Moonlight 1.0 Brings Silverlight Content To Linux 346
An anonymous reader writes "Novell has unveiled some of the fruits of its technical collaboration with Microsoft in the form of Moonlight 1.0, a Firefox plug-in which will allow Linux users to access Microsoft Silverlight content. Officially created by the Mono project, it is available for all Linux distributions, including openSUSE, SUSE Linux Enterprise, Fedora, Red Hat and Ubuntu. Also included in Moonlight is the Windows Media pack, with support for Windows Media Video, Windows Media Audio and MP3 files."
GlasDOS agrees... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:speaking of poison (Score:5, Funny)
And all you DRM fetish purists
"Ohhh, encrypt me stronger baby. More Secure, more secure! That's it! Ohhhhh..." ?
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Dominatrix: "No, It's just a game we're supposed to play! Now gimme 50 bucks."
User: "What? That's it? It didn't even work last time!"
You bring up an interesting point (Score:5, Interesting)
I'd like to watch movies from netflix
Ok, so you need this for Netflix.
Any other reasons why you'd want Silverlight?
Honestly, not trolling. Netflix is apparently one reason, and a good one. What are the others?
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
>Any other reasons why you'd want Silverlight?
Because /. admins will manually drop your karma if you don't say good things about MS...?
Obligsig...
Remember, investing in MS is risking having your own money used against you in the marketplace. Spend it on something worthwhile, like, er...NetFlix. OH! And a /.subscription!
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:You bring up an interesting point (Score:5, Funny)
yeah, that Inauguration thing was so thinly covered by so few sites, people without Silverlight were really left out in the cold for that one
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
And this is relevant how ...?
Sorry I live outside the USA so the coverage of both these events was available without silverlight
Re:You bring up an interesting point (Score:4, Informative)
because it's not been standardised and when the W3C tried to Nokia and Apple got all shitty about it.
What other reasons? (Score:3, Funny)
Quite simply getting access to some of the finest German shizer films on the web!
What? you'd claiming that the internet is used for more than just fulfilling the fetish desires of lonely men in their basement?! heresy! heresy I say!
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I would suggest the Openstreetmap Silverlight renderer [figmentengine.com], but it exposes some bugs in Moonlight and the developer is still working with the Moonlight developers to get it running.
Choice. (Score:4, Insightful)
Any other reasons why you'd want Silverlight?
Say it with me, "Monopolies are bad."
Just because it's Microsoft doesn't make it evil. What's truly evil is being forced to rely on something like Flash to bring you content--no matter what.
Am I the only person dismayed by the fact that flash video is *so* horrible, you can't full screen youtube's HD stuff on a 2.8 GHz Pentium 4 machine?
I mean, FFS, Adobe had Flash ready for the iPhone in months.... But we can't even get a native x64 version of it on ANY OS. If Microsoft can force some swift kicks in Adobe's ass (which they should for forcing me to download a damned plugin to save to PDF in Office 2007 anyway) and vice-versa, I see nothing but good things on the road ahead.
Re:Choice. (Score:4, Informative)
I mean, FFS, Adobe had Flash ready for the iPhone in months.... But we can't even get a native x64 version of it on ANY OS.
Funny you should say that, because I'm running the x64 linux flash plug-in right now. Its supposedly in alpha, but seems entirely functional to me. Check out the release notes [adobe.com]. Yeah, they came up with something for the iPhone in a few months, but it is simply running a derivative of OS X, and the plug-in had a huge demand.
freely implementable standard? please (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:freely implementable standard? please (Score:5, Interesting)
Something like this [youtube.com] perhaps?
SVG + Video > Silverlight
And that's only the tip of the technological iceberg. Behold the power of HTML5. Coming to every web browser except Internet Explorer.
Re: (Score:2)
Coming to every web browser except Internet Explorer.
Perhaps you missed the last Slashdot post?
Re:freely implementable standard? please (Score:5, Interesting)
Which post would that be? The one where Microsoft failed to implement DOM2 events, then implemented HTML5 features based on DOM2 events and therefore incompatible with the standards, therefore not HTML5?
Don't get me started. IE8 is a sore point for me. You WON'T appreciate what you hear. (Or maybe you will. But it won't be the most pleasant conversation.)
No, do go on... (Score:5, Funny)
Don't get me started. IE8 is a sore point for me. You WON'T appreciate what you hear. (Or maybe you will. But it won't be the most pleasant conversation.)
Well, if it's something to the effect that though for years, you've absolutely hated Internet Explorer 6's limitations and the fact that Microsoft all but abandoned its development, and during those years, while you put up with all its idiosyncracies you accumulated a metric ton of contempt for the company whose half-life might -- if all the issues were addressed today -- only have you wishing painful chronic illnesses on the IE product development team in 5 years, and that despite all that, you allowed yourself a glimmer of hope when you heard the Microsoft folks talking about how IE 8 would support web standards, only to discover that they're basically still planning on being 4-5 years behind everybody else while dumping a lot of effort into silverlight, but you weren't really surprised because honestly, if they had either the skill or will to keep up, they could have done it without breaking a sweat back when IE6 was actually briefly in the lead, and so your contempt, rather than diminishing, is actually pretty much cemented on a monotonically increasing curve which will eventually cause the cretins involved in IE's product development team to suffer debilitating effects proportional their proximity to you.... then by all means, do go on.
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry if I'm a little edgy. I do mean that IE8 is a sore spot for me. Slowness to implement standards I can understand. Microsoft has an uphill battle with the Trident engine. But blatant disregard? Flaunting their non-implementation of standards? Closing bugs for standards support as "By Design"? That I cannot stomach.
Death to Microsoft. May the phoenix be a stronger company and a better citizen.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I don't see anything in that demo that wasn't in Silverlight 1.0 demos a couple of years ago.
Re:freely implementable standard? please (Score:5, Insightful)
And I don't see anything in Silverlight that isn't similarly addressed by HTML5. Ergo, HTML5 is superior for its standardization, true cross-platform support, and competing implementations that can meet the needs of many different ideals.
For the record, I don't have anything against people such as yourself who work at Microsoft. Many people who work there are great people. But from the inside looking out, you can't see the forest through the trees. You especially can't see the massive amount of harm and disrespect your company is paying the industry. And that harm is why I can't stand Microsoft anymore. Mr. Wilson can complain about negativity all he wants, but he refuses to recognize the trail of broken promises he and your company have given to the industry.
Re:freely implementable standard? please (Score:5, Informative)
Do what exactly? Linking off to a site that requires Silverlight with no explanation doesn't seem like a very good argument when you're posting to a forum that doesn't want to install your plugin. (Or more to the point, many of them can't install Silverlight 2.0.)
Your second link talks about multi-bitrate encoding. Which strikes me as (like the entire Silverlight platform) a solution looking for a problem. Despite the fact that Microsoft has had the technology deployed for years as part of WiMP, the market hasn't bought into it. It's just as easy (and probably less confusing) to simply provide different sizes. 95%+ of current streaming videos don't even have to worry about that. The closest thing we have to an issue is Youtube using low quality as the default. And even that has more to do with backwards compatibility and paced rollouts than it does a strict technology problem.
Perhaps Silverlight will be better positioned when HD streaming becomes the norm. More likely however, is that HD will be the norm when the majority of hardware on the market is both capable of HD streaming and integrated into the standard home in a way that would make HD streaming a superior enough experience for consumers to want to use it. At which point the advantage of technologies like multi-bitrate streaming simply vaporize. Microsoft would do better to spend those resources on implementing the web standards they've been blatantly ignoring for the past decade.
As an aside, why is it that every Silverlight website stops you cold? There's not even a description of what it is you're missing and/or why you should install the plugin. It's simply "install this or go away". So I go away. No skin off my nose.
Re:freely implementable standard? please (Score:5, Informative)
Do what exactly? Linking off to a site that requires Silverlight with no explanation doesn't seem like a very good argument when you're posting to a forum that doesn't want to install your plugin. (Or more to the point, many of them can't install Silverlight 2.0.)
The second link is about how the stuff in the first is authored, and doesn't require Silverlight. Sorry if that wasn't clear.
Your second link talks about multi-bitrate encoding. Which strikes me as (like the entire Silverlight platform) a solution looking for a problem. Despite the fact that Microsoft has had the technology deployed for years as part of WiMP, the market hasn't bought into it. It's just as easy (and probably less confusing) to simply provide different sizes. 95%+ of current streaming videos don't even have to worry about that.
The challenge with offering multiple sizes is that in forces the user to know what their system and connection can play, and it really only works with progressive download models, not real instant-on, easy random access long-form "streaming." That's fine for some audiences, but not for the mass market. Multibitrate done right means nearly instant startup and gapless playback, dynamically adjusted to what the user's machine can play back. It's a very different use model than YouTube.
Perhaps Silverlight will be better positioned when HD streaming becomes the norm. More likely however, is that HD will be the norm when the majority of hardware on the market is both capable of HD streaming and integrated into the standard home in a way that would make HD streaming a superior enough experience for consumers to want to use it.
Ah, that's the point! Smooth Streamings gets us out of having to wait for everyoen to be able to do HD to use it for mass audience content. If only the top 40% of users can get full 720p, the top 40 % of users get full 720p. And users who have less get the best experience their hardware and network is capable off. We don't have to sweat the lowest common denominator.
As an aside, why is it that every Silverlight website stops you cold? There's not even a description of what it is you're missing and/or why you should install the plugin. It's simply "install this or go away". So I go away. No skin off my nose.
There's a lot of flexibility in how a site can present the install option. For example, NBCOlympics.com offered a fallback to an IE embedded WMP ActiveX component. I agree that more sites could do a nicer job of it, and we're talking to them about improving that experience.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
For example, NBCOlympics.com offered a fallback to an IE embedded WMP ActiveX component. I agree that more sites could do a nicer job of it, and we're talking to them about improving that experience.
Oh good, we can fall back to the older, less secure Windows model?
Cross-platform compatibility is the key. And I don't think one can reasonably trust anything based on a Microsoft standard. It doesn't mean I won't install moonlight anywhere, but it does mean I won't ever, ever be using silverlight.
If the system doesn't fall back to something actually standards-compliant without me having to do anything, then it is a gigantic fuckup. I don't want to do it Microsoft's way, I want to do it the right way, the s
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
That part was clear. My issue was that the content of the first link was not clear. I assume from the name it's a site that streams HD videos. Which means... well, nothing. Absolutely nothing to me. There's a variety of sites that already do that. Without more information, I can't understand why your site is superior enough to make me install Silverlight.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Cross-platform....... Using a blob of codecs that are almost certainly not going to be updated or even there in a few years' time.
I don't think you understand quite what cross-platform means.
Re: (Score:2)
68.15% [nwsource.com] and accelerating.
At this point it looks like "corporate standards" are doing quite a bit to prop up IE's numbers. The good news is that those who finally move away from IE6 aren't all moving to IE7. Many of those users are switching to an alternative browser. Which means that Microsoft's lock-in is slipping fast.
Actually... (Score:2)
Behold the power of HTML5. Coming to every web browser except Internet Explorer.
And IE, too, as soon as someone writes a something to render SVG + video in Silverlight. :)
Re: (Score:2)
You know, I actually did that for the Canvas tag. Except I used Java as the rendering engine. (Occasionally I even link to the demo here.) I had an entire plan for getting IE up to speed. Then Microsoft intentionally shafted the industry with their IE8 development. And then I stopped caring. I just... couldn't bring myself to feel anything positive toward Microsoft. I just wanted IE to die.
So I no longer support these efforts. Instead, I just watch IE's market share numbers drop. 67% and falling.
Re: (Score:2)
I feel you, man, but every open technology that can be shimmed in to work under IE is a draw away from a Microsoft technology, rendering IE less and less relevant.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
As it should (cost you karma). May your next life be spent working at a Windows ME help desk support center. (j/k, I wouldn't wish that on anyone.)
Re: (Score:2)
Because W3C standards have become functionally indistinguishable from articles on The Onion?
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Clearly, you've never read a W3C standard. No-one likes them.
I've read some (Score:2)
And I liked them. They let me do cool stuff in predictable ways. They're not flawless, but they vary from programming for IE in that they're documented. Documentation is a good thing. And they have a validator. External validation may be an emotional crutch but for my web pages, I like the help.
I like web pages that have a link that says this page looks awful [getfirefox.com].
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
The WebKit CSS extensions added in Mobile Safari are interesting. I wish for people to agree on a version of this for all browsers, as it would replace Flash in at least some areas.
http://webkit.org/blog/324/css-animation-2/ [webkit.org]
Re: (Score:2)
It may not be Richart Stallman perfect, but it works for even a jaded manager like me.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Um, portions of Silverlight are public source and moonlight *is* OSS.
It may not be Richart Stallman perfect, but it works for even a jaded manager like me.
This from the person who said Vista was faster than that bloated XP.
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1024039&cid=25706211 [slashdot.org]
I was curious to see what type of "jaded" manager would consider public source the same as open source so I checked your history.
You're good at hiding your "true" feelings because most your posts seem very pro-vista and critical of OSS (usually, though, with the disclaimer that you use such and such linux app. Reminds me of the Seinfield epdisode where the guy could make fun of ev
Re:freely implementable standard? please (Score:4, Insightful)
XmlHttpRequest, the 'X' in AJAX, started life as a Microsoft only, proprietary ActiveX object back in IE5.
Given that, your post doesn't really make sense.
Re:freely implementable standard? please (Score:4, Insightful)
It's crystal-clear:
XmlHttpRequest is a "de facto" standard, yes. It was introduced by Microsoft, yes (it was not intended for AJAX, though), and IE implements it right by definition.
On the other hand, it's not possible to do AJAX if if the DOM and every thing else in the browser is not standards conformant, and boy, Microsoft has troubles doing that! It's the same old problem with JavaScript, only much worse.
Makes sense now?
OK installed it... (Score:2, Funny)
OK I installed this. Now what? Any sites use this?
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Nevermind, it crashes my firefox on some sites and doesn't work with 2.0 version websites.
Re: (Score:2)
netflix (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Nope, not yet. Netflix requires Silverlight 2.
Am I going to be sued for patent infringement? (Score:3, Interesting)
That seems to be the message Microsoft is sending.
Oh yes, will it run on my ARM processor (where Flash runs just fine)?
Re: (Score:2)
No. [mono-project.com]
x86 only... I was kinda hoping that this would lead to a PPC version, but I suspect not - they won't be "killing Flash" just yet.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
That seems to be the message Microsoft is sending
I used to think it was mass-hysteria when I heard people say what you just said. Until a while back I stumbled upon this on Novell's site:
This protection extends far beyond our broad Novell Indemnification Program; you also benefit from the Novell and Microsoft patent cooperation agreement. It ensures that when you buy any Novell productsâ"whether Linux-based or proprietaryâ"you receive a patent covenant from Microsoft.
And:
Under the Novell and Microsoft patent cooperation agreement, when you buy any Novell productsâ"whether Linux-based or proprietaryâ"you receive a patent covenant not to sue from Microsoft. Microsoft's covenant not to sue a Novell customer applies to a Novell offering independent of the channel of distribution and licensing terms, and whether any code is covered by GPLv2 or GPLv3.
Here is the direct link: http://www.novell.com/licensing/ntap/ [novell.com]
Suffice it to say, I no longer use OpenSUSE :)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Really all it is, Microsoft gave Novell $300 million for a mutual indemnification agreement. That's a hell of a lot of money, and any reasonable person would believe that Microsoft is more worried about infringing on Novell patents than vice versa.
Any naive or willfully ignorant person would believe that. Microsoft made this deal around the time they were claiming Linux violated their patents. In return for the upfront cash to Novell, Microsoft gets royalties on any future sales of Novell. It divides the Linux community between those paying protection money to Microsoft and those who don't. Open source and patent royalties are incompatible.
Cool, but... (Score:5, Insightful)
Don't get me wrong, I think its cool that projects like this exist and I am not going to criticize anyone for spending time working on it.
But Silverlight really seems like a solution in search of a problem. Flash provides nice interactivity at the cost of an annoying plugin, and HTML5 is quickly catching up and should be the long term method of constructing web apps.
The only advantage of Silverlight seems to be the unified language for both backend and content, but that doesn't seem compelling to me. Anyone here using Silverlight for anything interesting that couldn't be done in Flash or HTML?
Re:Cool, but... (Score:5, Interesting)
It's designed to directly compete with Flash. The "problem" that it solves is that Adobe is dominating a market that Microsoft wants. You may notice that most of Microsoft's products attempt to solve similar problems.
Yeah.. (Score:4, Informative)
I got a bid in a gig for Silverlight, and, the thing is, Flash is actually a bit better for some of the special effects. I think its fair to say that Flash and Silverlight are designed to do two different things. Flash has more fancy graphics options, but, Silverlight is easier to assemble content dynamically with. You could go one of two routes with Silverlight. One way is to send out the binary blob ala Flash, but you can also just send out xml straight out to it.... that makes it a bit more like working with a normal web server paradigm. In that sense, you can view Silverlight as more of a stopgap to HTML5 than you would Flash.
Re:Yeah.. (Score:4, Interesting)
It's not a stopgap, it's an alternative. Microsoft is trying to kill HTML5 with Silverlight. They will fail I think, because IE market share is dropping and nearly everyone technical wants them to die now. If IE6 didn't do it, Vista did.
Smooth Streaming! (Score:5, Interesting)
On the media side, check out:
http://www.smoothhd.com/ [smoothhd.com]
I encoded the "Big Buck Bunny" clip up there :). It's still in pre-alpha, but you should be able to get the idea
This uses a new API called MediaStreamSource, which enables file parsers and protocols to be built in managed code, and then hand off the video and audio bitstreams to Silverlight's built int decoders.
In the case of Smooth Streaming, every two seconds of the video is a seperate http request, and each of those chunks is available in six different data rates. Managed code heuristics running inside of Silverlight dynamically pick the right bitrate for the next chunk based on available CPU power, network speed, and window size (no reason to download 720p if the brower window is shrunk down in a corner of the stream).
And because this is based around small http requests, chunks get proxy cached, so 100 people watching the same video behind the same firewall would only need to get a single copy, providing much better scalability than traditional unicast streaming.
Anyway, this is something that Flash certainly can't do, and I haven't seen any hint of HTML5 being able to do. Pulling it all together requires some pretty specific characteristics of the video decoder (the ability to switch resolutions with a new sequence header without any pause), an API like MediaStreamSource, and having a performant enough runtime to be able to run all the heuristics and parsing without using much CPU.
I blogged the authoring workflow for this and some other details here:
http://on10.net/blogs/benwagg/Expression-Encoder-2-Service-Pack-1-ndash-Intro-and-Multibitrate-Encoding/ [on10.net]
Re: (Score:2)
Awesome info thanks for sharing. Wish I had mod points left for you.
Re: (Score:2)
To me I'm just happy if it can provide something html/css/svg/javascript/.. don't. I really hate flash so ..
All I have to say (Score:2)
All I have to say is I can now watch MLB.tv in Linux without the freaking hassle I used to have. It's getting very close to the point of not having to dual boot much longer.
STILL can't use "Watch It Now" on Netflix!! (Score:5, Interesting)
Well, even with this, I STILL can't watch anything on Netflix's "Watch It Now" section... because THAT requires Moonlight AND ActiveX (and I still had to forge my UA just to get that far).
We're no farther along than we were before.. as always.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:STILL can't use "Watch It Now" on Netflix!! (Score:5, Insightful)
There must be a non-ActiveX version of the page if it works on Macs... keep at it! :)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Silverlight 2.0 :(
Re: (Score:2)
Bummer!
Well, moonlight seems to be lagging Silverlight by about a year and a half. Try again in a little over a year :(
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, according to the Moonlight roadmap, they're planning a Moonlight 2.0 alpha version in March, and the first release version in September:
http://www.mono-project.com/MoonlightRoadmap [mono-project.com]
Re: (Score:2)
It's Sun's fault (Score:3, Insightful)
Sun could have owned this market, but Java was a piece of crap for multimedia and video applications, and so people dropped it. Instead of coming up with nice looking, robust, real-world solutions, Sun was busy building a platform designed by committee and with some of the world's most bloated and least tested APIs on it.
You know what? (Score:3, Interesting)
Unusable microsoft software as usual. (Score:5, Informative)
Keeping up with the microsoft tradition novell unleashes a much touted piece of software which really does not work. Typically inept.
Firefox 3.0.6 32 bit Intrepid
Randomly tried some different stuff from the microsoft showcase http://silverlight.net/Showcase/ [silverlight.net]:
Lasercopter: Cannot work with 1.0 compiled for 2.0
autocosmos tv: Does not even detect the plugin
Meshviewer: Does not detect the plugin
Lorenzo Reca: Does not detect the plugin
Manic Miner: Does not detect the plugin
My teeth start gnashing and give up
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Even with Silverlight they majority of the demos don't work or work so entirely poorly that they make Flash look good.
Re:Unusable microsoft software as usual. (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Unusable microsoft software as usual. (Score:4, Insightful)
It is not only that in practical terms it doesn't work. There is something else here. If you look at the press release for the Moonlight 1.0 release, they tell you about a number of things Microsoft had to do to allow this to happen. For example, releasing their codecs for linux, providing patent indemnification, releasing some microsoft code as open source.
This tells you that Microsoft has complete control over Moonlight in terms of allowing it to progress or not. I am sure that for Moonlight 2.0 there will be another bunch of things that Microsoft will need to do (or not) if they decide to make it happen.
So what do we have? a free implementation of a non industry standard solution that can't exist without the approval from Microsoft.
Moonlight is just meant for the MS marketing drones to be able to tick the box when users ask about multiplatform.
So what... (Score:2, Informative)
The HBO example page they use works just fine with gecko-mediaplayer and mplayerplug-in, that Linux users have had for years.
Catch up, original poster! You're late! (Score:2, Insightful)
Odd that this is just now breaking on Slashdot. According to the Mono project's Moonlight page [go-mono.com], the final version of Moonlight 1.0 was released Jan. 20 -- just in time for Linux users to accept de Icaza's invitation to watch President Obama's inauguration over the Internet [slashdot.org] via Silverlight.
To answer somebody's earlier question, Moonlight 1.0 is licensed under LGPL [mono-project.com].
Sorry I'm late. (Score:3, Insightful)
And nothing of value was gained.
Significantly... (Score:4, Interesting)
Moonlight features codecs that have already been licensed by Microsoft from major media companies. Moonlight users are indemnified against litigation that might arise from their use in Moonlight due to the Novell whole agreement...thing. In other words, everyone's safe from the (possible or otherwise) threat of litigation, honest!
Also, Moonlight 1.0 has been tested with, and passed, all the regression-testing tools Microsoft tested with Silverlight. Meaning a guaranteed high level of compatibility.
Of course the motivation behind this isn't of course Microsoft's "throbbing heart" for the FOSS community; it's purely and simply that it wants to blow Flash out of the water, and is even willing to Open Source, support, and invest heavily in OSS to do it if necessary.
And that's good because it means Adobe will have to raise the bar on flash now someone's invading it's territory...put another way, did you REALLY think you'd get 64-bit flash support on Linux from Adobe if Silverlight hadn't been released?
Why? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Why? (Score:5, Insightful)
Making the web dependent on binary plugin formats....users are probably the only ones who DON'T win.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Why? (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Then I have something for you. First read the article. It is about this thing called Moonlight. It's open source. As a content creator you can create video, animations, and other interactive content using free and open source tools that can be viewed with free and open source plugins.
Re:Why? (Score:4, Informative)
Binary formats? Like JPG, PNG, GIF or PDF?
Yes, if horrors like that were allowed onto the web, we'd all be doomed.
Oh, wait...
The difference is that with the image formats you mentioned are all manipulatable via HTML, aren't interactive in any way.
They are all explicitly content-only with no interaction.
PDF though, that isn't really for the web. Thats aimed at pixel for pixel, screen for screen uniformity - which HTML battles against. HTML and open web standards is all about the browser showing the content in whatever way the user needs to see the info, and have it all work.
What the previous anonymous coward was getting at was when you put the structure, interactivity, and applications all running encapsulated inside a plugin (where the browser/user can't config it), then you either subvert HTML (redundant) or provide non-accessible content (bad thing). The goal should be to move structure/architecture out of plugins and into the markup where it belongs. That way, in 10 years time when you can't see anymore, your browser will be able to jazz the content together so you can access it with your futuristic hypersensor.
Re:Why? (Score:4, Insightful)
If Adobe is finally taking Linux seriously, it's because they are afraid of Microsoft. Best outcome we can have is Adobe and MS each taking a 50% share of this market. We'll reap the benefits, regardless of OS of choice.
If Adobe is finally taking Linux seriously, it's because they are afraid of Microsoft. Best outcome we can have is Adobe and MS each taking a 50% share of this market.
Supporting Silverlight is not necessary for that. In fact it can be the quite the opposite. If Adobe sees having a Linux plugin as a competitive advantage, they'll give it a lot of love. But if Silverlight is (badly) supported in Linux, it gives them the wrong message. Basically it is just another tick on the box, and they don't need to make it work properly, just pretend that it does, exactly like Microsoft is doing.
Re:One Word (Score:4, Funny)
Now to spend the next few minutes trying to work out whether that actually counts as a word...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
From TFA:
Also included in Moonlight is the Windows Media pack, with support for Windows Media Video, Windows Media Audio and MP3 files.
Yes, I can just see the lines of linux users just queuing up in anxious trepidation waiting to be able to use Windows Media Video and Audio files on their beloved linux systems...
Re: (Score:2)
It's not like you have to actually make use of them, but being able to is rather convenient ..
I do understand that a few may not see it as free enough though, but well, let the masochists worry about that.
Re: (Score:2)
Its just annoying that its hard/impoissible to find a foss version of moonlight. One say i will put the effort in and compile an ffmpeg version, but until then i have no intention of touching the microsoft codec pack.
It seams like something that could easily be packaged in a tar or deb by people who don't care about legal threats and then linked to by everybody (well apart from the shills that produce moonlight).
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
The interesting thing is that Moonlight downloads the codecs for you on demand (no need to add other repos) and they are properly licensed (as opposed to w32/w64codecs). I can see a lot of Linux users doing this, actually.
Since Ubuntu and Suse already ship Mono (or have drunk the MS kool-aid, depending on how you feel), they should include this plug-in by default so that it works out of the box.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Just out of curiosity, does it prompt you for permission to download? I'm wondering what sort of protections they have against someone using either their own codec (thus downloading arbitrary executable content - presumably they don't allow this), an obscure codec not typically used (this would greatly increase the attack surface area since it effectively becomes any bug in any codec supported by the platform whether or not you have it installed), and finally against man in the middle attacks that allows s
Re:One Word (Score:5, Interesting)
Yes, I can just see the lines of linux users just queuing up in anxious trepidation waiting to be able to use Windows Media Video and Audio files on their beloved linux systems...
The day this article [arstechnica.com] hit slashdot I said that the purpose for this was to insert Microsoft IP into Linux. People called me crazy. Well, we're here! Let's all get comfy in this brave new world, shall we?
Does anybody still trust Novell? Why?
Oh, and Windows Media Player is way cool, because it has the codecs for Plays For Now [ft.com].
Re: (Score:2)
Weird from someone with a "Javascript + Gaming = Amazing (PC & Wii)" signature.
Personally I much rather have an open-source silverlight to javascript layer in my browser than Adobes flash plugin.
I installed miro 2 and removed flash, though that will suck for plenty of sites :D
Re: (Score:2)
I don't see why. I love web standards. They open up platforms and make the Internet a better and more powerful place for all users. Microsoft's attempts to subvert those standards don't make me happy. Nor does Miguel's backwards attempts [slashdot.org] at bringing Microsoft technology to Linux.
Microsoft technology was once at the top of its field. While Microsoft lied, stole, and crushed to get there, at least it really was superior to the alternatives. Now they're instead planting their either ancient or useless alternat
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I keep hearing this but no evidence supports it. The only evidence you can provide is "Microsoft is evil". Despite your quite common belief that Mono is some kind of Microsoft plot, Microsoft has been actively helping Mono. I don't t
Re:Miguel (Score:5, Insightful)
no worse than any other company (Score:2)
Start here [catb.org]. Proceed to this [theregister.co.uk] and this [wikipedia.org] and this [bbc.co.uk].
Any questions?
If you don't know why (Score:2)
If after reading all that you still don't care then I have no answer to "Why care?".
You've made your choice. Live with it. Have a nice worm.
Re: (Score:2)
... what you should ask yourself is if you will also get a tinfoil hat with your installation, it seems like you need (yet another?) one.
Mod parent up. (Score:2)
This is exactly how microsoft operates to keep people from switching to alternative platforms (e.g. oss solutions)
they did it with WMV for ages until the pressure became too great.
now they're trying to do it with silverlight.
I find it a little too convenient that they release 2.0 the moment news arises of linux support for 1.0. As soon as they develop 2.0 for linux they'll upgrade to 3.0, and so on and so forth.
Re:Permisive MS (Score:4, Insightful)