Posted by Spex on 08/21/07 15:56

Neil Smith [MVP Digital Media] wrote:
> On Sun, 19 Aug 2007 14:17:20 -0700, David <d33licious@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I was wondering, if you played with both Adobe Flash and Microsoft's
>> Silverlight. Personally, I think that Flash just has more leading
>> technology to play around with. How would you compare both the
>> products?
>
>
> Flash does progressive download, as does Silverlight 1.0
> Silverlight 1.1 will do streaming, which Fash doesn't offer.

Flash is a mature solution that is highly regarded by developers and end
users alike. Silverlight is developed by Microsoft. Which means when
they get bored with it you get dumped up shit creek without a paddle.
Nuff said...

>
> Flash streaming servers** cost tens of thousands of $$$ for the
> *software* (WM Server is more like a few thousand), leaving out
> hardware costs which are likely to be comparable.

Flash streaming servers are not exactly necessary for the vast majority
of deployments are they? It is such a highend niche.

>
> Bulk flash encoding software using On2 VP6 costs about $30-40000 which
> is why it's taken this long for YouTube to consider that as an option.

Well YouTube are encoding all new uploads as H.264 and Adobe have just
updated Flash to support H264 as the video codec of choice. Beta
available soon if not already.
>
> It's not ideal for startups or even major companies to test with
> unless they have disposably deep pockets.
>
> There's a much much wider selection of codec settings and types in the
> WMV culuture compared to the On2 selection currently available (VP3,
> VP6 and MP3 audio I think).

In a previous incarnation I was a web developer mainly interactive and
video content and I can assure you the number of codecs a platform
supports a fuck all to do with anything. Your comment smacks of several
years old thinking. H.264 is the obvious way forward from the
perspectives of artists/developers/deployers. Keep it simple!!

>
> So, technically I think it has a long way to go.
>

Pragmatically speaking Silverlight has a long way to go in finding
acceptance with the people who really matter. In my circle of creative
type friends I have heard no excitement about it whatsoever. These are
the developers that M$ should be turning on but clearly are not.

The best M$ can hope for is Silverlight is picked up by a geeky niche
somewhere.

Microsoft ought to stick to what they are good at...er...writing
operating systems...Maybe not....

[Back to original message]