The Future of Silverlight: My Take [& a BUILD / HTML5 Rant]

I had this post brewing many months ago, back when Silverlight's future was bright and adoption was great. Then there was this little statement by a Microsoft executive, a very unclear clarification by the exec and an even less clear direction from those involved in the development of Silverlight & the tools. Everyone was confused and started calling for "the end is near" with Silverlight only to have Microsoft say throughout the summer of 2011 "just wait until the BUILD conference, it will all make sense." Then only to have virtually the phrase "Silverlight" to get almost zero play and talk about WinRT and Metro apps. Personally I was very frustrated as I wanted instant news, but I decided to hold back my thoughts until I felt like I had a better grasp on what was going on. I'm still a bit confused on some stuff

Microsoft usually does a fantastic job on marketing their products. But with this issue, talk about one of the absolutely worst handled things ever. You've got developers, Microsoft's biggest proponent, being left out in the cold with customers asking "should we do this project on Silverlight?" I wish someone would have stood up and rebutted all the rumors. We were left to outsiders, like this phenomenal post, to get an idea of the big picture. Some things are still a bit unclear to me.

Silverlight Isn't Dead

So many people seem to think the cool thing is to say Silverlight is dead. I've got a good friend who knows I'm a fan of Silverlight and loves coming to me and saying "Silverlight is dead mother f---er!" I don't get the best vibe from people within Microsoft who seem to think Silverlight is a new 4-letter word which is quite disappointing. At any rate, we are where we are today. For me, and from the more Silverlight-in-the-know people that are out there, it seems the consensus is that it isn't dead. There are some great posts on the subject by some leading Silverlight folks out there… I suggest you read them:

Personally don't think Silverlight is dead and will be around for quite some time. When is a technology dead? It's when people stop using it, when you lose critical mass and when you don't have support for it. Microsoft recently shipped the Silverlight 5 RC. It has incredibly strong development tools in Visual Studi0 2010 & Expression Blend. There are some fantastic design ~~patters~~ patterns that have emerged. It's the best way to stream HD video in high quality with the best user experience (ala Smooth Streaming) to clients and has been used for some major events like the United States Presidential Inauguration in 2009, NCAA March Madness & the Olympics to name just three.

You are free to disagree but I don't think I'm sticking my head in the sand with this point and acting like an old guy saying "Why do we need something new, I all this old stuff we have works great!" I'm still happy with Silverlight and plan to keep building with it. What I thinks is somewhat interesting and misguided are all the people who are saying Silverlight is dead compared to HTML5.

Now let me transition over and talk a little about why I still like Silverlight over HTML5 & my take on where they fit in the picture for us.

Why I love Silverlight over HTML5

OK, time to flip 'em and toss my cards down on the table: I love Silverlight & I can't stand JavaScript. I don't have much against HTML5 but what I'm not a fan of us the development and architecture experience. I'll come back to that… why do I love Silverlight. Well, I've talked about it before, but specifically I love the data binding capabilities, I love the MVVM design pattern, I'm quite happy with the development tools (Expression Blend & Visual Studio), I love the prototyping capabilities that SketchFlow brings to the table and so much more. Personally I feel like I can whip out a working business application in a fraction of the time if I built it using a classic browser based app (ASP.NET/HTML/JavaScript). After a month or so with Silverlight I found myself working hard to fight the "I've got this hammer, now everything looks like a nail" feeling. I could go on, but you get the picture.

So what' s my issue with HTML5? Admittedly time will likely cure this but for me, the development experience is atrocious. All your coding is done in an interpreted language, JavaScript. JavaScript development is just plain painful. Feel free to disagree, but for every one of you, I'll like up 1,000 more who hate it. There's too much magic in it, the debugging story is pathetic in all the tools that are out there. The development tools we do have are no where near to what we get with real typed and managed languages I'd so much rather be back in my former life as a Java developer than work with JavaScript. Will the tools get better? Sure… and who will have the best ones? Microsoft of course, they always give us the best development tools. But I've seen vNext of Visual Studio, currently codenamed "Dev11" and, and I'm still not impressed with the scripting development. What about real design patters? How about testing or even automated testing? It sucks… totally sucks.

Like I said, time will likely cure most of my pains (crappy dev tools, no design patters, good testing architectures).

But wait, one last thing. People like to tote the line "write once, run everywhere" when building HTML5 apps. Please… if you are naïve or young enough to believe that, I've got this swamp down the street from me I'd absolutely love to sell you. Fact is there are at least three major browser vendors and while there is a spec for HTML5, no one wants to build the same mousetrap… they all want a better mousetrap. I've lived this "write once, run everywhere" life before. In the late 90's I worked for a startup who had a proprietary website administration tool called AdmiNET. It was written in Java and at the time Sun Microsystems was running a promo that if your app ran on 8 different platforms, they'd advertise your app in the Wall Street Journal. There were so many "if this platform then..., elseif that platform then…" to drive you nuts. Sorry guys, that's not following the mantra of "write once, run everywhere" and if you think that HTML5 is going to be that savior, you're living in a fairy tale land.

A while ago I posted a little quip to Twitter that was picked up in a publication and posted as my official take. Man that was unfortunate… but there was some truth to it. I said something like "Do you know why they call it HTML5? It's because it, the dev tools and the user base, is always about 5 years away." Personally I still feel that way… maybe not 5 years away, but we certainly aren't there today!

Where does HTML5 Fit in the Picture?

Ah, the big debate where everyone wants to chime in. Microsoft is dead on: want to create the best cross-platform experience on the web? HTML5 is the way to go as virtually every browser. Silverlight is most certainly not the answer. Where I don't see HTML5 is creating robust and complex business applications and such. Can you do it? Sure… I'm sure you can. But writing complex client-side business logic in JavaScript (recall people, it's called "script" for a reason), I just don't see that being a good idea. It makes much more sense to build HTML5 anonymous public facing sites than it does to build Silverlight rich sites because lets face it: why would you cut off a sizeable chunk of your potential audience just to pick one technology over the other.

What I don't get… maybe someone smarter can answer this for me…

After watching the BUILD keynote, a handful of sessions and reading numerous blog posts, I still have a handful of questions. Maybe one of my readers has the answer and if so, please feel free to post a comment below. Before I jump in too deep, I have full confidence in Steven Sinofsky and I'm simply saying "I don't get it" or "I don't understand"… I'm not saying "this doesn't make any sense and Microsoft is a bunch of bafoons." There is a reason for everything and this guy didn't just fall off a truck… thus I personally need to figure out how to answer my own personal questions about WinRT, Metro style apps and the future of where Windows 8 is taking us.

First, when you look at this picture, the picture plastered across BUILD, it makes you think:

So there are now two styles of apps . I get that from the user experience, but from a technical experience, why? It's a bit scary to think that .NET is buried into a lower right corner box with Silverlight. I guess my main question here is with respect to .NET, What's Wrong/Missing that required WinRT? Why create a whole new platform when you can extend or tweak .NET? I look at it from a SharePoint perspective… there are things we can and cannot do in the client object model (CSOM). To address this Microsoft created a proxy that blocks us from using things in the full server-side object model. Further, we want to leverage the CSOM not just from .NET, but also from Silverlight & pure HTML/JavaScript solutions so Microsoft built implementations for that. Isn't that what WinRT is doing to some extent? And am I reading this correctly that the .NET Framework is also on it's way out? I didn't read it that way at first, but the terrible diagram above as well as comments from the likes of Joe Wilcox make me think otherwise...

Another question frustration I have is that you now build two types of apps with two different codebases: Metro style or Desktop apps. Seriously… why two completely different platforms? I really have to explain to someone that "look, even though you've build apps on the desktop and on the Windows Phone that can share a common codebase, and while the phone development is done using Silverlight, even though you have this new Metro app that looks all tile-y like the phone, you can't use the same code because there's this whole new thing called WinRT." Don't even get me started with two different versions of IE10 (Metro style & desktop style) one of which can do plugins and one of which can't (seriously?... Steven Sinofsky is channeling his inner Steve Jobs me thinks).

Conclusion

Don't get me wrong, I'm not slamming Windows 7 8. In fact, I think Microsoft is nailing it. I can't wait to have a device that I can use at my desk as a laptop, but then pick up the slate and go downstairs out of the office and when I'm on the couch use the same machine like I use my iPad on my couch. I can't wait to consolidate two devices I have now!

I've quite a few more questions about this new future we're moving towards, but I will hold off on those until I better understand a few of those core questions. One thing is for sure, this is going to be interesting!

posted on Sunday, October 16, 2011 11:35 AM

Feedback

# re: The Future of Silverlight: My Take [& a BUILD / HTML5 Rant] 10/16/2011 1:35 PM Scott

Love the article! Found a small typo "patters that have emerged"

# re: The Future of Silverlight: My Take [& a BUILD / HTML5 Rant] 10/16/2011 4:12 PM Michael Stum

Silverlight may or may not be dead, but it's still not properly compatible with Google Chrome (windowless-mode may result in a black rectangle). Since Chrome is pretty popular, Silverlight is dead to me.

There may be uses for it, but essentially you're tying yourself to Internet Explorer and hope it doesn't break in Firefox and Safari or use Out of the Browser features.

It IS great as a Video Player though.

# re: The Future of Silverlight: My Take [& a BUILD / HTML5 Rant] 10/16/2011 4:32 PM Leon Z

A simple take on why two types of apps with two different code bases:

Because we are currently at a crossroads. I think WinRT is the future. It's a true replacement for Win32, whereas .NET is more like a wrapper on top of Win32. So you could say WinRT is more native (and faster). But the API is modernized, so all the high level techniques we are used to using in .NET, can still be used when developing for it.

Microsoft really wants us to switch to WinRT. But for backward compatibility reasons they still need to support the desktop-style stuff. So two API's.

But ultimately I think Microsoft suggests the Desktop-style apps and related technologies will disappear. In that light Silverlight IS dead. But with WinRT you can do the same (or even more), using the same techniques. So it's not a loss.

Then again, I could be completely wrong here :)

# re: The Future of Silverlight: My Take [& a BUILD / HTML5 Rant] 10/16/2011 4:33 PM Faz

I'll try to answer concisely but it's a big topic to cover in this format :

*** What's Wrong/Missing that required WinRT? Why create a whole new platform when you can extend or tweak .NET?

The problem here is that you're viewing WinRT as playing at the same level as .Net when in fact, .Net is as much a 'customer' of WinRT as it is currently with Win32/COM. It's these api's that WinRT is replacing, not .NET. Unfortunately, that diagram above is a pretty poor description of reality. If you're writing Metro apps in C#/VB.NET then you ARE doing .net development. WinRT (which is really just a further refinement of COM) interops with .net via RCW (Runtime Callable Wrappers) in the same way that COM libs always have (although the new api's are much more suitable and performant compared to COM marshalling, for instance types map much more easily to .NET types). So, .NET isn't going anyway, in fact it's likely to be the #1 way people develop Metro apps given the similarities with the API (the UI api for WinRT is effectively Silverlight 4 which adds further weight to your silverligtht isn't dead argument.

It's worth adding, think about Windows today. How much of windows itself or the applications bundled are managed applications? The answer is pretty much zero and a lot of that has been due to the divide between the OS/platform groups and the developer division in msft. .Net is still largely and end user development framework, not one used by the core platform group. With the move to these new api's and promises that all new future windows functionality will be implemented as WinRT api's, this puts .net on a much better footing going forward with arguably no real difference in terms of developing UIs between using .Net & XAML or C++ & XAML (HTML is a difference issue altogether).

*** Seriously… why two completely different platforms

Because msft with even all their resources, don't have unlimited capability to completely replace the programming model we use today across the whole landscape of applications covering on the one side, mobile/phone and other touch based devices, up to the opposite end of the scale including multi-million line, enterprise application development scenarios. Well ok, they do but not if we want to see Windows 8 before Apple are release ipad 5! There's no doubt that these api's will broaden in scope and eventually greater parts of win32/com & .net as time goes on and who knows, maybe in Win9 timeframe, we'll have a complete set of tools, api's and frameworks to really target the enterprise and traditional desktop application develpoment with this new model.

Until then, there's nothing stopping you leveraging winrt api's in your .net application when Win8 is released. Microsoft have yet to really detail which parts of WinRT will be supported outside of Metro but they have stated on a number of occasions that they will (camera capture and geolocation for instance, but there's loads of examples which make no sense to leave as metro only).

Hopefully I've answered your questions (and probably created others). Unfortunately the BUILD videos only take you so far and msft as always, have fallen well short in the marketing dept which is why these issues still remain unanswered in a lot of people's minds.

With regards to the device consolidation. I'll confirm the reality is as good as you can imagine. Finally the prospect of a single compute device that can perform all roles, run the full suite of current and legacy apps as well as a new wave of touch based metro apps, be your productivity aid while on the move, yet your development workstation while at home (unless you're mad enough to try and develop in visual studio with the soft keyboard!). It's great now even at this early stage so I for one can't wait until msft add the full suite of apps needed for RTM and plug all the other functional gaps. Beta 1 can't come quick enough...

# re: The Future of Silverlight: My Take [& a BUILD / HTML5 Rant] 10/16/2011 5:04 PM Ken Magel

Lack of clarity often means uncertainty. I think the fate of Silverlight is still an active subject for debate within Microsoft. Steve Balmer seems to want to embrace a new, interpretive way of doing things, but many below him want to keep the old ways.

# re: The Future of Silverlight: My Take [& a BUILD / HTML5 Rant] 10/16/2011 6:33 PM Darren Hemming

Finally a balanced view on the whole HTML 5 vs Silverlight debate.

For my part I like both XAML and HTML (5 or otherwise). HTML is a great general purpose language that is accessible to a very wide audience - most browsers, on most devices, and with a good deal of support for Special Needs. The HTML 5 and CSS 3 combination offers some nice additional constructs, and ignoring some tolerable variations in browser support I'm happy to use it.

Yes, I agree with Andrew that JavaScript sucks. Without proper development tools developers can end up spending weeks trying to debug overcomplicated JavaScript hacks for drag 'n' drop effects, or even worse animation/simulations. Prototypes like JQuery certainly help but there's still a long way to go before this is a fun language to develop in. It's what works well with HTML and CSS though, so I will persevere for now in the interests of portability.

Silverlight isn't as portable, and there seem to be some serious issues with accessibility. But for building kick-ass business applications for managed company Intranets/Extranets, I can't think of a more powerful client-side language than XAML. It's flexible, highly extensible, and the Blend development environment is really nice. Although I love to get my hands dirty in pure XAML, I also love the fact that UI 'designers' can create compelling application interfaces using the Blend 'design' UI only. Yes you probably need to chain in some 'real' programmers at some point to add the C# functionality, but that's why we write code in object-orientated classes, right? So that not everyone has to be a code genius... So let the WCF (web) service coders do all the 'real programming' and just teach UI designers to plug into it - maybe then applications will start to look pretty as well as being functional.

I'm also really excited about Metro - there is defintely room for a lighter style of application for our Windows-based mobile devices. Though I just don't understand why a variation/extension of our current tools couldn't be used. For devices running Windows, surely XAML is still the most extensible mark-up language for writing 'apps'. keep C# as the client scripting language. We can still call .Net classes for anything server-side, and if we really must access WinRT style functionality then can't we get some low-lever coders to extend .Net to do that?

Personally my context on all this is that I'm not a 'great' developer. I know what I want to happen in terms of user experience, and I know which tools, languages and mark-ups will allow me to achieve that - XAML, C#.Net, HTML, CSS and Javascript give me all I need already. I just don't have time to learn another language just to access some lower-level functionality on certain devices - I'm counting on better programmers than me to do that work and make the methods available to me via the tools I already know (Blend, Visual Studio, SharePoint Designer). What I would really like to see is a version of Blend that handled Metro ("Metro Designer"?) or at least the abilty to easily embed Metro classes into WPF applications.

# re: The Future of Silverlight: My Take [& a BUILD / HTML5 Rant] 10/16/2011 11:10 PM Bryan Letcher

It is not dead but it sure dying. Windows 8 is a year away so there is a little life yet. If a developer wants to develop for something other than a Windows Phone 7 device, he or she would not now decide to learn and develop using Silverlight.

One of the reasons for Silverlight was to bring .Net to other platforms. The screenshot you show from Microsoft gives us a view into the future. HTML/CSS and JavaScript are considered equal citizens to XAML and to the variant of .Net languages.

I defer to Microsoft’s own press release on supporting HTML 5. They put it better than I.

From Microsoft…
www.microsoft.com/.../04-12MIX1PR.mspx

“Taking Advantage of Modern Hardware With HTML5
Consumers and developers face an important technology challenge today: With the majority of consumers using multiple devices, the performance and rich experience of native applications demand the time and investment of re-writing applications from device to device. As a result, technology standards such as HTML5, which deliver superior performance through Web-connected devices, play an increasingly important role. This dynamic creates a clear catalyst for developers to gravitate toward technologies that not only comply with standards, but also exploit the power of the local device to offer rich, immersive, next-generation Web experiences.”

# re: The Future of Silverlight: My Take [& a BUILD / HTML5 Rant] 10/17/2011 7:15 AM Olivier Dahan

You're right.
I love SL. I'm a SL MVP. I love VS and Blend.
But I will not be as gentle as you : no, we are not stupid, not understand what MS is saying. There is not on one side some genius at MS with a big IQ, so big that no one of us can understand one word of SL future... and on the other side a group of idiots, us.
I say clearly, MS is making a lot of big mistakes.
* mistake in communicating so bad with fair developers, even with SL MVP
* mistake in believing that making the first OS that is incompatible with itself (Metro Style / Classic) is a good idea
* mistake in pushing Metro Style since it is a sandboxed environment and since no serious app can run in such a context (so most users will use classic desktop, even on tablets)
* mistake beleiving all PC software editors will tomorrow cut 30% of theur income and give it to MS. So all serious editors will go on on classic desktop (just suppluying gadgets apps on Metro Style)
* mistake in pushing "html5/js" but only to create Windows app ! No Html developer will accept to use the first Html in the history that CAN'T work on the web (cause it uses WinRT objects) !
* mistake in making SL future as a london foggy day... all customers are delaying projects. No business, no money, just because MS is letting all unclear. They are loosing the benefit of several years of fairness.
* mistake in going on on this way even with all those messages everywhere, those blog entries...
* mistake in saying "wait the Build all answers will be given there" and giving no answer at Build...

Etc.

On my own, I say it clearly, something is going wrong at MS management.
We need a quick clarification, or a quick management change.

Those who are taking decision at MS are not more clever that all of us, perhaps less. There is no more a chief with a clear sight of the present and the future.

We must have the courage to say this loud : no, we are not all stupid, and all those mistakes MS is doing are real ones. No there is not a super high IQ manager at MS, they are just muddling along, closing their eyes and hears to what we are saying.

Situation is sad because MS has all the strength and all the products to win the game. And they're are just undermining the market, creating big frustrations, braking the market, confusing everybody.

And do not forget SL is "dead" only if W8 is an instant world wide success along with Metro Style and within Metro Style with the special version of IE 10 that doesn't run plugins...
W8 is still not there, the success of Metro Style, at least on PC is unsure (works good only with touch screen), IE is no more leader on its market, etc... A long list of "if" are leading to "Sl is dead". In all other cases, SL is still there, and usable with IE 10 classic style, Firefox, Chrome...

Last MS mistake : If you love SL you must advice all around you not to use IE 10. If EI10 is not a success, then SL will live. It is more than a mistake, it is totally crazy to create such internal war between MS products !

We need another captain, or the boat will sink, that's sure.

# re: The Future of Silverlight: My Take [& a BUILD / HTML5 Rant] 10/17/2011 1:27 PM Darren Hemming

Perhaps there's something to be said for mixed-mode user experiences, blending HTML 5 and XAML depending on the needs of users.

So if I want to build a public-facing site with reasonably simple user interaction then I'll use HTML 5. But if I want to design a highly interactive interface for a pivoting dashboard on a (SharePoint) Intranet site then I would still very much consider XAML.

Of course I'm being very optimistic that XAML could survive even of Silverlight plugin didn't. But then again, just think how powerful Metro apps would be if they were powered by XAML and C#. HTML 5 may be semantic, but is it extensible?

I guess in the end I can survive if Silverlight dies - just as long as XAML continues to be useful in some other context (it's too good to lose).

# re: The Future of Silverlight: My Take [& a BUILD / HTML5 Rant] 10/17/2011 8:47 PM John White

Thanks Andrew for saying what needed to be said, and for igniting the discussion. Given that I don't ereally have anything to add, I thought I'd leave everyone with this topical bit of humour:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RRFiu0xfQzw

# re: The Future of Silverlight: My Take [& a BUILD / HTML5 Rant] 10/18/2011 8:27 AM Jack

I think most of the HTML5 enthusiasts refuse to remember how long it took to get rid of IE6. Changes are slow in corporate environments as well.

Based on history it will take years before you can really build anything based on HTML5 without a backup option. Yes, we all have the latest gadgets and toys but general public doesn't. Think about how long it will take until everyone runs IE10 to support your HTML5 application. It isn't even RTM yet.

Flash and Silverlight will be with us for a long time. Like it or not.

# re: The Future of Silverlight: My Take [& a BUILD / HTML5 Rant] 10/18/2011 12:21 PM AC [MVP SharePoint

@Leon - Respectfully I disagree. How can one "be at a crossroads" when only a small few can notice it? Prior to BUILD I hadn't heard a single person, even those of my trusted contacts within Microsoft, even hint a the concept. I am still of the opinion that Microsoft has set to sell the "why we need to do this." They did such a great job explaining why Vista would have massive driver issues. We didn't like it, but we got it. Secondly, your point about Metro apps being the way of the future and desktop apps will eventually disappear... again, respectfully I *strongly* disagree. You really think that a touch/Metro version of Excel, PhotoShop, Visual Studio or QuickBooks is going to take off? Maybe I'm wrong, but I'd be willing to stake my career on the fact that there's just no way that will happen.

@Fax - Thanks for such a fantastic comment... this is the meat of a great discussion! Now that helps (RE: 1st paragraph). Where did you pick all this up... was that in one of the BUILD sessions? I've watched quite a few BUILD breakouts, but I didn't walk away with that take. VERY VERY good point in your 2nd paragraph... I hand't though of that. I have seen the same frustrations about the Windows platform guys and their issues with DevDev's .NET Framework.

Great comments from everyone else. One thing that's really stumping me: with so many people confused out there, and now that they've pulled back the curtin @ BUILD (so not more "wait until BUILD" comments apply), I don't understand why MSFT is still silent on this topic and hasn't had their marketing engine really spell the story. Wouldn't it be as easy as picking up the phone and calling Mary Joe Foley and Paul Thurrot and saying "hey, interested in an interview that discusses WinRT, Silverlight, XAML and our take?" I'm guessing one of them would bite!

# re: The Future of Silverlight: My Take [& a BUILD / HTML5 Rant] 10/18/2011 12:24 PM Fred Yeomans

Great post, Andrew. It only scratches the surface of my frustration with Microsoft's strategy (though I am not sure whether it is the technical strategy that is screwed up, the communications strategy, or both!)

# re: The Future of Silverlight: My Take [& a BUILD / HTML5 Rant] 10/18/2011 4:41 PM ven gri

I agree with you.
I can beilive people wll page huge amount of hours to develop a web page using HTML5 compared with the amount of hours that they will pay if the page is build using Silverlight which always will be less.

Also intellectual property will be an Issue with HTML5.

you can save some time using something like jquery but at the end you will have to write tons of javascript code.....good luck with that.

plus each Broswer will have their own issues and workarounds...that will be a nightmare.

if you want to build a web page that is simple and you want to doit ones then HTML5 will be OK and it could run literally in any device browser (that support HTML5) but ones you get in to a very complex page with a lot of user interactions, tables, charts....Silverlight in the right Path....

BTW Windows 8 is PRE-BETA so thing could change and will change.....for good or for bad....only time will tell.

Good Post Andrew.

# re: The Future of Silverlight: My Take [& a BUILD / HTML5 Rant] 10/19/2011 11:21 AM Rob Finney

Interesting post which I think sums up the lack of clarity being given around the use of SL.

I am concerned that there is so little clarity around this - but then that is nothing nothing - just last week we've have it's alive, it's dead, it's a zombie with regards the Zune hardware and it seems to be the same approach with SL (if not at the same re-animated point).

How this pans out in the future will be interesting to see - there's already signs that Windows 8 will be usable on low-powered devices up to high-end gaming rigs and servers - if its the same code base then the next Phone software, even XBox may use the same platform and interfaces...

# re: The Future of Silverlight: My Take [& a BUILD / HTML5 Rant] 10/27/2011 1:15 PM Burton H Roberts

Silverlight is caught in the middle between WinRT and WPF. The good news is that, theoretically, this should be good for WPF. Why build a cross-browser cross-platform app with Silverlight if it doesn't cross enough platforms and browsers? And if you're building LOB apps, and the company has standardized on Windows, why not use WPF instead of SL? It's richer and more capable! I say Silverlight is dead, long live WPF!

# re: The Future of Silverlight: My Take [& a BUILD / HTML5 Rant] 10/29/2011 5:16 PM Gary Tunnicliff

Microsoft has made a mistake with METRO - it is a poor phone interface, a poor tablet interface. Do something interesting use circles, gestures, fingerprints even pressure but get rid of the tiles for dummies. They need to explain that WinRT - replacement for win32/COM and how much faster .NET will be. The desktop is where all development work is going to be done. A tablet is a browsing tool - HTML 5 without plugins is nice to view stateless restful restaurants. It is useless for any business apps. Javascript is a joke for productive code, poor debugging, poor testing and even more useless for patterns. I'll have the project finished in a minute just got to find a brace....
It makes even less sense for cloud - html5 - the future - what interpreted xpath/DOM/xslt for messages!!! where does WCF fit in calling resful only? The binding, dependencies, inheritance, loosley coupled environment actually made silverlight very useful - what the hell is going on - make silverlight cross platform and as powerful as WPF and get rid of the metro interface altogether - make a better SL/surface/?? interface and make developers get excited because this technology is not doing it. If it's developers developers developers then make sure we have a desktop to do that and a port to the browser interface if we need one.

Post Feedback

Title:
Name:
Email:	(email will not be displayed)
Url:
Comments:
Please add 7 and 5 and type the answer here: Remember Me?

All Comments Are Filtered & Moderated
Unfortunately comment spammers are just too effecient and are constantly dirtying up blogs with irrelevant and unwanted comments trying to improve their standing on search engines. All comments on this blog are moderated. I do not censor comments, but I don't approve comments with vulger language or those soliciting products. Most of the time comments are approved within a few hours of being submitted with the only exception when I'm traveling.

Why are you asking for my email address?
The only reason I'm asking for your email address, which isn't required to submit a comment, is to provide a gravatar if you've created an account for yourself and associated your email address with a small image. If you have a gravatar created for the email address you submit, it will appear next to your comment. Otherwise nothing will appear.

What is a gravatar?
A gravatar is a "globally recognized avatar." You can get more information about gravatars, as well as create your own for free, at www.gravatar.com. You can also view my gravatar here.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License