Flash died because it was bug ridden and provided a huge amount of backdoors into pc's. Silverlight was only there to take flash's market share. When flash died so did silverlight it's mission accomplished. Microsoft's goal for many years is to be web based only. The keep trying to push developers towards web based architecture.
.02c On Wed, 30 Jan 2019, 07:53 Arjang Assadi <[email protected] wrote: > until a rendering engine is included I can not see any benefit to using > blazer or any other WASM equivalents. Flash as bad as it was , was a better > solution , no idea what the big idea was to kill it off , or for that > matter ms unilaterally killing silver light. > > > On Wed, 30 Jan 2019 at 5:26 pm Greg Keogh <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Folks, has anyone else in here given Blazor a good bash and got comments? >> I've run some sanity tests on 0.7 and it's looking pretty good. You can >> reference packages and projects, there's basic binding (which I hope they >> improve), you can break things up into "components" and nest them, separate >> code-behind if you want, register and inject services, define routing, make >> async web calls, deploy to Azure web apps, etc. All this stuff I mentioned >> is in the docs, but I had to try it myself to see if it really works. The >> only thing I haven't tried yet is rendering a large complex page to see how >> it performs and responds to DOM changes. >> >> So finally it looks like there's a real chance in the .NET ecosystem that >> the crazy zoo of JS frameworks to make SPAs will be displaced by a familiar >> and respected languages and frameworks. Great, but suddenly I was slapped >> hard by a shocking realisation … we're still stuck using the web browser >> and HTML (and some JS glue) for rendering the UI. >> >> The web browser cannot render complex business app UIs. Where are the >> rich controls and layout features we are used to on the desktop, or in >> Silverlight, or Flash or Java Applets for that matter? HTML was created to >> render simple text and pictures and now 27 years later it's completely >> effing stupid that we're still trying to create apps with it. We're >> changing how those apps are written, but we're still stuck with the damn >> browser and HTML for rendering. >> >> I have an example … a few weeks ago I wondered by a web page was taking >> 40s to load. It turned out I was loading a tree (a fake one, as there is no >> tree control) with 4000 nodes, each one in a div and 3880 of them were >> hidden. So the page looked small and tidy, but there were thousands of >> hidden divs. I spent hours of suffering inventing a click-demand-load >> technique. There is no virtualisation in HTML, which is taken for granted >> in real UI frameworks. >> >> There endeth the good news and the bad news. >> >> *Greg K* >> >
