christian.einfeldt writes "This week, Major League Baseball will open without Microsoft's Silverlight at the plate, according to Bob Bowman, CEO of Major League Baseball Advanced Media, which handles much of the back-end operations for MLB and several other leagues and sporting events. The change was decided on last year but was set to be rolled out this spring. Among the causes of MLB's disillusionment with Silverlight were technical glitches users experienced, including needing administrator privileges to install the plugin (often impossible in workplaces). Baseball's opening day last year was plagued by Silverlight instability, with many users unable to log on and others unable to watch games. Adobe Flash already exists on 99% of user machines, said Bowman, and Adobe is 'committed to the customer experience in video with the Flash Player.' MLBAM's decision to dump Silverlight is particularly problematic for Microsoft's effort to compete with Adobe, due to the fact that MLBAM handles much of the back-end operations for CBS' Webcasts of the NCAA Basketball Tournament and this year will do the encoding for the 2009 Masters golf tournament."
I wish the article would have explained why MLB went with Silverlight in the first place. What kind of arm-twisting (or hooker-and-blow-providing) could MS have possibly done to convince a company to take such a major financial gamble? For the most part, Silverlight is largely unproven tech and--to add insult to injury--proprietary. Can someone explain the appeal?
I can guess why. 1. Microsoft probably offered a bunch of technical help. 2. Silverlight has a much better programing model the Flash. I have not looked at Flex yet but Flash is nasty. 3. Probably thought that they would get better performance out of it.
Flash is in this case is the Devil that we know. Silverlight is the Devil we don't so Flash will probably win this fight.
Silverlight has a much better programing model the Flash. I have not looked at Flex yet but Flash is nasty.
Sure, the Flash IDE is a toy, the timeline is only useful for simple animation, and Actionscript 1 and 2 are crap, but Flash isn't bad at all if you're working on a pure code-based Actionscript 3 project.
Silverlight has a much better programing model the Flash. I have not looked at Flex yet but Flash is nasty.
Sure, the Flash IDE is a toy, the timeline is only useful for simple animation, and Actionscript 1 and 2 are crap, but Flash isn't bad at all if you're working on a pure code-based Actionscript 3 project.
I agree with this. Having used flex/actionscript3 recently it is very easy to learn/use, even on linux - and worked great. Admittedly I was only doing a simple game but as a programmer I was impressed at how easy it was to get up and running.
Find a good text editor that does syntax highlighting for actionscript (even as2 highlighting will work ok) and just use the console-based compiler for generating the swf files.
I never liked flash before - and I'm still not a fan of websites coded entirely in flash, but I'm starting to become a fan of flash programming and the web apps it can potentially produce:)
I did look at silverlight but the linux plugin (moonlight) is a long way from compatibility with the windows one (2 versions behind!), and also I saw the term ".NET" and decided I'd see what flash was like these days...and I'm glad I did.:) The flex SDK (including flex/actionscript compiler) is free so you can develop flash on linux/mac/windows and its free. This is a huge plus for me.
Flash is in this case is the Devil that we know. Silverlight is the Devil we don't so Flash will probably win this fight.
Not true anymore. Apparently, Silverlight is now the Devil that MLBAM has gotten to know, and they decided they hated him so much that they went back to the other devil they already know, Flash.
A high-profile reverse-course like this has got to be really bad news for MS. You'd think that, in trying to unseat Flash, they would have spent a little more effort making sure everything worked just right so that people wouldn't try it out and hate it, and go right back to what they were using before. Pissing off your early (and high-profile) adopters is NOT a good way to run a business and build marketshare.
"You'd think that... they [Microsoft] would have spent a little more effort making sure everything worked just right..."
I agree with everything you said.
It's interesting that the failures of technological companies are often social failures, not fundamentally technological failures.
What theories do you have about why Microsoft allowed the failure to happen? Has Microsoft become unable to function? Or, is Microsoft accustomed to its virtual monopoly causing people to accept Microsoft software no matter how buggy? Or, what?
What theories do you have about why Microsoft allowed the failure to happen?
Judging by some of Microsoft's recent bad moves, such as the bewildering array of Vista versions, re-working of the Office UI for Office 2007, the enormous bloat they added to it and so on, I'm beginning to believe that the programmers and developers no longer control development. It's beginning to look like MS is being controlled by marketdroids who not only have no clue what their customers want, they have no desire to gain one. It's a shame, really, they used to be able to produce good products that people actually wanted.
It's beginning to look like MS is being controlled by marketdroids who not only have no clue what their customers want, they have no desire to gain one. It's a shame, really, they used to be able to produce good products that people actually wanted.
Don't forget Uncle Fester is a salesman. And he is also the big boss. Bill Gates, for all his megalomaniac tendencies, was at least technically literate. So he could provide a steering influence to the company on technical grounds rather than purely make money to finance the next version which makes more money to pay for the next version. Selling a technological product requires the people making the decisions to be technical people. Nothing wrong with profits, so long as profits are not the only consideration.
Or to use the beloved car analogy.. When the colour and appearance of a car is the most important aspect for the company, the car is going to eventually be crap if they ignore the trivial things like the engine and the steering. Which is why a Ferarri doesn't just look good, and a Toyota doesn't just run well.
Question is... What happens to Microsoft if the WOW doesn't start with 7?
What theories do you have about why Microsoft allowed the failure to happen? Has Microsoft become unable to function?
It goes to the top. Until the board comes to its senses and gets rid of Ballmer, Microsoft is going to continue its slow, steady slouch toward...... well, toward a lucrative government bailout.
I'd like to add that you can see examples of how a company's upper management totally influences the way it does things. For instance, MS is always doing a sloppy job on stuff, and has really horrible marketing (e.g., the MSN butterflies) that people make fun of. Their upper management hasn't changed substantially in several decades now. Apple, OTOH, always is really anal about little details like their packaging, making sure their user experience is just the way they want it, etc., and this has always been attributed to Steve Jobs (they sure weren't like that under Sculley). (For the record, I'm no Apple fanboy, as I'm a Linux fan instead, but I do appreciate Apple's dedication to quality products and styling, even if it's not exactly my own taste. Just like I'd never buy a Rolls-Royce even if I was a billionaire, though I can appreciate their styling, and I can appreciate good country music like Johnny Cash even though I don't really like country music.)
But it's not going to change until the board throws Ballmer out and puts someone better in his place. But with the way large corporations work, that's not likely to happen, unless MS starts having really serious financial problems. Some shareholders are upset and complaining (although that makes me wonder why they still own stock), but it's not enough to force a change.
Except right now, it only supports WMV, WMA and MP3. That's pretty far from your assertion that it supports what the user wants. From your FAQ:
Windows Media Audio and Video 7,8,9 (WMA, WMAPro, WMV/VC-1), as well as MP3 audio. Microsoft has announced support for H.264/MPEG AVC and AAC playback in a future version of Silverlight coming in early 2009. We will explore the need for additional formats and codecs based on customer feedback and market need over time. Our philosophy around media formats support is "choice". It is important to note that Silverlight is a format-agnostic RIA environment that should support any media format that users require. The addition of native H.264/AAC video and audio decode inside of Silverlight is all about providing choice to customers.
So basically, either you have to ask Microsoft to support it or maybe write support yourself, which you'll probably then have to distribute to everyone. Yeah, way to be open...
So basically, either you have to ask Microsoft to support it or maybe write support yourself, which you'll probably then have to distribute to everyone. Yeah, way to be open...
Oh, that's ENTIRELY WRONG of them!!! I can't imagine what would have happened if, say, Linux had been created with such ideals...
So basically, either you have to ask Linus to support it or maybe write support yourself, which you'll probably then have to distribute to everyone. Yeah, way to be open...
The current Silverlight 3 preview release supports in addition to the proprietary codecs a pluggable framework for developers that wish to do so to use their own codecs.
As part of the Moonlight effort we now have implemented Vorbis, Theora and ADPCM and have a partial implementation of Dirac almost ready to use.
Our codecs work in both Silverlight 3 and our open source Moonlight implementation.
Our codecs work in both Silverlight 3 and our open source Moonlight implementation.
You mean that "open source" Moonlight that you are leaving full of Microsoft patent timebombs -- Microsoft patent infected code that is being incorporated into Moonlight under the guise of being open because of the Novell Microsoft agreement? The "open source" moonlight that is only safe on Novell's (MS) linux?
Take a walk back to Redmond with that "our open source moonlight" bullshit.
Technically true, but still less of an issue than Silverlight. Silverlight is proprietary and owned by the company with a near monopoly on consumer operating systems. Adobe is proprietary but they have no reason to prefer one platform over another (aside from marketshare of course), and so are very unlikely to sabotage other platforms at any point in the future.
On the other hand, it might be very beneficial for Microsoft to sabotage other platforms (and they already are, just by not even offering an _official_ linux player).
Yeah, that's a good question. I suspect that MS offered a lot to get them to use it. MLB.TV was the only reason I installed silverlight. I suspect I am not alone. If MLB offered a choice between the two I'd never have installed it. I've yet to come across another site where it's necessary. Now I can safely uninstall it, and most likely never need it again. I had endless problems with it -- especially on my Mac. Silverlight simply did not work well.
The new flash player for MLB.TV this year is a vast impro
by Anonymous Coward
on Tuesday April 07 2009, @07:49PM (#27498087)
I interviewed with them a few years ago.
MLB.com had all their video in WMV and a pre-exisitng Windows Media Server infrastructure, because they were very concerned about rights management.
Because they were a big Flash shop, they had to do a lot of mixing and matching Flash and JS to work with Windows Media player.
When Silverlight came out, it looked like it would be an all-in-one deal that would let them retain their existing video infrastructure and clips, and be able to better utilize them inside the RIA's they build.
They gave it a shot because it cost them almost nothing, MLB.com is rolling in dough and gets free stuff all the time because they're high profile.
because they were very concerned about rights management.
Considering they threaten to sue anyone who uses the term "World Series", that doesn't surprise me.
Every time I hear some poor minimum-wage sports radio announcer have to use the term "The Fall Classic" when he really means the Series, I spit on Major League Baseball.
Next, they'll want me to call White Sox Park "US Cellular Field" instead of the canonical "Comiskey Field".
Which reminds me, has anybody else noticed the amazing discipline that McDonalds has forced sportscasters to exercise now that All-Americans have become "McDonalds All-Americans".
During every broadcast I watched of the NCAA tourney, whenever there was mention of the top high-school players, it was always "McDonalds All-Americans" and nobody even choked on it once.
Maybe because Adobe refused to port Flash 8, 9, or 10 to any platform other than Windows and Mac OS?
What in the world are you talking about??? I currently have Flash 10 installed and I'm using Linux. And yes it is officially supported, on the other hand Moonlight, the OSS Slilverlight implementation which is the only way to get it to work on Linux really has no backing from MS and is behind the official Siliverlight plugin.
True points, but Flash on Linux from Adobe is less 'open' than Silverlight from Microsoft. Did you happen to notice that Adobe used what they had opened and jumped through some licensing hoops to get you their 'proprietary' Flash player?
Microsoft has considered doing the same, but it would involve either opening up the Vista API to open source, or make them shove together a fully closed solution with less functionality.
Microsoft turning Silverlight over t Mono and the Moonlight project is a win win, as Microsoft doesn't have to open their precious 'IP' that is non-Silverlight related from the Vista APIs, and yet it gives users a full open source solution.
If you want to support open source, Silverlight is your donkey to bet on, if you want Adobe semi-open solutions, keep using Flash and be happy.
I can remember when people were in love with Apple for opening up Darwin and the OS X kernel as required for the BSD and MACH licensing, but when it came to OS X and the 'Apple' portions, people realized the opening of Darwin was to get the rights to the code and also 'use' the community and repackage everything back under the upper levels of OS X and a sue happy Apple.
Adobe didn't make their Linux Flash player to be 'good' to the Linux community, they made it to regain control of the Linux community that was going the way of the open 'Flash' players that Adobe had no control over. And apparently their 'play' to win the Linux users worked, as you are an example of a Flash fan happily installing a non-open Flash player that has full Adobe control.
- MS has virtually no control over moonlight, and also seems pretty good about providing the mono team with what they need to replicate both Silverlight and other.NET features.
Also, most people don't have or use or even WANT to use Silverlight.
And you have come to that conclusion based on exhaustive research of the preferences and use-patterns of all the people who are currently wearing your underwear.
As industry devils go, Flash has fairly low levels of evil. It's proven, it fills a niche, it works, and while it's not wide open, it's not exactly locked shut either.
As industry devils go, Flash has fairly low levels of evil. It's proven, it fills a niche, it works, and while it's not wide open, it's not exactly locked shut either.
...For small values of "works."
Anyone else having problems with "You muct have flash 9 or greater" messages using the non-IE version of the flash plugin?
If I still have to use Microsoft's browser to get Flash to work, then it's no better than Silverlight.
Um, sure, they are both proprietary, but Flash is much less so. For example, Flash has a 100% supported plugin for Linux and Mac whereas Silverlight doesn't (well, might have an official Mac port, but not Linux), both are 100% compatible with the Windows version, plus Flash has support on some things that Silverlight support will be impossible such as on the Nintendo Wii's Opera browser, and Flash lite for mobile devices.
Flash also has a work in progress OSS implementation called Gnash.
by Anonymous Coward
on Tuesday April 07 2009, @07:02PM (#27497665)
Nearly all front end developers know javascript, and are therefore quite capable of flash programming. Silverlight has low market penetration and nobody wants to use it because it's widely seen as the latest in a long series of failed attempts to Microsoftize the web.
MLB could benefit from the high resolution available. Has anyone watched the March Madness on Demand from Cbs.sportsline.com? The quality was amazing... much better than any flash video that I have watched. It seems that Flash is way behind in terms of video. Youtube is NOT good quality. Cbs.sportsline.com's video scaled down or up based on the available bandwidth and was an excellent viewing experience. Of course, I am not factoring in the business aspects, but the quality of silverlight's video can be high. further reading http://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/article/61563 [sportsbusi...ournal.com]
Microsoft today announced the release of version 2.0 of its world-beating Silverlight multimedia platform for the Web. As a replacement for Adobe's Flash, it is widely considered utterly superfluous [today.com] and of no interest to anyone who could be found.
"We have a fabulous selection of content partners for Silverlight," announced Microsoft marketer Scott Guthrie on his blog today. "NBC for the Olympics, which delivered millions of new users to BitTorrent. The Democrat National Committee, which is fine because those Linux users are all Ron Paul weirdos anyway. It comes with rich frameworks, rich controls, rich networking support, a rich base class library, rich media support, oh God kill me now. My options are underwater, my resume's a car crash, Google won't call me back. My life is an exercise in futility. I'm the walking dead, man. The walking dead."
Silverlight was created by Microsoft to leverage its desktop monopoly on Windows, to work off the tremendous sales and popularity of Vista. Flash is present on a pathetic 96% of all computers connected to the Internet, whereas Silverlight downloads are into the triple figures.
"But it's got DRM!" cried Guthrie. "Netflix loved it! And web developers love us too, after all we did for them with IE 6. Wait, come back! We'll put porn on it! Free porn!"
Similar Microsoft initiatives include its XPS replacement for Adobe PDF, its HD Photo replacement for JPEG photographs and its earlier Liquid Motion attempt to replace Flash. Also, that CD-ROM format Vista defaults to which no other computers can read.
In a Microsoft internal security sweep, Guthrie's own desktop was found to still be running Windows XP.
I'm still surprised companies aren't jumping on the HTML 5 bandwagon. Eschew flash and plug-ins for native web browser applications and video.
http://280slides.com/ [280slides.com] is a great example of what can be done. The ObjectiveJ they're developing is truly amazing - and it's all browser native. Even IE 8 works.
I hate to say it, but Apple are right for once - get rid of flash and other plug-in based user interfaces and get back to basics. Share your JavaScript frameworks, use local storage and more - embrace HTML 5.
The whole point of using flash for video is to 1) prevent viewers from skipping over ads, and 2) prevent viewers from saving the streaming video to disk. If you allow native web browser applications, then what is to prevent users from substituting their own native application which violates points 1 and 2?
Yes everyone has flash, but what they don't tell you is that you'll also need the Swarmcast NexDef browser plug-in.
Check out the not so great review of the flash/nexdef experience: MLB Support Forums [mlbsupport.com]
Oh and if you want to also understand this from Microsoft's perspective:
Miscosoft SL Team Blog [silverlight.net]
The CBS March Madness HQ streaming was SilverLight and was a huge success.
And 0 and 2 to Ballmer. MLB is up one zip on that last homerun by Adobe Flash. "Bud" Selig goes into his windup...and Ballmer gives it tremendous jolt! It's going, going, and it's gone! Right off the 'Microsoft will give MLB all the assistance it needs in the way of servers, tech support, and donated Windows Server 2008 licenses in every MLB stadium across the country if you'll install Silverlight' sign in center field! The crowd is going wild! They're pouring onto the field! They've got Selig down and there cramming Ubuntu Server DVDs down his throat! And wait...they're after Ballmer now hurling chairs...but he seems to be holding them off with free copies of...Yes! Windows XP! I've never seen anything like this in all my years in Baseball. This is truly a sad, sad, day. This is Bob Uecker signing off.
Next, 'Silverlight' returns to MLB after the All Star break 2009. Right after these messages.
It's too bad that MLB charges money for this service. Considering the number of ads that naturally fit into a baseball game broadcast, it should still be profitable to broadcast it for free. This works well for TV stations which broadcast baseball games, and it's also been very successful for the web broadcasts of the NCAA basketball tournament in recent years.
Of course, it's not free because the MLB won't pass up this (or any) chance to make money. Never mind the fact that the game broadcasts themselves are also ads, since the fans often buy merchandise and tickets.
I would love to see the day come when virtually any sporting event is broadcast online for free. The economics seem to add up. Because of the importance of a live broadcast, and the frequency of breaks in the action, ads actually make sense as a way to pay for sports broadcasts. I don't often tolerate ads for any other sort of video.
why are people trying to watch MLB on their work computers in the first place?
Have you ever watched or listened to a baseball game? It's been the chosen background noise of America since the 1930s. It's not like a lot happens that is going to disrupt your work.
Why make the leap in the first place? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Why make the leap in the first place? (Score:5, Insightful)
I can guess why.
1. Microsoft probably offered a bunch of technical help.
2. Silverlight has a much better programing model the Flash. I have not looked at Flex yet but Flash is nasty.
3. Probably thought that they would get better performance out of it.
Flash is in this case is the Devil that we know. Silverlight is the Devil we don't so Flash will probably win this fight.
Parent
Re:Why make the leap in the first place? (Score:5, Insightful)
Silverlight has a much better programing model the Flash. I have not looked at Flex yet but Flash is nasty.
Sure, the Flash IDE is a toy, the timeline is only useful for simple animation, and Actionscript 1 and 2 are crap, but Flash isn't bad at all if you're working on a pure code-based Actionscript 3 project.
Parent
Re:Why make the leap in the first place? (Score:4, Informative)
Silverlight has a much better programing model the Flash. I have not looked at Flex yet but Flash is nasty.
Sure, the Flash IDE is a toy, the timeline is only useful for simple animation, and Actionscript 1 and 2 are crap, but Flash isn't bad at all if you're working on a pure code-based Actionscript 3 project.
I agree with this. Having used flex/actionscript3 recently it is very easy to learn/use, even on linux - and worked great. Admittedly I was only doing a simple game but as a programmer I was impressed at how easy it was to get up and running.
Find a good text editor that does syntax highlighting for actionscript (even as2 highlighting will work ok) and just use the console-based compiler for generating the swf files.
I never liked flash before - and I'm still not a fan of websites coded entirely in flash, but I'm starting to become a fan of flash programming and the web apps it can potentially produce :)
I did look at silverlight but the linux plugin (moonlight) is a long way from compatibility with the windows one (2 versions behind!), and also I saw the term ".NET" and decided I'd see what flash was like these days...and I'm glad I did. :) The flex SDK (including flex/actionscript compiler) is free so you can develop flash on linux/mac/windows and its free. This is a huge plus for me.
Parent
Free Flex Builder for Unemployed Developers (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Re:Why make the leap in the first place? (Score:5, Insightful)
Flash is in this case is the Devil that we know. Silverlight is the Devil we don't so Flash will probably win this fight.
Not true anymore. Apparently, Silverlight is now the Devil that MLBAM has gotten to know, and they decided they hated him so much that they went back to the other devil they already know, Flash.
A high-profile reverse-course like this has got to be really bad news for MS. You'd think that, in trying to unseat Flash, they would have spent a little more effort making sure everything worked just right so that people wouldn't try it out and hate it, and go right back to what they were using before. Pissing off your early (and high-profile) adopters is NOT a good way to run a business and build marketshare.
Parent
Failures of tech. companies are often social. (Score:5, Insightful)
I agree with everything you said.
It's interesting that the failures of technological companies are often social failures, not fundamentally technological failures.
What theories do you have about why Microsoft allowed the failure to happen? Has Microsoft become unable to function? Or, is Microsoft accustomed to its virtual monopoly causing people to accept Microsoft software no matter how buggy? Or, what?
Parent
Re:Failures of tech. companies are often social. (Score:5, Insightful)
Judging by some of Microsoft's recent bad moves, such as the bewildering array of Vista versions, re-working of the Office UI for Office 2007, the enormous bloat they added to it and so on, I'm beginning to believe that the programmers and developers no longer control development. It's beginning to look like MS is being controlled by marketdroids who not only have no clue what their customers want, they have no desire to gain one. It's a shame, really, they used to be able to produce good products that people actually wanted.
Parent
Re:Failures of tech. companies are often social. (Score:4, Insightful)
It's beginning to look like MS is being controlled by marketdroids who not only have no clue what their customers want, they have no desire to gain one. It's a shame, really, they used to be able to produce good products that people actually wanted.
Don't forget Uncle Fester is a salesman. And he is also the big boss. Bill Gates, for all his megalomaniac tendencies, was at least technically literate. So he could provide a steering influence to the company on technical grounds rather than purely make money to finance the next version which makes more money to pay for the next version. Selling a technological product requires the people making the decisions to be technical people. Nothing wrong with profits, so long as profits are not the only consideration.
Or to use the beloved car analogy.. When the colour and appearance of a car is the most important aspect for the company, the car is going to eventually be crap if they ignore the trivial things like the engine and the steering. Which is why a Ferarri doesn't just look good, and a Toyota doesn't just run well.
Question is... What happens to Microsoft if the WOW doesn't start with 7?
Parent
Re:Failures of tech. companies are often social. (Score:5, Funny)
What theories do you have about why Microsoft allowed the failure to happen? Has Microsoft become unable to function?
It goes to the top. Until the board comes to its senses and gets rid of Ballmer, Microsoft is going to continue its slow, steady slouch toward... ... well, toward a lucrative government bailout.
Parent
Re:Failures of tech. companies are often social. (Score:5, Insightful)
I'd like to add that you can see examples of how a company's upper management totally influences the way it does things. For instance, MS is always doing a sloppy job on stuff, and has really horrible marketing (e.g., the MSN butterflies) that people make fun of. Their upper management hasn't changed substantially in several decades now. Apple, OTOH, always is really anal about little details like their packaging, making sure their user experience is just the way they want it, etc., and this has always been attributed to Steve Jobs (they sure weren't like that under Sculley). (For the record, I'm no Apple fanboy, as I'm a Linux fan instead, but I do appreciate Apple's dedication to quality products and styling, even if it's not exactly my own taste. Just like I'd never buy a Rolls-Royce even if I was a billionaire, though I can appreciate their styling, and I can appreciate good country music like Johnny Cash even though I don't really like country music.)
But it's not going to change until the board throws Ballmer out and puts someone better in his place. But with the way large corporations work, that's not likely to happen, unless MS starts having really serious financial problems. Some shareholders are upset and complaining (although that makes me wonder why they still own stock), but it's not enough to force a change.
Parent
It's the install base (Score:4, Interesting)
They were counting on the massive market share of Vista to put it over.
Oops.
Parent
Re:Why make the leap in the first place? (Score:5, Informative)
Depends on who it needed to appeal to.
If it's management, it only needs to work in the demo and be new and shiny.
If it's the IT dept it only needs to be stable and easily managed. Oh, and do the job.
Parent
Re:Why make the leap in the first place? (Score:5, Informative)
-to add insult to injury--proprietary.
Flash is no less proprietary.
Parent
Re:Why make the leap in the first place? (Score:4, Informative)
http://www.adobe.com/devnet/flv/ [adobe.com]
Go ahead, surprise me
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Silverlight FAQ [microsoft.com]
Silverlight supports what users ask it to support.
Oh, and a link to one of the formats it supports
WMV file format [digitalpreservation.gov]
pwnd
Re:Why make the leap in the first place? (Score:5, Insightful)
Windows Media Audio and Video 7,8,9 (WMA, WMAPro, WMV/VC-1), as well as MP3 audio. Microsoft has announced support for H.264/MPEG AVC and AAC playback in a future version of Silverlight coming in early 2009. We will explore the need for additional formats and codecs based on customer feedback and market need over time. Our philosophy around media formats support is "choice". It is important to note that Silverlight is a format-agnostic RIA environment that should support any media format that users require. The addition of native H.264/AAC video and audio decode inside of Silverlight is all about providing choice to customers.
So basically, either you have to ask Microsoft to support it or maybe write support yourself, which you'll probably then have to distribute to everyone. Yeah, way to be open...
Parent
Re:Why make the leap in the first place? (Score:5, Funny)
So basically, either you have to ask Microsoft to support it or maybe write support yourself, which you'll probably then have to distribute to everyone. Yeah, way to be open...
Oh, that's ENTIRELY WRONG of them!!! I can't imagine what would have happened if, say, Linux had been created with such ideals...
So basically, either you have to ask Linus to support it or maybe write support yourself, which you'll probably then have to distribute to everyone. Yeah, way to be open...
Wow... I'm glad that never happened.
Parent
Re:Why make the leap in the first place? (Score:5, Informative)
The current Silverlight 3 preview release supports in addition to the proprietary codecs a pluggable framework for developers that wish to do so to use their own codecs.
As part of the Moonlight effort we now have implemented Vorbis, Theora and ADPCM and have a partial implementation of Dirac almost ready to use.
Our codecs work in both Silverlight 3 and our open source Moonlight implementation.
Parent
Open source moonlight? (Score:5, Informative)
You mean that "open source" Moonlight that you are leaving full of Microsoft patent timebombs -- Microsoft patent infected code that is being incorporated into Moonlight under the guise of being open because of the Novell Microsoft agreement? The "open source" moonlight that is only safe on Novell's (MS) linux?
Take a walk back to Redmond with that "our open source moonlight" bullshit.
Parent
Re:Why make the leap in the first place? (Score:4, Informative)
Flash Player support for h.264 [adobe.com] and The Gnash OSS Flash Player [gnashdev.org]
Face it, Flash isn't as evil as you want it to be. And Microsoft has a hell of a way to go to catch up.
Parent
Re:Why make the leap in the first place? (Score:5, Informative)
Flash is no less proprietary.
I beg to differ.
http://www.openscreenproject.org/ [openscreenproject.org]
http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/04/30/adobes-open-screen-project-write-once-flash-everywhere/ [techcrunch.com]
Parent
Re:Why make the leap in the first place? (Score:4, Interesting)
>> Flash is no less proprietary.
Technically true, but still less of an issue than Silverlight. Silverlight is proprietary and owned by the company with a near monopoly on consumer operating systems. Adobe is proprietary but they have no reason to prefer one platform over another (aside from marketshare of course), and so are very unlikely to sabotage other platforms at any point in the future.
On the other hand, it might be very beneficial for Microsoft to sabotage other platforms (and they already are, just by not even offering an _official_ linux player).
Parent
A more accurate analogy: (Score:5, Interesting)
Bad analogy. This is the correct analogy:
"My puppy has bitten me severely several times and I understand when he is larger the bites may be even worse."
Haven't you heard of "Embrace, Extend, Extinguish" [wikipedia.org]? Here are 6,780 links [google.com].
Parent
Re:Why make the leap in the first place? (Score:5, Funny)
I wish the article would have explained why MLB went with Silverlight in the first place
There was a mixup and they thought they were going with the Fleshlight.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
The new flash player for MLB.TV this year is a vast impro
Re:Why make the leap in the first place? (Score:5, Interesting)
I interviewed with them a few years ago.
MLB.com had all their video in WMV and a pre-exisitng Windows Media Server infrastructure, because they were very concerned about rights management.
Because they were a big Flash shop, they had to do a lot of mixing and matching Flash and JS to work with Windows Media player.
When Silverlight came out, it looked like it would be an all-in-one deal that would let them retain their existing video infrastructure and clips, and be able to better utilize them inside the RIA's they build.
They gave it a shot because it cost them almost nothing, MLB.com is rolling in dough and gets free stuff all the time because they're high profile.
Parent
Re:Why make the leap in the first place? (Score:5, Interesting)
Considering they threaten to sue anyone who uses the term "World Series", that doesn't surprise me.
Every time I hear some poor minimum-wage sports radio announcer have to use the term "The Fall Classic" when he really means the Series, I spit on Major League Baseball.
Next, they'll want me to call White Sox Park "US Cellular Field" instead of the canonical "Comiskey Field".
Which reminds me, has anybody else noticed the amazing discipline that McDonalds has forced sportscasters to exercise now that All-Americans have become "McDonalds All-Americans".
During every broadcast I watched of the NCAA tourney, whenever there was mention of the top high-school players, it was always "McDonalds All-Americans" and nobody even choked on it once.
Parent
Re:Why make the leap in the first place? (Score:5, Informative)
Maybe because Adobe refused to port Flash 8, 9, or 10 to any platform other than Windows and Mac OS?
What in the world are you talking about??? I currently have Flash 10 installed and I'm using Linux. And yes it is officially supported, on the other hand Moonlight, the OSS Slilverlight implementation which is the only way to get it to work on Linux really has no backing from MS and is behind the official Siliverlight plugin.
Parent
Re:Why make the leap in the first place? (Score:5, Interesting)
True points, but Flash on Linux from Adobe is less 'open' than Silverlight from Microsoft. Did you happen to notice that Adobe used what they had opened and jumped through some licensing hoops to get you their 'proprietary' Flash player?
Microsoft has considered doing the same, but it would involve either opening up the Vista API to open source, or make them shove together a fully closed solution with less functionality.
Microsoft turning Silverlight over t Mono and the Moonlight project is a win win, as Microsoft doesn't have to open their precious 'IP' that is non-Silverlight related from the Vista APIs, and yet it gives users a full open source solution.
If you want to support open source, Silverlight is your donkey to bet on, if you want Adobe semi-open solutions, keep using Flash and be happy.
I can remember when people were in love with Apple for opening up Darwin and the OS X kernel as required for the BSD and MACH licensing, but when it came to OS X and the 'Apple' portions, people realized the opening of Darwin was to get the rights to the code and also 'use' the community and repackage everything back under the upper levels of OS X and a sue happy Apple.
Adobe didn't make their Linux Flash player to be 'good' to the Linux community, they made it to regain control of the Linux community that was going the way of the open 'Flash' players that Adobe had no control over. And apparently their 'play' to win the Linux users worked, as you are an example of a Flash fan happily installing a non-open Flash player that has full Adobe control.
- MS has virtually no control over moonlight, and also seems pretty good about providing the mono team with what they need to replicate both Silverlight and other .NET features.
Parent
Re:Why make the leap in the first place? (Score:5, Funny)
And you have come to that conclusion based on exhaustive research of the preferences and use-patterns of all the people who are currently wearing your underwear.
Parent
Re:Why make the leap in the first place? (Score:4, Funny)
Well sorry to hear that Mr.iPhone user ;)
Parent
That's like saying (Score:4, Interesting)
"Major League Baseball Dumps Pact with Demons for Pact with the Devil."
Better the Devil You Know (Score:5, Insightful)
... as they say.
As industry devils go, Flash has fairly low levels of evil. It's proven, it fills a niche, it works, and while it's not wide open, it's not exactly locked shut either.
Parent
Re:Better the Devil You Know (Score:4, Insightful)
>
As industry devils go, Flash has fairly low levels of evil. It's proven, it fills a niche, it works, and while it's not wide open, it's not exactly locked shut either.
...For small values of "works."
Anyone else having problems with "You muct have flash 9 or greater" messages using the non-IE version of the flash plugin?
If I still have to use Microsoft's browser to get Flash to work, then it's no better than Silverlight.
Parent
Re:That's like saying (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Sliverlight was an idiotic decision anyway (Score:4, Insightful)
Nearly all front end developers know javascript, and are therefore quite capable of flash programming. Silverlight has low market penetration and nobody wants to use it because it's widely seen as the latest in a long series of failed attempts to Microsoftize the web.
has anyone seen high quality flv? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:has anyone seen high quality flv? (Score:5, Insightful)
It should be plenty fine to play a fucking video.
Parent
Microsoft releases Silverlight 2.0, nobody cares (Score:4, Funny)
Microsoft today announced the release of version 2.0 of its world-beating Silverlight multimedia platform for the Web. As a replacement for Adobe's Flash, it is widely considered utterly superfluous [today.com] and of no interest to anyone who could be found.
"We have a fabulous selection of content partners for Silverlight," announced Microsoft marketer Scott Guthrie on his blog today. "NBC for the Olympics, which delivered millions of new users to BitTorrent. The Democrat National Committee, which is fine because those Linux users are all Ron Paul weirdos anyway. It comes with rich frameworks, rich controls, rich networking support, a rich base class library, rich media support, oh God kill me now. My options are underwater, my resume's a car crash, Google won't call me back. My life is an exercise in futility. I'm the walking dead, man. The walking dead."
Silverlight was created by Microsoft to leverage its desktop monopoly on Windows, to work off the tremendous sales and popularity of Vista. Flash is present on a pathetic 96% of all computers connected to the Internet, whereas Silverlight downloads are into the triple figures.
"But it's got DRM!" cried Guthrie. "Netflix loved it! And web developers love us too, after all we did for them with IE 6. Wait, come back! We'll put porn on it! Free porn!"
Similar Microsoft initiatives include its XPS replacement for Adobe PDF, its HD Photo replacement for JPEG photographs and its earlier Liquid Motion attempt to replace Flash. Also, that CD-ROM format Vista defaults to which no other computers can read.
In a Microsoft internal security sweep, Guthrie's own desktop was found to still be running Windows XP.
HTML 5? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:HTML 5? (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Misleading Article... Not 100% Flash (Score:5, Informative)
Check out the not so great review of the flash/nexdef experience: MLB Support Forums [mlbsupport.com]
Oh and if you want to also understand this from Microsoft's perspective: Miscosoft SL Team Blog [silverlight.net]
The CBS March Madness HQ streaming was SilverLight and was a huge success.
It's the bottom of the ninth (Score:5, Funny)
MLB is up one zip on that last homerun by Adobe Flash.
"Bud" Selig goes into his windup...and Ballmer gives it tremendous jolt!
It's going, going, and it's gone!
Right off the 'Microsoft will give MLB all the assistance it needs in the way of servers, tech support, and donated Windows Server 2008 licenses in every MLB stadium across the country if you'll install Silverlight' sign in center field!
The crowd is going wild!
They're pouring onto the field!
They've got Selig down and there cramming Ubuntu Server DVDs down his throat!
And wait...they're after Ballmer now hurling chairs...but he seems to be holding them off with free copies of...Yes! Windows XP!
I've never seen anything like this in all my years in Baseball.
This is truly a sad, sad, day.
This is Bob Uecker signing off.
Next, 'Silverlight' returns to MLB after the All Star break 2009. Right after these messages.
It's very obvious (Score:5, Funny)
Flash, savior of the Universe.
Flash, It will save everyone of us
Flash It's a miracle
Flash, King of the impossible
I mean, duh.
Pay service? (Score:5, Interesting)
It's too bad that MLB charges money for this service. Considering the number of ads that naturally fit into a baseball game broadcast, it should still be profitable to broadcast it for free. This works well for TV stations which broadcast baseball games, and it's also been very successful for the web broadcasts of the NCAA basketball tournament in recent years.
Of course, it's not free because the MLB won't pass up this (or any) chance to make money. Never mind the fact that the game broadcasts themselves are also ads, since the fans often buy merchandise and tickets.
I would love to see the day come when virtually any sporting event is broadcast online for free. The economics seem to add up. Because of the importance of a live broadcast, and the frequency of breaks in the action, ads actually make sense as a way to pay for sports broadcasts. I don't often tolerate ads for any other sort of video.
Re:MSFT Icon is stale. (Score:5, Funny)
This is off topic, but Slashdot's MSFT icon is stale.
I agree. I think the new icon should be a flying chair.
Parent
Re:MSFT Icon is stale. (Score:4, Insightful)
A chimp on a flying chair.
Parent
Yow! (Score:3, Funny)
Re:work (Score:5, Insightful)
why are people trying to watch MLB on their work computers in the first place?
Have you ever watched or listened to a baseball game? It's been the chosen background noise of America since the 1930s. It's not like a lot happens that is going to disrupt your work.
Parent