Ribbon bar, games for windows live, DRM pushed by intel/MS, etc.

Re:Same old microsoft (1)

lilfields (961485) | more than 2 years ago | (#40145615)

Metro? You mean we'll go back to a work where we have just icons with no description of anything related to the programs content? I guess the GUI won't be updated until Apple says so! Metro's Live Tiles are essentially what Microsoft tried to do years and years ago with the active desktop, which were subsequently killed after their spat with the U.S. government. Guess who no longer has the government on their back? (hint: Microsoft.) Your insightful on Slashdot, but in reality your post is more trollish.

Re:Same old microsoft (1)

dkleinsc (563838) | more than 2 years ago | (#40145757)

What I've noticed is that it's gotten worse since Bill Gates left Microsoft to Steve Ballmer. I'm guessing this has a lot to do with the fact that BillG was quite able to evaluate the technical merits of different proposals, while SteveB was not. BillG could act as a filter between the research teams that need to come up with the Next Big Thing (TM) to justify their existence and the MS marketing machine that is quite capable of hyping just about anything in the press.

Bad sign for good technology (4, Interesting)

TheNucleon (865817) | more than 2 years ago | (#40145289)

Silverlight really is a well thought out technology. It does a great job of abstracting the presentation layer from the code, and is pleasant to program. The tools for developing in Silverlight are nice, too. Too bad that it is showing signs of fading away - I think it had a lot of potential.

Re:Bad sign for good technology (4, Insightful)

cpu6502 (1960974) | more than 2 years ago | (#40145371)

I thought the necessity for Silverlight (and Flash) was obsoleted by HTML 5? I think both these programs need to disappear.

Re:Bad sign for good technology (1)

Enderandrew (866215) | more than 2 years ago | (#40145467)

Many Microsoft sites that used Silverlight have moved to HTML5, and Microsoft is telling Silverlight developers to embrace HTML5.

Re:Bad sign for good technology (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40145783)

Now if only Microsoft would embrace it too...

Re:Bad sign for good technology (3, Insightful)

BaronAaron (658646) | more than 2 years ago | (#40145623)

The various browser implementations of HTML5 still haven't matured enough to reliably replace browser plugins in all cases. Specifically video playback support is still a mess due to all the codec patent issues. A recent project I worked on required us to encode the video in three different formats to cover all the major browsers. If we used Flash we would have only had to encode once. There is also no DRM solution for HTML5 video. This is a non-starter for many streaming companies like Netflix.

HTML5 get better everyday though, it's only a matter of time.

Re:Bad sign for good technology (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40145719)

Obviously coming from someone who has never had to develop with JS/HTML5. It's a miserable experience compared to Flash or Silverlight and it takes a lot longer since there is less tooling and you have multiple browsers to target.

HTML5 convergence (4, Insightful)

johanwanderer (1078391) | more than 2 years ago | (#40145417)

This is just another sign of the industry converging to HTML5 as the primary display API. Flash is going away, now Silverlight is, too. Hopefully the companies will increase their efforts to allow users / developers to migrate existing applications to the new API.

Re:HTML5 convergence (4, Insightful)

ArhcAngel (247594) | more than 2 years ago | (#40145593)

Flash is going away,

Flash is the new IE6. Ten years from now corporations will still be clinging to it while everyone else is running HTML17.

Re:HTML5 convergence (1)

tokul (682258) | more than 2 years ago | (#40145771)

Your thoughts will look better, if you stop converging things. Now it is just something coming from smoked html5 marketing department.

Re:Bad sign for good technology (5, Insightful)

Sarten-X (1102295) | more than 2 years ago | (#40145449)

Potential that could have been useful in, say, 1993...

Silverlight was supposed to be Microsoft's answer to Flash, but HTML 5 is already the generally-accepted answer to Flash. It was supposed to enable web-based applications to run on the desktop, but the widespread adoption of AJAX and other browser technologies has made that goal unnecessary, too. It was supposed to be a mechanism for Microsoft to claim dominance of up-and-coming technologies, but it's just yet another failure on Ballmer's running list of "too little, too late" achievements.

Re:Bad sign for good technology (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40145629)

That might all be true; but it was DOA for me because I don't want to install another plug-in.

Re:Bad sign for good technology (1)

jellomizer (103300) | more than 2 years ago | (#40145673)

Silverlight is part of Microsoft recent trend of systems that were too little to late, and not marketed well enough.

Microsoft actually lately has been developing some nice stuff... However they are failing to catch on because they are seen as near identical replacement of an existing product that is widely used.

Why develop for Sliverlight when everyone has Flash installed... Besides HTML 5 standards would be out soon.
Why get a Zune and buy software on the Microsoft channel, when Apple already has one, and it is already really big.
Why get a Windows Phone, when you can an Android or an iPhone....

People will stick with the older technology even if it is a little bit worse then the new stuff, mostly because unless it is really that much better you are wasting your time coding for something that then you need to evangelize the user community to adopt.

Am I a bad person? (5, Funny)

demachina (71715) | more than 2 years ago | (#40145293)

Am I a bad person to experience a Schadenfreude rush everytime Miguel, Facebook, Zynga or Groupon fails?

Re:Am I a bad person? (2)

sycodon (149926) | more than 2 years ago | (#40145397)

Absolutely Not.

I was actually kind of giddy when Facebook shares started dropping the first day out.

I just head they are predicting $25 by mid-summer.

Re:Am I a bad person? (3, Insightful)

OzPeter (195038) | more than 2 years ago | (#40145583)

Absolutely Not.

I was actually kind of giddy when Facebook shares started dropping the first day out.

I just head they are predicting $25 by mid-summer.

By mid summer?? It's $28 and falling TODAY

Re:Am I a bad person? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40145661)

You're missing the best part. The bankers that decided to IPO way too many shares at way too high a price bought a ton of that garbage on opening day to try to prop the price up. How much are they still holding, and how much money are they losing? If they haven't already lost their entire underwriting fee, that point can't be too far off.

Re:Am I a bad person? (1)

elsurexiste (1758620) | more than 2 years ago | (#40145721)

Most likely a sadist or a psychopath. ;)

Re:Am I a bad person? (4, Funny)

Col. Klink (retired) (11632) | more than 2 years ago | (#40145953)

> Am I a bad person to experience a Schadenfreude rush everytime Miguel, Facebook, Zynga or Groupon fails?

There's a whole online support group [slashdot.org] for people like us.

Hasn't silverlight been abandoned (1)

vlm (69642) | more than 2 years ago | (#40145295)

Hasn't silverlight been abandoned?
First release in '07 and according to the wikipedia article the staggering market penetration of 0.3% (thats zero point three, I didn't drop a leading 9 or something...)

Re:Hasn't silverlight been abandoned (1)

sangreal66 (740295) | more than 2 years ago | (#40145373)

It's still alive on Xbox. It drives all of the new media applications

Re:Hasn't silverlight been abandoned (2)

MightyMartian (840721) | more than 2 years ago | (#40145461)

And another legacy monster is born. Microsoft has a peculiar expertise for loading itself down with this kind of cruft.

Re:Hasn't silverlight been abandoned (1)

The MAZZTer (911996) | more than 2 years ago | (#40145377)

Microsoft has decided to never implement WelGL in IE (IIRC) and supposedly this is because they're trying to push 3D features in Silverlight.

Oh look, Flash has built-in 3D features now, and actually has a user base...

Re:Hasn't silverlight been abandoned (1)

tom17 (659054) | more than 2 years ago | (#40145399)

One word.

Netflix.

Re:Hasn't silverlight been abandoned (1)

jedidiah (1196) | more than 2 years ago | (#40145749)

A $60 ARM appliance makes far more sense for that particular use case.

Re:Hasn't silverlight been abandoned (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40145495)

"Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings. Bad science flies us into planets."

- AC

So Miguel . . . (-1, Troll)

hduff (570443) | more than 2 years ago | (#40145343)

After you sold out to Microsoft years ago, how does it feel to be treated like the whore you were?

Re:So Miguel . . . (1)

jellomizer (103300) | more than 2 years ago | (#40145741)

Do you say that about the StarOffice/OpenOffice/LibreOffice developers to make sure their products support Microsoft Office files.
How about those hard working people in the WINE project.
Heck those guys who make DOS BOX.

I for one would like much more positive community support from the Open Source community toward Mono. De-Windows .NET would open the door towards more cross platform applications.

Re:So Miguel . . . (1)

rubycodez (864176) | more than 2 years ago | (#40145937)

LibreOffice is just file formats.

screw WINE and DOS BOX, virtual machines run windows for those who want it, with a far superior compatibiliity.

Ahh! (3, Insightful)

gQuigs (913879) | more than 2 years ago | (#40145353)

I'm no fan of .NET, but I'm pretty sure the Mono developers aren't the only ones using it.

He is saying there is no future for Silverlight (the .NET based web plugin), not all of .NET. And that they won't put resouces into developing Moonlight (the open source version of Silverlight).

...or maybe I was the only one confused by the summary....

I know of two sites that use Silverlight, netflix and xfinity. They both use it just for the Microsoft DRM, afaik.

Re:Ahh! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40145427)

I hate .NET, every time I interview or hear some smarmy HR person talk about it, I want to blow chunks on someones shoes.

Re:Ahh! (1)

jellomizer (103300) | more than 2 years ago | (#40145775)

Perhaps if you actually sit down and learned it, you may actually get a job. .NET is prevalent in Windows Application. If a company chooses windows for whatever motive knowing .NET will probably get you in.

Re:Ahh! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40145847)

I never said I didn't learn it (try reading), I just said I don't like it. Big difference, typical slash dotter.

Time to abandon Mono itself.... (0)

jkrise (535370) | more than 2 years ago | (#40145393)

I cannot think of a single company that has adopted Mono. And even .Net is being deprecated by Microsoft in favour of the Tablet Formfactor Metro apps.

Time for Miguel and his employers to abandon Mono altogether and drop this whole pseudo-open source thing. Enough and more time and talent has been wasted on creating useless things.

Re:Time to abandon Mono itself.... (2)

Enderandrew (866215) | more than 2 years ago | (#40145723)

.NET never was that huge for desktop apps for most users, but it is HUGE in the enterprise world. HTML5 is the path for Metro tile apps, but Microsoft isn't abandoning all their enterprise customers with internal apps. .NET isn't going away. Mono in theory could allow these customers to shift to Linux, but I'm not sure anyone has really tried that.

Re:Time to abandon Mono itself.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40145899)

How about some really really tiny game engine called UNITY3D? Pathetic, right? Who cares? Just maybe some 60% of the mobile game industry that matters.

.NET != Silverlight (5, Interesting)

Empiric (675968) | more than 2 years ago | (#40145409)

It isn't terribly surprising that Mono is abandoning Silverlight, since Microsoft seems to be doing much the same in favor of HTML 5.

The .NET Framework and tools in totality are a different story, though.

By the way, for those who haven't looked at it recently, MonoDevelop has come a -long- way. It's feature-comparable to Visual Studio, nowadays.

Re:.NET != Silverlight (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40145491)

Too bad its built on a foundation of sand... combined with a swamp.

Re:.NET != Silverlight (2)

Empiric (675968) | more than 2 years ago | (#40145785)

Well, since I was a developer at Coldwell Banker a few years back, whose worldwide real estate search and "tour" sites were running handily on .NET and SQL Server, I happen to know directly that it was a relatively-small percentage that were built on sand and swamp. But you could filter those out by price range. ;)

Re:.NET != Silverlight (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40145813)

lol @ butthurt ruby developers

Re:.NET != Silverlight (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40145861)

i dunno VS (or microsoft's .net implementation), but if it is as buggy as monodevelop (or mono), then i am very glad i dont have to use it.
i have started a small project involving xml/xsd processing and pdf generation to learn .net a bit and to be able to asses .net and mono as objectively as possible, and i came to the conclusion that mono is a piece of crap. i have never used such a buggy programming environment ever (and i have used some fairly experimental stuff too like smalltalk or eiffel). mono has two official, upstream bug trackers... both with thousands of "New" bug reports. i have added a few with a quite detailed description (and it seemed that the fix would be a one-liner, although TBH i have not looked at the code) and have never heard back. this was months ago (yes, that's expected... obviously they dont have enough man power to tackle it. "my" foss project has the same problem, but that's a clear contradiction to "feature-comparable"... at least in my book).

c# is quite nice, although most of the features are pretty useless imho. nice to have sometimes, but nothing that can compensate for the bad parts of .net's API and/or its documentation.

How do we strong arm Ultra Violet distributors now (1)

pecosdave (536896) | more than 2 years ago | (#40145419)

If you want to watch many companies Ultra Violet distributors movies you're stuck with Silverlight, at the prompting of one I tried to get Moonlight going but there wasn't a 64 Bit version.

Of course Sony takes and overall screw Linux position [wikipedia.org] even banning Linux browsers from logging into their website with cryptic error messages.

Re:How do we strong arm Ultra Violet distributors (1)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 2 years ago | (#40145697)

I get this funny little feeling that "Ultraviolet" will come to occupy the same in history footnote as as "DIVX"(the phone-home video player attempt by Circuit City, not the codec), "Flexplay", and "DVD-D"...

I can't think of any ways that the 'consortium' behind it could make it any more of a user nightmare; but they seem to be doing their best.

Re:How do we strong arm Ultra Violet distributors (4, Informative)

Microlith (54737) | more than 2 years ago | (#40145759)

The funniest part about that Talk page is that "JimTheFrog" is, according to his user page:

Jim Taylor is Head of Technology and Product Development for UltraViolet/DECE, the online entertainment equivalent to DVD and Blu-ray.

So basically, that entire talk page is about the lead of that DRM-centric disaster defending what is fundamentally a customer-hostile technology. I'd call him a shill but he's probably tasked with "maintaining the message" on places like Wikipedia to make UltraViolet seem less fundamentally shitty than it is. And his dickish attitude towards Linux seems unsurprising, given that he

was DVD Evangelist at Microsoft.

What will it be replaced with? (1)

Qwavel (733416) | more than 2 years ago | (#40145443)

Silverlight, and even Flash, are dying out.

Don't get me wrong - that is a good thing - but I want to be able to watch Netflix, Youtube Videos, etc. in my browser and that isn't going to happen unless there is some way for my browser to handle DRM'ed video streams.

So, either HTML5 needs to add support for DRM'ed video, or users will only be able to use these services via 'apps' and obscure platforms will be at a huge disadvantage (e.g. Netflix isn't writing an app for the Playbook because the platform isn't popular enough).

Personally, I think that the hate that is felt towards DRM should be redirected towards proprietary DRM so we can break down platform lock-in and give the obscure platforms a chance with the average consumer.

Re:What will it be replaced with? (2)

Hatta (162192) | more than 2 years ago | (#40145637)

Personally, I think that the hate that is felt towards DRM should be redirected towards proprietary DRM so we can break down platform lock-in and give the obscure platforms a chance with the average consumer.

Can't be done. Any open DRM platform will be trivially circumvented. In cryptographic terms, DRM is an attempt to send a message from Alice to Bob without it being read by Charlie. The problem is that in DRM, Bob and Charlie are the same person. The way DRM companies get around this is by hiding the private key in the software. If their DRM systems were open, then they would be unable to hide anything anywhere.

Re:What will it be replaced with? (1)

hobarrera (2008506) | more than 2 years ago | (#40145715)

Or maybe DRM needs to die once and for all, which is what most consumer are expecting.

Re:What will it be replaced with? (2)

Bert64 (520050) | more than 2 years ago | (#40145725)

Any form of DRM has to be proprietary, the entire premise is based on security through obscurity... If the platform is not obscure, then it becomes even more trivial to circumvent.

It is DRM that should be abandoned, it serves only to screw legitimate customers through lack of player choice and bugs etc... It does absolutely nothing to stop piracy, if anything it encourages it because it enables the pirates to offer a superior product...

DRM is inherently broken because you have to give users everything they need in order to play the stream, you just need to reverse engineer it and work out how to extract the data or keys. For any DRM scheme which has content worth pirating, this always happens, and it only takes one person to work it out and distribute his tools to the warez scene.

Re:What will it be replaced with? (2)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 2 years ago | (#40145839)

Personally, I think that the hate that is felt towards DRM should be redirected towards proprietary DRM so we can break down platform lock-in and give the obscure platforms a chance with the average consumer.

Trouble is, there is nothing but 'Proprietary DRM'. If DRM is 'open' it becomes quite trivial to produce a tool that is conformant in all respects, except that it silently ignores the various customer-hostile features(like those little HDMI converter boxes, that aren't supposed to exist, that report themselves as an HDCP compliant sink on one side; but spit out an unencrypted video stream on the other).

Thus, we see either single-party proprietary DRM(eg. 'Fairplay' where only one company holds the keys) or multi-party proprietary DRM(eg. WMDRM, where you can license the DRM system; but only by agreeing to cripple your product in specific ways). There might be a hypothetical 'open' DRM, developed under some sort of OSS model; but for it to remotely work in practice, it would just be rolled out on tivoized platforms only. And what good is 'open' in that case?

No. Shit. (5, Interesting)

EjectButton (618561) | more than 2 years ago | (#40145453)

"we no longer believe that Silverlight is a suitable platform for write-once-run-anywhere technology, there are just too many limitations for it to be useful."
If only someone could have warned you, oh wait someone did, _everyone_ in the world who has paid any attention to Microsoft's behavior over the last 20 years.

Miguel has supported:
the Microsoft "partnership" with Novell (disaster for Novell in the community)
OOXML/docx (deliberately obfuscated format mess)
C# (has a constant vague patent cloud over it that he dismisses)
Moonlight/Silverlight (a patent-encumbered flash clone, in an era when flash is going away, now shown to be a bad idea)

I used to wonder if Miguel was a Microsoft plant, now I wonder if he just has a learning disability.

Re:No. Shit. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40145735)

And BTW the announcement has a negative impact on the project. It would be better to keep the project alive until it dies naturally, it is open source not corporate. Put the lot on github and let the community sort it out if anybody cares.

Sounds much like a meeting behind closed doors in redmont... "From now on we focus on html5, silverlight has not reached much adoption, let's pull it. Oh notify that De Icaza guy we no longer need the pretense of platform independence".

Re:No. Shit. (0)

rubycodez (864176) | more than 2 years ago | (#40145867)

s/plant/whore-bag/g

Re:No. Shit. (1)

Spykk (823586) | more than 2 years ago | (#40145927)

C# (has a constant vague patent cloud over it that he dismisses)

So, what is the alternative then? I'm sure that you are aware that Java has its own vague patent cloud these days. The market has shown that there is a need for a JIT compiled platform for architecture neutral binaries. If Java and .net are out then what can we use?

Silverlight was temporary anyway (1)

Dhrakar (32366) | more than 2 years ago | (#40145479)

Silverlight just like Flash was only ever going to be temporary anyway. They were both technologies trying to do the same thing of abstracting the GUI to something that crosses OS versions, platforms, etc. Once Flash started giving way to HTML5, the writing was on the wall for Silverlight. Soon, I imagine, we will have native apps for things the need deeper/privileged access to the platform (phone, tablet, desktop, whatever) and web-style HTML rendering for everything else.

Sometimes a manager's gut is right (2)

MyLongNickName (822545) | more than 2 years ago | (#40145537)

My lead developer wanted to adopt Silverlight a couple years back for a key application we were developing. I am sure he had strong technical reasons, but getting tied to a highly proprietary Microsoft technology just smelled bad. .NET is one thing, Silverlight scared the hell out of me. I pulled out one of my rarely used veto cards and I'm glad I did.

Write-Once-Run-Anywhere??? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40145543)

These days we no longer believe that Silverlight is a suitable platform for write-once-run-anywhere technology...

Wow. Is THAT what Silverlight was supposed to be?? My god!

I mean, did I miss something?

Last I checked, it was a browser plug-in, that only provided Windows binaries, only "plugged-in" with Internet Explorer, and provided the exact same features as Adobe Flash (ohhhh, but it was a Microsoft product, so it was better!)

Re:Write-Once-Run-Anywhere??? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40145851)

only "plugged-in" with Internet Explorer

It sort-of-works in Chrome and Firefox as well. It just crashes constantly when you're using it (based on my office's internal webapp).

Refrain (2)

Corson (746347) | more than 2 years ago | (#40145547)

"The Mono project is about the only group of people actively talking up .NET" -- You made this up, right? tiobe.com shows C++ at 9.8% and C# at 6.8%.

Re:Refrain (1)

Sonic McTails (700139) | more than 2 years ago | (#40145639)

I think the article means that mono is the only re-implementation of the .NET stack that attempted to implement Sliverlight, not that they are the only group coding in .NET.

Still worded awkward as hell ...

Re:Refrain (1)

Corson (746347) | more than 2 years ago | (#40145859)

Oh, and Objective-C at 8.3% but, unless and until the business world switches to Mac OS X/iOS, I think it's fair to label it as "entertainment".

A group of people? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40145665)

Really, Mono is a group of people talking up .Net? I thought it was maybe a group of scones or a group of mudpies. After all, don't scones and mudpies talk, too? Oh, they don't? Then maybe Mono is a group of people. Thanks for clarifying that. I learn something everyday on ./

restrictions (1)

l3v1 (787564) | more than 2 years ago | (#40145671)

"Microsoft added artificial restrictions to Silverlight"

Uhm, what do we say now... let's try: We told you so!

How many endless debates in forums back in the day when Mono development started, all in vain.

Wonderful news. Just wonderful. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40145755)

Slitherlight slitthers away into the depths of hades. Perfect.

Sadly there will be some media streams (mostly in the US) who won't get the message and still try to force it down our throats.

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>