I understand people's concern with MS's change in messaging BUT to say that Flashes approach to REACH is any better than what SL's is seriously crazy talk. I've had this conversation before with a lot of people, I have no idea how Adobe will deliver on their promise of delivering 3 products across a broad set of OS's
FLASH, FLEX, AIR across MAC/Windows/Symbian/Meego/Blackberry/Android/ChromeOS ... Not only that they are also committing to having a App Store across all these. I am eagerly waiting to see how this turns out, because I can see a very fragmented deployment story across the adobe ecosystem happening. MS are committing themselves to the Windows stack and I believe this sets them up to deliver quality.. If MS had to do what Adobe are attempting to do for ALL major OS's, a lot of sacrifices would need to be made in feature set and project timelines... Also there's nothing stopping the HTC's and Motorola's of the world from taking Embedded Silverlight and porting it to their OS (Android/Symbian etc). Moonlight team did it. If they want to differentiate themselves from the competition then they should bring SL to their platform. Just hire Moonlight guys or better yet hire some gun Silverlight native developers, if you pay the right amount you can easily get a gun team to help you do it! A lot of energy is spent on trying to achieve reach, I've seen the discussions on how complex some relatively simple features like scrolling became when dealing with cross OS issues. And it only gets worse when dealing with a device centric FOSS world. Anyway rant off... Let's see how well adobe deliver on their 3 screens and an app store initiative, I'm giving them 2 years to see if it turns out to be one big mess or not! MS today has a story for creating shared SL experiences across windows desktop and windows phone. And if it attempts to bring the same level of -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of [email protected] Sent: Tuesday, November 02, 2010 3:12 PM To: [email protected] Subject: ozsilverlight Digest, Vol 15, Issue 18 Send ozsilverlight mailing list submissions to [email protected] To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://prdlxvm0001.codify.net/mailman/listinfo/ozsilverlight or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to [email protected] You can reach the person managing the list at [email protected] When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of ozsilverlight digest..." Today's Topics: 1. RE: Bob Muglias & Steve Balmers statements on committment to Silverlight (Paul Du Bois) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2010 10:53:38 +0800 From: Paul Du Bois <[email protected]> Subject: RE: Bob Muglias & Steve Balmers statements on committment to Silverlight To: ozSilverlight <[email protected]> Message-ID: <0e6055fc629d9d4884ac4f9ea72358db372397e...@prjhkgsvr01.projection.local> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Disagree. Two reasons for choosing Flash over SL have been heavily buffed by Microsoft?s recent statements. 1. While MS is ?shifting strategy?, Adobe remains committed to making Flash cross-platform by pushing it onto more devices and operating systems. So Flash will only become more ubiquitous than SL which means as Flash developers can apply their skills in more places. 2. Adobe remains focused on improving and supporting Flash while MS is off chasing HTML5 glory. Flash is a core part of Adobe?s vision and product suite, where as SL seems to be moving to the periphery. As a developer and/or CIO/CTO, knowing that a company is committed to supporting its proprietary platform is critical to investment decisions. Even in light of Bob and Steve?s ?clarification? statements, Adobe wins big time. I too am now in the camp of those wishing we?d gone Flash instead of Silverlight. - Paul Du Bois From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jordan Knight Sent: Tuesday, 2 November 2010 12:20 PM To: ozSilverlight Cc: ozSilverlight Subject: Re: Bob Muglias & Steve Balmers statements on committment to Silverlight But let's not forget sl+flash are all About tomorrow :) Cheers, Jordan. On 01/11/2010, at 7:17 PM, "Shane Morris (Automatic Studio)" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: To my mind all this noise re Silverlight v HTML5 does not really affect the Silverlight v Flash argument. The reasons to choose Flash or Silvelright are pretty much the same today as they were last week. The only change is a slight dip in confidence in MS's commitment to further innovation going forward, I guess. But for an organisation that made its platform decision based on what exists today rather than what might be coming, I feel like nothing much has changed? Shane ________________________________ From: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> [[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>] on behalf of Grant Maw [[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>] Sent: Tuesday, 2 November 2010 11:19 AM To: ozSilverlight Subject: Re: Bob Muglias & Steve Balmers statements on committment to Silverlight And there'll be a lot more like Barry if this isn't dealt with quickly, and with finality. We have a client who has invested heavily in a SL app at our recommendation. It took us a very long time to convince them that SL was the right tool for the job, and even after all that we are still getting the "why didn't we use Flash" argument flaring up from time to time. This latest development has the potential to make us look pretty darned foolish when our customers get wind of it. I believed at the outset that we made the right call, and I still do, but now, just as SL is getting wider acceptance, things like this happen and as a result we are going to have to go through all the old arguments once again with a new app that is proposed for next year. We have invested heavily in SL, and so have our customers, on the premise that the platform would be around for the long haul. Statements like Muglia's, followed further by a "clarification" that is more spin than substance, and a meaningless statement from Ballmer do very little to put the cat back into the bag. Hard facts, and more detail about future development of the product (and it's tooling) over the next 5 years would go a long way to restoring confidence. On 2 November 2010 09:18, Barry Beattie <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: I think it's at this stage that I will unsubscribe from this list and give up on Silverlight for the moment as "irrelivant", perhaps checking back later. I was hoping SL would be able to produce worthwhile interfaces to the clunky rubbish found in products like Dynamics CRM but I just can't see the buy-in from that division to do much with SL and those products. Bye all. Have fun. Barry Beattie On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 9:05 AM, Chris Anderson <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: It's amusing to see how many times Steve Balmer name dropped 'Silverlight' in his post :). Backpedalling ahoy! My concern from the beginning has specifically been with the phrase ?Our Silverlight strategy and focus going forward has shifted". Bob says that's not a negative statement in his post, but I disagree. Microsoft "shifted" their strategy away from Windows Mobile, and look what happened with it - practically nothing for years. After Microsoft released IE6 their strategy "shifted" - again work on that product halted for years. It wasn't like either of them were perfect, and couldn't have done with more work! It was easier to brush off Scott Barnes' tweets as those of an ex-softie that *might not* have the current full picture and strategic insight of Microsoft, but harder when the controversy stems from the current president of the Server and Tools division. You could say that it was simply a bad choice of words, but added to Scott Barnes' tips starts painting a bad picture for Silverlight's future. Stating that their strategy has shifted sends the wrong message to CTOs, and creates the PR nightmare we are all faced with now. Personally, I still have faith in Silverlight and its potential (both current and future), and evidence showed that Microsoft shares it too (LightSwitch, Windows Phone 7, etc). I just hope that Microsoft continues to see that potential through before chucking it on the backburner, and doesn't abuse that faith. Currently they have a rather demoralised community, and it's going to take a lot to prop it back up. Because those of us promoting Silverlight will have a lot more work to do to now promoting the platform. If one good thing comes from this controversy, it is that the community has spoken, and it will *not* be happy with a shift in strategy. Maybe, just maybe, that will impact positively internally at Microsoft. Chris On 2 November 2010 07:19, Winston Pang <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Man do you ever sleep? Haha you seem to operate in US time. Bobs post seems to be getting some interesting replies... Sent from my iPad On 02/11/2010, at 5:28 AM, Jose Fajardo <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Here's Microsoft's official statements Bob Muglia has posted extensively on the Silverlight Team Blog: http://team.silverlight.net Steve Ballmer has also commented on his PDC blog: http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2010/nov10/11-01Statement.mspx .... either believe them or not completely up to you guys! Note: The information contained in this message and any attachment to it is privileged, confidential and protected from disclosure. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by replying to the message, and please delete it from your system. Thank you. Cynergy Systems. _______________________________________________ ozsilverlight mailing list [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> http://prdlxvm0001.codify.net/mailman/listinfo/ozsilverlight _______________________________________________ ozsilverlight mailing list [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> http://prdlxvm0001.codify.net/mailman/listinfo/ozsilverlight _______________________________________________ ozsilverlight mailing list [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> http://prdlxvm0001.codify.net/mailman/listinfo/ozsilverlight _______________________________________________ ozsilverlight mailing list [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> http://prdlxvm0001.codify.net/mailman/listinfo/ozsilverlight _______________________________________________ ozsilverlight mailing list [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> http://prdlxvm0001.codify.net/mailman/listinfo/ozsilverlight -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://prdlxvm0001.codify.net/pipermail/ozsilverlight/attachments/20101102/4c04368a/attachment.html ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ ozsilverlight mailing list [email protected] http://prdlxvm0001.codify.net/mailman/listinfo/ozsilverlight End of ozsilverlight Digest, Vol 15, Issue 18 ********************************************* Note: The information contained in this message and any attachment to it is privileged, confidential and protected from disclosure. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by replying to the message, and please delete it from your system. Thank you. Cynergy Systems.
_______________________________________________ ozsilverlight mailing list [email protected] http://prdlxvm0001.codify.net/mailman/listinfo/ozsilverlight
