Easier to be aware on a 64-BIT browser since many if not most plug-ins have no 64-BIT declination (yet) and that is, as far as I’m concerned, the last of my worries. I’m running Firefox 42 64-BIT and, if I use 64 (!) add-ons, I have not one plug-in installed. We are dealing with evidence, not with gadgets seemingly dressed up with a pseudo-improvement attitude in order to legitimate what is or can be an intrusion and/or a degradation of users’ liberty : NPAPI must no longer be supported, even as a “tolerance” interval to allow sites to move their a*s. I’m not a radical but there are times where a choice is incompatible with consensus. I believe browser developers should impose the natural course of technological evolution to websites and their administrators. I dislike the dilemma between audience and progress imposed by reluctant sites to adopt latest technology.
It is intended for developers and designers interested in learning more about how to build experiences with Microsoft Silverlight. I don’t use Silverlight, no more than Adobe’s Flash, I am of those who believe that html5 (browser capability to manage audio and video) is already a reality and fulfills tomorrow’s browser aims. Microsoft Silverlight (formerly WPF/E) is a cross-browser, cross-platform plug-in for delivering the next generation of media experiences and rich interactive applications (RIAs) for the Web. That does not mean that they cannot protect their users by default, for instance by setting plugin contents to "click to play" instead of running them right away.
I think that browser developers should leave it up to the user to install and use plugins, provided that they don't cause instabilities or have known security vulnerabilities. Pale Moon for instance won't follow Mozilla, Google and Microsoft according to a post on the official forum. First, they can block updates of the browser to retain plugin functionality, or keep an older copy around for that purpose, or they may use a browser that won't discontinue support. Neither Google with its Chrome browser nor Microsoft's new browser Edge support Silverlight anymore. It is interesting to note that Firefox is one of the few mainstream browsers left that supports Silverlight. Will you need it in the future? Maybe.This ends support for Silverlight and other browser plugins that depend on NPAPI in all versions of the Firefox web browser. It's Deep Zoom shows promise.ĭo you need it now? No.
I digress though, Silverlight is good for quickly dumping a skin over some video using Encoder. Silverlight isn't some magic bullet that can do anything and why in the world would you want it to either? How about a clever or RIA that helps me prepare for retirement like E*TRADE has (which is built with Flex btw)? You will not see photo editing and word processing in Silverlight in the near future. There are a plethora of amazing RIAs out there for Flash compared to the few that are Silverlight. How is knowing two easier than one? It's not. Let's see, in Flash we have Actionscript but in Silverlight we have XAML and then either C# or VB.NET.
It certainly doesn't seem to be easier to code than Flash. Then there's Expression Studio which feels like it's about 8 behind Adobe's Creative Suite but that's a whole other story. It's trying to move into the same area as Flash but it's still about 4 years behind in that there are fewer components/assets, no MovieClip equivalent, video and animation causes anything slower than a core duo to drop frames, no motion paths, no filters (drop shadows, blur, glow, etc.) and probably more stuff I can't remember atm. How exactly is Silverlight an "advanced alternative" to Flash? It's not. Ah, Betanews, source of wordy news articles and reviewers who have no idea what they're talking about.įirst off Silverlight is nearly 3x the download size of Flash player.