View Full Version : Microsoft releases Silverlight, supports Linux
Gremlinzzz
September 8th, 2007, 01:52 PM
What do you think is it going too be writing home all the time or is it free?
http://www.tectonic.co.za/view.php?src=rss&id=1698
nonewmsgs
September 8th, 2007, 01:59 PM
microsoft making something for linux? that's crazy talk.
urukrama
September 8th, 2007, 02:05 PM
Here (http://weblogs.asp.net/scottgu/archive/2007/09/04/silverlight-1-0-released-and-silverlight-for-linux-announced.aspx) is the news directly from a Microsoft man.
Polygon
September 8th, 2007, 02:13 PM
did they release SILVERLight for linux or is it just MOONLight, which is the linux port of silverlight?
23meg
September 8th, 2007, 02:14 PM
Just Moonlight.
Gremlinzzz
September 8th, 2007, 02:17 PM
Some one try it and report back. its like cold water I'm not going in first.
tcpip4lyfe
September 8th, 2007, 03:25 PM
Human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together - mass hysteria.
Tomosaur
September 8th, 2007, 03:27 PM
Good news - but not GREAT news. We really need a completely free flash/Silverlight competitor. Moonlight will still be using binary blobs for the decoding of media, and thus most Linux distributions probably won't be able to legally ship with Silverlight support anyway.
EDIT: woops, just took a look at Miguel's blog - he seems to be saying that people can still use Moonlight in a 100% free setup, but there's still some doubt over redistribution. Still, I guess it's not TOO bad having to manually install it - after all, we do the same for Flash and suchlike.
marco123
September 8th, 2007, 03:27 PM
Some one try it and report back. its like cold water I'm not going in first.
:lolflag:
jgrabham
September 8th, 2007, 03:32 PM
Dirty sons of b****s
I dont want any of MSs crap on my nice shiny ubuntu
23meg
September 8th, 2007, 04:09 PM
Dirty sons of b****s
I dont want any of MSs crap on my nice shiny ubuntu
If I'm not horribly wrong, with the exception of the "Silverlight media codecs" that Microsoft will provide, and Ubuntu certainly won't ship, Moonlight won't be any more "MS crap" than Tomboy and F-Spot are, assuming no patent and redistribution issues that may be specific to it will arise that are yet unforeseen.
Andrewie
September 8th, 2007, 04:39 PM
Dirty sons of b****s
I dont want any of MSs crap on my nice shiny ubuntu
:confused: save your self some time and just avoid this thread. Their providing Moonlight with official support so it remains open source and it ISN'T controled by Mircosoft, so relax jgrabham. Microsoft will be providing codecs to decode the media but everything else is open source. Personally, I really hate flash-player so right now I'll take anything. With Monolight x86, x64, ppc, and every other platform that Linux runs on will get support. Try to ignore the Microsoft part and focus on the good.
Gremlinzzz
September 8th, 2007, 05:29 PM
Now that i thought about it. this could be a good thing for linux users. now with competition adobe might move a little faster to improve flashplayer.
Dr. C
September 8th, 2007, 06:03 PM
Dirty sons of b****s
I dont want any of MSs crap on my nice shiny ubuntu
Even if it is released under a combination of the GPL, LGPL and MIT X11 license making it both Free Software and Open Source?
If we are taking of the prosperity Codecs on top of Moonlight, I can understand, but Free Software does not suddenly become propriety just because Microsoft is somehow involved in its creation.
nowshining
September 8th, 2007, 06:11 PM
doesn't this shine u guys on a clue about what is to come what is and who truly is who.. and what is now..
T_W
September 8th, 2007, 06:12 PM
This of course just begs the question why Miguel didn't just help out the gnash project. But then of course he could have helped out gcj/classpath and not hoisted "mono" upon the world.
I really don't understand the Ximian preoccupation with cloning crappy Microsoft technology (which is in turn just clones of other people's technologies).
:confused:
You would think they would all just switch to Vista and be done with it.
Andrewie
September 8th, 2007, 06:24 PM
This of course just begs the question why Miguel didn't just help out the gnash project. But then of course he could have helped out gcj/classpath and not hoisted "mono" upon the world.
I really don't understand the Ximian preoccupation with cloning crappy Microsoft technology (which is in turn just clones of other people's technologies).
:confused:
You would think they would all just switch to Vista and be done with it.
C# is a standard and a lot of business are moving to it and Java, not supporting it is stupid. I wouldn't say its crappy, because it looks a hell of a lot better then flash
stuh84
September 8th, 2007, 07:56 PM
Human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together - mass hysteria.
Ghostbusters :)
Sluipvoet
September 8th, 2007, 08:39 PM
The real question is not weither they make a silverlight version for Linux(either directly or indirectly via Moonlight),
But weither they will keep on supporting it, once it has conquered the market.
Remember InternetExplorer for Unix and Mac?
zipperback
September 8th, 2007, 08:48 PM
What do you think is it going too be writing home all the time or is it free?
http://www.tectonic.co.za/view.php?src=rss&id=1698
I don't know how anyone else really feels about this issue, but for me, unless it's 100% Open Source such as with the GPL, there simply isn't any way I am going to even consider installing ANYTHING from microsoft. I want to see the source code FIRST, before I install it, and I want 100% complete control over what it may or may not do on my system.
I may be paranoid, however that doesn't mean I'm stupid.
MS has a track record of buggy code, software which phones home, and an big brother attitude when it comes to what people can do with their computers.
All in all, until MS opts to use the GPL or a GPL compatible license, I am simply not going to use it. [-X
- Jack
- zipperback
DjBones
September 8th, 2007, 09:06 PM
cool, with moonlight, linux shouldn't skip a beat..
wonder if it will be able to be distributed if it grabs the codecs with a disclaimer after its installed (like mp3's)
st33med
September 8th, 2007, 10:45 PM
I'm suspicious about this...
They were creating an OOXML that is not compatible with Linux, now they are creating moonlight for Linux? Something's not right...
I'm not saying it is not a bad thing, I'm just wary of Microsoft's intentions with this software.
Andrewie
September 8th, 2007, 10:46 PM
cool, with moonlight, linux shouldn't skip a beat..
wonder if it will be able to be distributed if it grabs the codecs with a disclaimer after its installed (like mp3's)
I hope that's how it works, I would hate to go hunting for codecs
23meg
September 8th, 2007, 11:00 PM
I don't know how anyone else really feels about this issue, but for me, unless it's 100% Open Source such as with the GPL, there simply isn't any way I am going to even consider installing ANYTHING from microsoft.
They were creating an OOXML that is not compatible with Linux, now they are creating moonlight for Linux? Something's not right...
Moonlight isn't coming from Microsoft, but Novell, as part of the Mono project.
T_W
September 8th, 2007, 11:09 PM
C# is a standard and a lot of business are moving to it and Java, not supporting it is stupid.
C# is a standard is name only. All language changes come from Microsoft and only from Microsoft. Everyone else is along for the ride. Trying to get new open source apps written in it is essentiually abandoning control of the platform to Microsoft.
Let me know when a killer C# Windows application becomes available for the Linux desktop... and not Paint.NET doesn't cut it.
I wouldn't say its crappy, because it looks a hell of a lot better then flash
I'm not quite sure how you compare a programming language to a web multi-media plugin. I'm also not sure how in such a comparison you can come to the conclusion that one if "better looking".
zipperback
September 8th, 2007, 11:21 PM
Moonlight isn't coming from Microsoft, but Novell, as part of the Mono project.
Cough....... "SCO" (you do remember the whole SCO fiasco right?)
There was MS Money involved in that one too.
23meg
September 8th, 2007, 11:48 PM
Cough....... "SCO" (you do remember the whole SCO fiasco right?)
There was MS Money involved in that one too.
Your previous point was regarding the code itself, but this is not; does "MS money" automatically make code bad or malicious, even if it's under a free software license? I think it shouldn't.
iPower
September 8th, 2007, 11:52 PM
moonlight will be dead in 2 years
Ripfox
September 8th, 2007, 11:59 PM
Not a chance. It would make my nice clean OS feel all grimy. :-&
init1
September 9th, 2007, 12:02 AM
It's not something I really care about. I probably will never need it. And if I do, I'll get it. No big deal for me.
PatrickMay16
September 9th, 2007, 12:11 AM
It's not something I really care about. I probably will never need it. And if I do, I'll get it. No big deal for me.
Most sensible reply in the thread.
vexorian
September 9th, 2007, 06:57 AM
Moonlight is a totally unnecessary project . It is pseudo open source (yep, license it with GPL all you want, it will require propietary codecs to work at all) and its only function is to promote a technology the world does not need and was created with the sole objective of adding a microsoft tax for browsing the web.
http://blogs.sun.com/webmink/entry/the_lure
http://blogs.cnet.com/8301-13505_1-9773642-16.html
http://tieguy.org/blog/2007/09/06/simon-phipps-and-moonlight-give-me-an-excuse-to-post-a-cool-picture/
Miguel Icaza and Novell are some of the worst things that happened to the free software world.
triptoe
September 9th, 2007, 11:37 AM
moonlight / silverlight are the new medium. They will displace flash. At least that is my prediction. From a developers standpoint they are far superior than flash. Already in benchmarks it is showing an increase in performance over flash. In coding you will be able to use developer friendly languages like C#, python, boo etc....
The system is simply more elegant and LESS proprietary than flash because you will be able to use free codecs... like ogg theora, using gstreamer ETC.
This is a definite good thing for linux and the patent issue is more FUD than anything. the .NET itself which mono is based on... is actually at the mercy of sun because it could infringe on many of Java's patents. There is not going to be a patent war because Microsoft_would_lose
Kimm
September 9th, 2007, 12:41 PM
Is see this as positive. When I read that blogg post the OP posted, it looked really great! Far better than Flash even!
I'm still a bit nervous about it being a Microsoft product though. You never know, they might just win over Flash and then decide that Linux is no longer a wanted part of the project. Hopefully, this will lead to a more Open Internet experience though.
christopherZA
September 9th, 2007, 04:08 PM
Well as an Open-Source developer, the important thing is that Big Bad Bills M$ has made an about turn on a non M$ product - Moonlight is not M$.
A commitment to any Open-Source WEB 2 technology from even an evil empire like M$ is important to its existence. Without this support, developers would ignore the platform, thus killing it off.
M$ will contribute to Moonlight - not develop it ](*,)
I, on the other hand, will develop Web 2 apps for Moonlight as I will have the confidence that they will run on multi-platforms.
KriTenKs
September 9th, 2007, 04:17 PM
Well as an Open-Source developer, the important thing is that Big Bad Bills M$ has made an about turn on a non M$ product - Moonlight is not M$.
A commitment to any Open-Source WEB 2 technology from even an evil empire like M$ is important to its existence. Without this support, developers would ignore the platform, thus killing it off.
M$ will contribute to Moonlight - not develop it
I, on the other hand, will develop Web 2 apps for Moonlight as I will have the confidence that they will run on multi-platforms.
Finally someone who sees it as i do.(As a developer) As a user though im glad their using the official codecs because i just want it to work. Just work.
forrestcupp
September 9th, 2007, 05:34 PM
I think if Microsoft offered some of you $1000, you wouldn't take it.
Things aren't bad just because they are from MS.
vexorian
September 9th, 2007, 05:46 PM
Well as an Open-Source developer, the important thing is that Big Bad Bills M$ has made an about turn on a non M$ product - Moonlight is not M$.
A commitment to any Open-Source WEB 2 technology from even an evil empire like M$ is important to its existence. Without this support, developers would ignore the platform, thus killing it off.
M$ will contribute to Moonlight - not develop it ](*,)
I, on the other hand, will develop Web 2 apps for Moonlight as I will have the confidence that they will run on multi-platforms.
This proves my point, Mono and novell are doing MS marketing job for what reason, why do we need to depend on an MS invention? As a developer I prefer to rely on truly open source platforms that may not change its licenses later or get new patents or depend on closed source codecs (heck that cannot be open source) Because I don't want random companies to decide the future of the software I make, that's the reason I wouldn't use silverlight at all. In the future MS will be able to tax me for using their "cool" platform and also taxing users for playing it.
As much as MS will not develop moonlight, moonlight is gonna be dependent on Microsoft's closed source codecs they will later be able to relicense or ask royalties for them.
From a pure technical perspective: Silverlight is the best of breed on this space. I like it, and it matches my opinions. Maybe not everyone's opinions, but mine and some others.
This shows that the intentions are to make it widestream and not simply to support Linux, that's the reason moonlight exists, advertise microsoft's new world domination plan.
In the comments to Miguel's blog, a commenter asks about using or developing Moonlight:
"What about microsoft patents? If I create my own linux distro or I use a distro that is not mainstream or just doesn't have a deal with the daemon.. err Microsoft.. like Novell has.. Will I have to suffer the shadow of Microsoft patents over Silverlight when using or developing Moonlight?"
Miguel's complete response:
"Not as long as you get/download Moonlight from Novell which will include patent coverage."
To those that don't believe this is a patent mine, as "open source" as moonlight is, you can only get it from one source else MS will be able to sue you, excellent. (And this means: ubuntu will not be able to bring this "open source" software without paying fees to microsoft.
I think if Microsoft offered some of you $1000, you wouldn't take it.
We don't need yet another closed platform for web developers, can't web developers simply stick to standards?
Edit: just found this jewel:
I do not blame them. OOXML is a superb standard and yet, it has been
FUDed so badly by its competitors that serious people believe that
there is something fundamentally wrong with it. This is at a time when
OOXML as a spec is in much better shape than any other spec on that
space.
this guy must be some kind of MS developed cyborg to ever say that. Please save gnome from him.
:::
September 9th, 2007, 08:58 PM
As a developer I prefer to rely on truly open source platforms
And here lies the problem, in my opinion: There is no truly open alternative in this case!
SVG is great in theory, but no browser I know of implements it to an extend that would make it useful as a platform for interactive Websites
Ajax is essentially a hack, abusing HTML for something it was never meant to be.
What remains, are Flash and Silverlight. And in my opinion, Silverlight is better than Flash - both as in "more free" and in "technically better". And I somehow don't think that Microsoft's sole purpose is to harm Linux, even when they seem to support it.
adewale
September 9th, 2007, 09:33 PM
Okay i am fairly new to linux and what am particular about is the story of Internet explorer for Unix, am feeling this support microsoft is giving to Open source is just a marketing strategy. By the time it gets the targeted audience it desires, it might just as well drop support for it just like for unix
Andrewie
September 9th, 2007, 09:54 PM
Okay i am fairly new to linux and what am particular about is the story of Internet explorer for Unix, am feeling this support microsoft is giving to Open source is just a marketing strategy. By the time it gets the targeted audience it desires, it might just as well drop support for it just like for unix
I understand what everyone is saying but I don't think Microsoft can play their same games anymore. Novell, Red Hat, Sun, Ibm, etc they all have very strong voices, if Microsoft tries then something they'll be sure to speak out.
triptoe
September 9th, 2007, 11:01 PM
This proves my point, Mono and novell are doing MS marketing job for what reason, why do we need to depend on an MS invention? As a developer I prefer to rely on truly open source platforms that may not change its licenses later or get new patents or depend on closed source codecs (heck that cannot be open source) Because I don't want random companies to decide the future of the software I make, that's the reason I wouldn't use silverlight at all. In the future MS will be able to tax me for using their "cool" platform and also taxing users for playing it.
As much as MS will not develop moonlight, moonlight is gonna be dependent on Microsoft's closed source codecs they will later be able to relicense or ask royalties for them.
You will be able to use free codecs like ogg theora. I think that proves that statement false.
This shows that the intentions are to make it widestream and not simply to support Linux, that's the reason moonlight exists, advertise microsoft's new world domination plan.
That is something any pragmattic programmer would say... like linus. He doesn't believe moonlight or mono represents a threat to linux... no more than Linus thinks hacking the kernel for linus represents a threat because it might violate some patent somewhere... there are work arounds. And it is a superior technology.
To those that don't believe this is a patent mine, as "open source" as moonlight is, you can only get it from one source else MS will be able to sue you, excellent. (And this means: ubuntu will not be able to bring this "open source" software without paying fees to microsoft.
I sincerely doubt that. Ubuntu already mono apps like tomboy by default. Why spread FUD?
Edit: just found this jewel:
this guy must be some kind of MS developed cyborg to ever say that. Please save gnome from him.
He is the one that started gnome lol. He is on the same side as us... he is just more enlightened than some others.
adewale
September 9th, 2007, 11:06 PM
I understand what everyone is saying but I don't think Microsoft can play their same games anymore. Novell, Red Hat, Sun, Ibm, etc they all have very strong voices, if Microsoft tries then something they'll be sure to speak out.
Well i just hope so, it's their program and they have some rights reserved and they could simply give the same excuse they had for IE.
tehkain
September 10th, 2007, 01:10 AM
"Supports Linux" is bad wording. "there is a FREE Implementation on gnu/linux that will lag behind any advancement because MS refuses to use or create open standards" is the actual situation.
Tho MS did help by giving the project a little here and there, but truthfully compared to what they could have done it is still very lame.
Bart_D
September 10th, 2007, 01:15 AM
I read about this a few months ago and ALMOST could not wait. Just found out that it does not work for Opera.
http://www.microsoft.com/silverlight/system-requirements.aspx
GTH
Andrewie
September 10th, 2007, 02:35 AM
I read about this a few months ago and ALMOST could not wait. Just found out that it does not work for Opera.
http://www.microsoft.com/silverlight/system-requirements.aspx
GTH
If it supports firefox/mozilla family then it should support opera, because opera has support for netscape plugins. If it doesn't support opera I'm going to have to switch sides on this flamewar, I need my opera.....:(
danny joe ritchie
September 10th, 2007, 02:38 AM
Dirty sons of b****s
I dont want any of MSs crap on my nice shiny ubuntu
+2:lolflag:
Wiebelhaus
September 10th, 2007, 12:46 PM
Dirty sons of b****s
I dont want any of MSs crap on my nice shiny ubuntu
I agree , "I Ain't effin going anywhere near that."
vexorian
September 10th, 2007, 03:28 PM
I sincerely doubt that. Ubuntu already mono apps like tomboy by default. Why spread FUD?
How is it FUD? It is Miguel's own words, you'll have to download moonlight from novell if you don't want to get sued AND that's what Miguel himself has said, not me. I was not talking about mono, but moonlight.
He is the one that started gnome lol. He is on the same side as us... he is just more enlightened than some others.
Two things you can say about such an OOXML supporter:
- He has been bought by Microsoft.
or
- He is dumb.
Since I doubt Miguel Icaza really is dumb, and from your reply you seem to also agree, you know what my conclussion is.
T_W
September 10th, 2007, 04:37 PM
Edit: just found this jewel:
He is the one that started gnome lol. He is on the same side as us... he is just more enlightened than some others.
Miguel has always had an unhealthy fascination for Microsoft technology, adopting it even when there are freer, better, multi-platform alternatives already available.
Bonobo, Mono, OOXML, Silverlight.
I just don't understand that mindset and I really don't understand why so many people defend it.:confused::confused:
Steveway
September 10th, 2007, 04:54 PM
Miguel has always had an unhealthy fascination for Microsoft technology, adopting it even when there are freer, better, multi-platform alternatives already available.
Bonobo, Mono, OOXML, Silverlight.
I just don't understand that mindset and I really don't understand why so many people defend it.:confused::confused:
Whoo, lol.
I know back about half a year I had a lot of problems concerning Bonobo, dunno what exactly but it was Bonobos fault.
I always hated F-Spot and Tomboy, and of course ZMD, because they use so much memory and are so sloooooooow.
OOXML, I use ODF.
And don't forget the cursed Silverlight.
Microsoft's newest attempt at pushing the w3c-standards out of the way and implementing their own thing, so noone sees how crappy IE is.
What is that guys name? Miguel? Show him to me, I think someone needs to get a slap in the face.
hardyn
September 10th, 2007, 04:55 PM
I would not at all be suprised to see an ms-office port for linux in coming years...
Wiebelhaus
September 10th, 2007, 08:20 PM
I would not at all be suprised to see an ms-office port for linux in coming years...
only with a DNA sample and face recognition scan and multiple rectal cavity searches.
vexorian
September 11th, 2007, 03:27 PM
How is it FUD? It is Miguel's own words, you'll have to download moonlight from novell if you don't want to get sued AND that's what Miguel himself has said, not me. I was not talking about mono, but moonlight.
And now novell itself has confirmed :
Bruce Lowry of Novell’s PR team here. You state in this piece that the only Linux Silverlight will run on is SUSE Linux Enterprise (citing, incidentally, a site called Boycott Novell, which one can surmise from its name is not objective). This isn’t correct. Using Moonlight, Silverlight will run on any Linux distro supported by Mono, which is most of the major distros. It’s true that, under the terms of our agreements with Microsoft, only SUSE Linux Enterprise will be able to bundle Moonlight into the distribution.
Not even openSUSE...
http://blogs.cnet.com/5530-13505_1-0-10.html?forumID=166&messageID=2490312&threadID=228078
the_darkside_986
September 11th, 2007, 04:11 PM
Sounds like another irritating mechanism to mess up the web browsing experience. Flash, Java, .NET, all are annoying in their own ways. Maybe the free software community should invent our own technology for web apps, and implement it in some websites, and tell people to download it to view the site's enhanced multimedia features. (No site should ever be one big, clunky Flash applet.) It would be multi-platform, of course. I do not think it is very healthy in the long run to simply make free clones of proprietary, patented technology.
In fact, I think the free software community should be even more innovative in general. I'm not claiming that we are always copying existing technologies, I mean, there are some innovations, such as ruby or Lua scripting language. But we should invent even more stuff and encourage its adoption, including web applet technology. There is no point in sitting around waiting for Java to be truly free, and even if gnash actually becomes usable, what would prevent Adobe from trying to sue the developers?
kadath
September 11th, 2007, 05:42 PM
Mono and Silverlight are just a Trojan Horse for MS to squeeze their code into Linux and give it cancer, and Icaza is their head cheerleader. The more I learn about him, the less I like him.
Obviously MS knows that Linux will someday replace Windows on the enterprise desktop, so why not acquire the top enterprise distro and make it the "MS-approved Linux"? SuSE is dead, and OpenSuSE probably won't last formuch longer.
On the desktop, it's obvious that MS wants "patent protection" money from the big desktop-oriented distros, thus the deals with Linspire and Xandros. They tried to taint Ubuntu too, but Shuttleworth is too smart to fall for that garbage, thankfully.
Frankly, I'm shunning Mono and Silverlight/Moonlight, and I advise others to do so as well. Anything with MS DNS is inherently diseased.
23meg
September 11th, 2007, 06:39 PM
It’s true that, under the terms of our agreements with Microsoft, only SUSE Linux Enterprise will be able to bundle Moonlight into the distribution.
If this is and is likely to remain the case, I'm putting Silverlight / Moonlight on my ignore list.
Side note: GNOME discourages Bonobo for new applications, and it will probably be phased out entirely.
the_darkside_986
September 11th, 2007, 06:50 PM
I am still thinking of the idea of a free software original web applet system. I've been thinking of this idea even before Silverlight was mentioned.
I have learned a small amount of Xlib, and some openGL, but I am wondering, does anyone know of tutorials on how to write a firefox plugin (NOT extension)? All search results describe how to make an extension, but to pursue this idea, I must learn how to make a firefox plugin.
My plan is to implement openGL-accelerated web apps whose language is written in Lua scripts. While we are trying to get gnash caught up to Flash 9, well, caught up to a usable application, Adobe will be adding features, leaving us in the dust. My idea is to create a separate, original concept that doesn't necessarily contain all the features of existing proprietary choices but still is equally viable of a solution.
I know of a tutorials on how to integrate X11 and openGL, and how to integrate LUA scripts with C/C++ applications. I've also experimented with designing a virtual machine, but that isn't important since Lua libraries provide the virtual machine backend. All I need now to get started is information on how to design a plugin for Mozilla browsers.
triptoe
September 11th, 2007, 06:53 PM
If this is and is likely to remain the case, I'm putting Silverlight / Moonlight on my ignore list.
Side note: GNOME discourages Bonobo for new applications, and it will probably be phased out entirely.
It's not true....
If they want patent coverage, it must be downloaded from Novell. If
they do not want patent coverage, they can distribute it (Its all open
source).
Andrewie
September 11th, 2007, 07:25 PM
wtf....not even OpenSuse....ok ya screw this I don't care anymore, back to my craptastic flash.
evil_cat
December 2nd, 2007, 06:31 PM
LOL me too :)
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.2 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.