Silverlite is the bridge to a better web
May 1st, 2007 Rusty“Skinkers integrates Microsoft Silverlight with peer-to-peer delivery to transform live interactive desktop TV” - so Silverlite will provide rich UI including video (flash-killer)
Some exerpts from the article: “…deliver interactive web video experiences that blend media, graphics, and animation… Silverlight’s support for web standards… cross-platform… user’s PC will join the “cloud” of peer-to-peer nodes.” (flash-killer)
I have wanted to develop in Flash about as long as I have been building websites. The problems are
- it’s a different design paradym (can’t jump right in like I can with every other programming language)
- it’s difficult to integrate live, real business data and resources
- I’ve heard that it can be done with Flex
- Flex is incredibly expensive if it is part of a larger solution
- There isn’t nearly the support available to mitigate the technology risk
- I’ve never actually seen someone use Flex outside of a demo
- Its proprietary, and disconnected (you have to recompile your swf and redeploy the binary. I hate keeping binaries in my source tree!)
So I have never used flash for more then a slide show. That doesn’t mean flash isn’t fantastic for eye candy but how do we wrap eye candy around our business data?
(suggestions, advice welcome)
Silverlite promises to integrate with the C# or VB.Net lifecycle experience. You write C# code to emit Silverlite. I’m sure XAML plays a role, as well. More importantly, it can be data bound. The above example indicates that clients are connecting via a browser plug-in to run a streaming video app that also happens to connect to other clients to share streaming distribution. That means somewhere there is a runtime data store of client IP addresses and connection details. There must be two way communication and workflow execution happening. This is really exciting (flash-killer), not just because it’s a proven integration and deployment pattern (flash-killer), but because it opens up that forbidden world of rich, beautiful UI.
I am mildy interested in WPF but I can’t see that as a right now investment. My Vista laptop is a little, um, finicky. OK, it sucks. I won’t connect after sleep, it hangs alot, it needs frequent reboot… but its a Dell, what more would you expect? The point is, no one real can use your extraordinary WPF interface right now. Unless your job is to impress VC or potential clients at a technology trade show, so what? who cares? I have to develop features, not flash (there’s that word, again). I’m not saying that those software engineers who are learning WPF right now won’t be worth 20% more then their non-WPC counterparts but I am saying that business decisions are made based on recognizable revenue. If you have some money you need to spend, invest in a WPF prototype project rather then another piece of software you’ll never use or a Server that is ten times what you’ll need before it costs a quarter as much. You know who you are big business with departmental budgets! Go blow that money on a pilot project to investigate new interface technology and bring your team and your image up to the cutting edge.
Back to the point… WPF is tomorrows interface butanything I can load in a browser is here NOW. I don’t have to wait on operating system adoption or framework downloads. If I can get a flash-like experience on what is presently installed on users’ systems and integrate that rich experience with my present and ongoing server solution investments, sign me up! Wack meets practical. Finally…
I’ll be honest, I love the way flash looks. I just hate how it plays with others, or doesn’t. For years I have waited for Macromedia to innovate further and provide better tools, better support and a better product. I’m still waiting. I hope Flash comes out with their version to keep the competition on their toes and the industry on the forward path. However, I’ll be sprinting down the Silverlite trail, hoping to Gates that this one takes us out of our html rut.
�