Scott, I'm not exactly on board with "Silverlight will continue to have successes as it has today." It's far too early to make that broad a statement. One day, maybe, but today? No. The first real all-Silverlight site, Ice Cube's UVNTV.com, has not been successful. Big fanfare, bad video, losing traffic at the plugin download page, big dud. Second big fanfare is the Silverlight player for video of the Beijing Olympics. Again, video quality has been roundly criticized as awful. Online viewership is way down from what they expected. Today, people don't want to download the Silverlight plugin. That is not a success. Not yet.
--Cole --- On Sat, 8/16/08, Scott Barnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: From: Scott Barnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [flexcoders] The end of ActionScript 3 as an EcmaScript 4 implementation To: [email protected] Date: Saturday, August 16, 2008, 1:30 AM Anatole, I understand there is a sense of umbrage towards Microsoft over this decision; I disagree with some of the wild theories floating around as to what the real motivation behind this is. Seven entities in total disagreed with Mozilla and Adobe that the proposal was a right fit. I however look forward to seeing what the next phase of this standard will become, and overall Silverlight will continue to have successes as it has today, if either decision were to be blessed around this said standard. Silverlight has the DLR, so if folks want to spin-up their own iteration of an ECMA standard of their choosing, you're more than welcome to it and I'd be curious to see how you triumph! HTH. On Fri, Aug 15, 2008 at 8:36 PM, Anatole Tartakovsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Scott, I hope you realize that this goes beyond Silverlight or any particular player - but to the heart of the browsers problems today - performance and robustness. If it was not for IE market share, ActionScript would of been de-facto ES4 standard as it is supported by Mozilla and would be quickly migrated to other OS browsers. And I have very low expectations of Microsoft willingness to maintain IE on par with performance, compatibility and robustness requirements - based on personal experience. The fact that this standard is blocked means war - and I would suggest as the first step for the community to create a plugin script implementation ( recognized as attribute on <script> tag, loaded along with Flash for faster market penetration) to give developers a choice between old javascript and actionscript - that can remove most of the power Microsoft exercised last week Sincerely, Anatole Tartakovsky On Fri, Aug 15, 2008 at 8:00 PM, Scott Barnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: In what way is Silverlight proposing a new standard? ECMA decision has no affect on Silverlight. C# for example is a standard today, everything we are doing or using either adheres to a standard, furthemore XAML for example falls under our (Open Specification Promise) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Specification_Promise. The DLR was introduced to allow dynamic languages outside the mainstream the ability to enter the RIA space, without imposing restrictions or ensuring they must abide by C# or ActionScript to get access? I would of thought this is an obvious positive for RIA overall (Adobe's Ryan Stewart agrees - http://blogs.zdnet.com/Stewart/?p=356). Microsoft and several other folks (Yahoo!, DOJO etc) all agreed that this wasn't the right fit, but are all committed to ensure we find a right fit. *shrug*.. so lumping this entirely in Microsoft's lap is a little skewed in thinking. HTH. On Fri, Aug 15, 2008 at 8:37 AM, Cole Joplin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- On Thu, 8/14/08, Scott Barnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > C# is an ECMA-334 standard. As to how this affects Silverlight? Cole, could > you elaborate? Sure. Microsoft wants a new standard for web scripting using Silverlight's RIA framework via .NET and the Dynamic Language Runtime. They want to bring support for IronPython and IronRuby to web scripting. Some see that as a Microsoft technology lock-in. Just like some saw ES4 as an Adobe lock-in (or at least a validation of it). ECMA-334 was precisely about Microsoft making C# a "standard." It's "a" standard, but not "the" standard. It's an off-shoot. So, perhaps it is best that history just repeats itself. Let them create a separate ECMA standard for Microsoft/Silverlight, and another for Adobe/Flash. Let's whip out some ECMA-402, and ECMA-402 -- pick a number. My point was that this was not going to get resolved in ES4, where one idea was going to get picked over the other. Standards promote commonality and adoption. Those things can translate into competitive advantage. Microsoft was not going to let Adobe have ES4 as "the" standard. It was too much of an advantage. --Cole -- Regards, Scott Barnes Rich Client Platform Manager Microsoft. http://blogs.msdn.com/msmossyblog -- Regards, Scott Barnes Rich Client Platform Manager Microsoft. http://blogs.msdn.com/msmossyblog
