Microsoft Silverlight – Light up the web. Really?
Note from the author: apologies if this post sounds like a Microsoft marketing campaign, but I am really excited about this technology!
Let’s say you have a website and you want to give your visitors the experience edge.
The media experience can be improved by using Microsoft Silverlight on your website. Some of the features include:
- Vector graphics with light, degrade and other effects
- Overlaying your HTML with Silverlight content
- React to keyboard input
- Video overlay
- Real-time data
- AJAX
Some impressive examples can be found on the Silverlight website. Here’s a few from the top of my head:
- Single coloured backgrounds? Forget about them! Create amazing forms, patterns, shades and colour rich backgrounds
- Animation effects, including menu transition, drag and drop, zoom, pop-ups, animated drop down, 3D wheel and “page turning”
- Better user experience patterns
Microsoft is working on Silverlight 2, the next generation of .NET media experiences and rich interactive applications for the Web.
How does Silverlight improve the Internet user media experience? It provides a cross-browser, cross-platform and cross-device plug-in to all Internet browsers.
You only have to install the plug-in once to enable Silverlight applications. Thereafter all Silverlight enabled websites will run on your favourite browser.
So is it an Adobe Flash replacement?
No. It is a different technology. Both can run on your website simultaneously.
With Silverlight you are not constrained to a “box” like Flash is. You can think “outside the box” and integrate animation and effects with your current HTML.
What are Silverlight websites?
Regular websites… with a twist!
Silverlight enhances media experience. If you already have a website you can easily add Silverlight to it.
If a website looks like a complex Flash application, it might not be: it was lit up with Silverlight.
Stop the yapping… I’m ready to try! Where are the tools?
The development tools are Microsoft’s:
- Visual Studio 2008 for developers
- Expression Web for designers
Both share the same project files. Developers and designers always have the latest version of the code.
With a good version control software the design/development experience can be even more productive.
Follow the setup instructions on “Get Started”
Installed! Now what do I tell my creative and dev team?
Tell them to break all HTML boundaries and free the World Wide Web to the next generation of content, the next generation on user experience.
Can I pretend I did not read this?
Whatever you do, wherever you go, you can’t run. Silverlight will crawl the web like a big old spider and will transform old webs into amazing, rich, beautiful, sensual and wonderful new “silver webs”.
It is what nature intended.
Telmo wrote this on 18.03.08 –
It's filed in the Design, Development, Marketing, User experience box
On March 18th, 2008 at 8:31 pm, Matthew Hill responded:
“To explore the world’s greatest rock memorabilia collection in mind-boggling detail, please install Microsoft Silverlight.”
Holy shit. Not this crap again. What happened to the last 7 years of developing Web Standards?
Along with the IE8 target switching, I’m beginning to think that MS have the death of Web Standards as their next big project.
Deep, deep sigh.
IE7 still barely gets enough of CSS right, yet you’re excited about MS developing yet ANOTHER proprietary tech that arguably won’t add much but more than frustrating pointless gimmickry to the web?
This isn’t what nature, or Tim Berners Lee, intended at all!
Seriously Telmo, how can you support this?
On March 19th, 2008 at 9:38 am, Paul Burgess responded:
OK - I checked out Expression Web - I get ‘the plug-in performed an illegal operation, restart your browser’ - three times. Try as I might to get excited about Silverlight, it’s very hard, or nearly impossible to. The last thing the web needs is another ‘page turning’ script.
The showcase reads as ‘do everything you already can with web pages - but with Silverlight instead’.
On March 19th, 2008 at 10:06 am, Robert Douglas responded:
Saw a demo of some Silverlight stuff about a year ago and was really impressed. It still scares me though…
I’ll definitely be doing more investigation but it feels like we’re going to go through all the pain of the 90’s again when Flash came out and was put in the hands of amateurs. (Not that I didn’t partake a little myself).
On March 19th, 2008 at 10:59 am, Rob responded:
“Tell them to break all HTML boundaries and free the World Wide Web to the next generation of content, the next generation on user experience.”
Nah, sounds nothing like a Microsoft press release…ahem
On March 24th, 2008 at 10:36 pm, Telmo Carlos responded:
I support giving visitors the experience edge. Improve the design and maximize the user experience on the web.
Flash, Moo tools, Scriptaculous and other libraries like xajax and YUI (Yahoo User Interface) are commonly used across the web.
Silverlight has a new approach: it enhances the HTML and is not limited to a “box” like Flash. It’s a great idea!
Might not pick up as others did but I do give it credit.
Too bad it still does not run as smoothly as it could.
On March 25th, 2008 at 2:48 pm, Matthew Hill responded:
Yes, but all the libraries you mention leverage existing technologies that have become part of the “web standards” package. Silverlight is proprietary and requires a plugin and completely goes against the standards movement.
Like flash, I’m sure that in the hands of sensitive, professional developers it can do wonderful things that don’t leave people out in the cold if they choose not to install it. But it also suffers from all the same problems Flash has: closed source, excessive visual gimmickry for little gain, inapproriate usage, difficult to make fully accessible, etc etc.
In a time where more and more people are embracing standards and the web is opening up to be a flexible platform, why do we want to encourage companies — especially Microsoft — to create more ways of restricting people through their own technogoloy or vision?
It makes no sense to me.
On March 25th, 2008 at 2:49 pm, Matthew Hill responded:
Excuse the typos above: sleepy fingers today!
On March 25th, 2008 at 7:25 pm, Will McInnes responded:
I’ve asked a Microsoft Silverlight evangelist to join the conversation and am hoping he will!
On March 27th, 2008 at 10:32 am, Telmo Carlos responded:
I understand where you are coming from regarding the standards movement.
In my opinion Silverlight is a step forward.
Maybe not for the standards movement but for its concept and the way it naturally “mingles” with the HTML.
It might have all the features of a closed source application, but in its essence it is coded using open source XAML (http://www.xaml.net/) and runs on JavaScript. Please see: http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/cc163404.aspx
As you know we make our websites accessible so no one is left in the cold, so I believe with Silverlight the user experience can be enhanced.
I will not go into the details of the Microsoft’s business model, but I think Silverlight is not as closed as other applications – especially Adobe Flash.
Silverlight filled a gap between HTML and Flash. I believe eventually web developers will come across it and who knows: it might be bigger than Flash one day.
On March 27th, 2008 at 8:58 pm, Will McInnes responded:
Isn’t it also the case that most innovation alienates many to reward a few? Then, as that innovation diffuses and becomes more widely adopted, it becomes more accessible, more available, better supported?
On March 31st, 2008 at 12:09 pm, Telmo Carlos responded:
I agree with Will.
Also, Web design needs to be pushed forward and Silverlight is a reflection of that.
On March 31st, 2008 at 5:15 pm, Matthew Hill responded:
I agree the web should always progress, I’m just not sure this is really it. Is silverlight a relefection of the need for progress, or is it actual progress?
Does silverlight run on mobile platforms? How does it work with assistive technologies? What happens to Silverlight content enabled sites for users who don’t install the plugin?
Clearly, I’m playing devil’s advocate. I can be very cautious regarding new web technologies, especially when they are closed source, and especially when provided by a company who have a very poor history when it comes to supporting web standards. IE development languished and held back more sophisticated web design for over 5 years, why do you think I’m so cynical?
Cynicism may not be positive, it may not be touchy feely, but it’s an entirely understandable response given MS history in this arena.
On April 2nd, 2008 at 11:02 pm, Jenni responded:
I’ve been pondering this one for a while, trying to explore my initial antipathy towards Silverlight.
I realised that as ever it’s unwise to isolate technology from use. By this, I mean that ‘maximising the user experience’ isn’t dependent on the use of new technologies but rather gauging who is using the product and what for.
For example, if I was to build a website to sell handbags I need to appeal to my target market by providing them with the optimal shopping experience. This might include the ability to compare bags, find ones by brand, colour, style, price. My customers might look at a lot of bags to decide which they like and want to see multiple views. Delivering this experience sleekly, with an immersive interface would help my customers like and remember my site - making them more likely to buy from me instead of my competitor. Using AJAX might help deliver this experience. Check out the ‘visual search’ on Like.com for an example of what I mean. Being a combination of standard internet technologies, my customers wouldn’t need to download anything before using my site either. (As I remember Boo.com didn’t last long…)
In contrast an online newspaper relies on the quality of it’s written content. In this instance I need to help my readers find items of interest quickly and easily, make it comfortable to read and then lead them through into other related items. I don’t need the interface to be immersive - because my content is. guardian.co.uk is a great example of this - as is the new-ish Times Online.
My problem with this sudden enthusiasm for Silverlight is that there no reference to when its use might be appropriate. Imagine the newspaper site built with Flash - it’d be rubbish. But that’s what happened when Flash was new and shiny. Frustrated by the limitations of HTML - and the lack of control over the aesthetics - designers leapt in and built everything in Flash.
I can imagine that if I was developing a Rich Internet Application or something that was entertainment based maybe I’d look at Silverlight - if there was something really special on offer maybe my users would be prepared to download it, but any barrier to use would have to be costed and assessed.
On April 7th, 2008 at 10:42 am, Telmo Carlos responded:
@Matt: Silverlight is Microsoft’s but it works cross browser and cross device, which is a good thing.
Your thoughts crossed my mind but as you said, in the hands of sensitive, professional developers, we can make the best of this tool.
@Jenni: I agree the user experience depends on many things (not only design and technology).
Silverlight would be the technology that could improve the look and feel of the site and even bits of the functionality.
Its role begins from the moment the designer is creating a site background. And it can be extended to entertainment sites, as it has many uses.
There is an impact, yes. Needs to be assessed, sure. But this is something we can use on a shop to make the user experience better as an enhancement.
@both: The goal in my mind is to keep the existing functionality but if the user has Silverlight installed he would, for instance, see a better graphical interface and have access to enhanced functionalities like zooming on products or “drag” them to the basket.
Used properly it’s a bit like JavaScript, but cross browser.
If we generalize the idea and think of it as another JavaScript library (no plug-ins), this would be a tremendous tool, but we would end up with all those cross-browsers issues.
I like the idea that Silverlight brings a new layer that does not exist yet on web development: something beyond the realm of HTML/CSS and that breaks the Adobe Flash rectangular boundaries.
What do you think?
On April 7th, 2008 at 2:21 pm, Matthew Hill responded:
I think I’d like to see Internet Explorer get CSS right first… :-)
On April 7th, 2008 at 3:00 pm, Telmo Carlos responded:
Microsoft is better at setting standards than actually following them.
It might be a good argument for Silverlight success. :-)
On April 8th, 2008 at 6:15 pm, Brian Warshaw responded:
For starters:
- I’m an avid Mac user.
- I enjoy programming in Actionscript 3.0 for the Flash platform.
- I hate most of the products that MS has ever released
BUT:
- After spending serious time in Java and PHP, I am enjoying the heck out of learning C#.NET, which is, most of the time, much more intuitive and efficient than either of the two aforementioned technologies (I’m talking about a coding perspective–I haven’t compared performance).
- I am excited by Silverlight. Portable multimedia formats like Flash and Silverlight are not gimmicks, as one commenter suggests above. Sites like YouTube, Pandora, and many others are not even feasible without technologies like this. Yes, it requires a plugin to use it, but can your browser render an interactive movie clip otherwise? No? So is the better alternative simply never to use such technologies because they don’t have perpetual native support?
Flash has been misused in the past and the present. It will be misused in the future. But the same could be said for elements of HTML markup, JavaScript, CSS, etc., etc., etc.
You can complain about the proprietary nature of these formats all you like, but until an open-source alternative comes anywhere close in terms of performance and capability, there’s no point in complaining. Not everything needs to be free and open-source. Believe it or not, some companies actually try to suck in a nickel or two. Your wanting something to be free and open souce will never be a good enough reason for such companies to stop earning from the developments that they make.
On April 8th, 2008 at 6:37 pm, Matthew Hill responded:
@Brian warshaw: I didn’t suggest that Flash and Silverlight were gimmicks, I suggested that Silverlight would be used as Flash has often been used: to add pointless gimmickry to websites. That is a poor use of technology, but as you rightly point out, it’s not exclusive to the tech: others have implemented poor decisions in web development using open standards.
Bad, inaccessible and restrictive websites will continue to be made, whether using a proprietary technology or not. As a standards advocate, I happen to not be in favour of those kinds of sites: just because I don’t agree with the way they are implemented, it doesn’t mean I’m saying they shouldn’t exist. I can choose to use them or not.
My intiial reaction towards Silverlight was (and still is) negative because I can see the early Flash days being repeated all over again. I have yet to be convinced otherwise — It was a shame that the initial samples I saw posted by Telmo had no keyboard support and gave no alternate content if the plugin didn’t exist: that is NOT how to use the technology if you want people like me on board and supportive of it.
On April 8th, 2008 at 8:45 pm, Brian Warshaw responded:
@Matthew
I’m all about standards–I’ve always built websites with a strong desire to support them. I’m also a firm believer in accessibility on the web; however, I think there is too often too square a view (I’m borrowing from Telmo’s idea about Flash’s biggest limitation) about how certain content should be made accessible to all.
We absolutely should seek ways to make these formats as accessible as possible, but in many cases, the content is, to a large degree, lost if it is not in its original media-rich format. Let me get it out of the way–I’m not advocating text content sites that go Flash for the glam. I’m talking about sites like homestarrunner.com, or even the Hard Rock site with Silverlight. There is no useful way to provide alternate content for these types of things. Yes, the developer should program detection so that the missing plugin can be sought and acquired, but what would the real benefit be in providing a text alternative to Strongbad? Serving text in lieu of the Hard Rock memorabilia site would completely defeat the purpose. The site doesn’t exist to simply tell you what memorabilia is in the collection (I’d bet that exists elsewhere)–it exists to give users a quick, colorful, lush representation of the memorabilia within that collection. I couldn’t see the value in having an alternate version of that–an explanation of what would appear if the plugin were present, yes, but not an attempt at replicating in text what was rendered in a media-rich format initially.
I absolutely agree that Silverlight will bring plenty of examples reminiscent of Flash’s early days (and let’s be honest, Flash’s early days are still ever-present as far as poor implementation is concerned), but I think I disagree about certain instances that you would consider bad implementation. But I respect your arguing your point clearly, and the fact that I don’t feel I can completely refute it is a testament to its validity.
I don’t feel like checking right now (I’m lazy), but are you the gent who recently commented about the Write page issues in the new WordPress?
On April 8th, 2008 at 8:54 pm, Brian Warshaw responded:
…that would be on Zeldman’s blog, btw.
On April 8th, 2008 at 9:25 pm, Matthew Hill responded:
Wordpress Write Rant? Yes, that would be me.
Re: Silverlight:
Your point about making inherently “inaccessible” content accessible is one I struggle with regularly. Having not yet been in a position to work on a site like Hard Rock, I haven’t yet had the delight of trying to find a usable solution that works for everyone, regardless of their platform or capability. So my view on it is rather theoretical and probably ill informed. I can be a bit of a purist sometimes. :-)
I may well need to think about this some more.
On April 8th, 2008 at 9:43 pm, Brian Warshaw responded:
Don’t feel bad–most views on the Internet are ill-informed :-)
As for your “rant,” it was refreshing to read. The Zeldman fans often flock to anything with his name attached to it and call it gold. It can be somewhat annoying. If it weren’t for Jeffrey’s content, I certainly wouldn’t visit the site, because the discussion is often just a cermonial falling in line with what his opinions are, particularly when the topic is design-related.
On April 9th, 2008 at 12:19 am, Matthew Hill responded:
I certainly share your views there! :-)
…hence my extreme disappointment at some of the ill-conceived ideas in the newest WP upgrade. It’s not a good advert for Happy Cog’s IA expertise in my very humble opinion.
On April 9th, 2008 at 2:22 am, Brian Warshaw responded:
I haven’t tried the new version, as I’m slowly building my own application for personal use, but from what you described (and certainly, nobody challenged it), it sounds like it would be a headache. I don’t know, I never thought there was much of a problem with the old WP Admin. I had great success using it. There were a few things that could have been more obvious, but I was surprised to hear that a complete overall was called for.
On April 9th, 2008 at 10:00 am, Trevor May responded:
Telmo: “Microsoft is better at setting standards than actually following them.”
Wow. I can’t let this one go without a comment! Microsoft are less about setting standards than creating their own proprietary attributes and forcing everyone else to adapt because of the sheer size of their market share.
This makes no ones lives easier. Designers, developers or the end-user. At all. Ever.
On April 9th, 2008 at 12:45 pm, Telmo Carlos responded:
@Matt, @Brian: great conversation. It’s good to see the progress on this.
@Trevor: I agree. I believe that are many ways to set standards. I don’t think Microsoft’s way is a good way, but because there are so many developers using it, it becomes a “standard”.
But again, I don’t want to go into MS policies…
@All: I have worked with disabled people in the past (visually and mobility impaired in particular) and I witness how hard it can be to navigate the web.
Accessibility can be time consuming if you don’t act soon, so it should be planned from day 1.
It is impossible to have the best of all worlds (including mobile and widget worlds). It is natural that in some projects, some worlds are not as accessible as others.
But we are getting there and each project we made the lessons learned are applied to the next.
Royal National Institute of Blind People - RNIB
We will work closely with RNIB for one of our clients that need an AA standard multilingual multi-site eCommerce solution.
Look forward to know their point of view. This will improve our development processes and will help made our websites even more accessible in the future.
Back to the subject
Regarding Silverlight, I think some features - like vector graphics - you can isolate and make accessible and other not - like dragging stuff and image zooming (Hard Rock example).
You need to separate the wheat from the chaff and made the best of it.
I think is it more accessible than Flash because it is easy to find replacement for some elements (like images instead of vector graphics, etc.). That is a step forward.
In the end you always have to find replacements for some elements, but I see there is a great effort to make Silverlight accessible.
Links
Here are some more links I stumbled upon:
A must see: Accessibility in Silverlight 2
Programming for Silverlight: a Q&A with Microsoft
Quote: “Because XAML is text, Silverlight applications will be easy to make accessible, Smith says”
Silverlight 2, Accessibility, Section 508, etc.
Automation and accessibility in Silverlight and IE8
Accessibility in Silverlight 2
On April 13th, 2008 at 1:30 am, John Dowdell responded:
… and an accessibility link in return:
http://access.adobe.com/
(You might want to check with the RNIB too….)
jd/adobe
On April 14th, 2008 at 2:29 pm, Jenni responded:
Noticed that the Guardian tech blog is reporting: ‘WebGui 6.0.1 was launched last week. What’s new (as of last month) is the move to combine WebGui with Silverlight 2. “We are going for a fully enabled enterprise platform for creating on-line Vista like applications” http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/04/11/the_webgui_way_to_develop_silverlight_2_applications_one_day.html
On May 1st, 2008 at 10:31 pm, Ash responded:
The more the merrier I say… Anything that can make the web more engaging, more beautiful and more usable gets my vote….. Having said that, I’m always mildly suspicious of Microsoft Products…..
Maybe they are gearing up to use it alongside their new Surface stuff?
http://www.microsoft.com/surface/index.html
On May 2nd, 2008 at 9:56 am, Matthew Hill responded:
“Vista like applications”. I’m turned off already.
On May 6th, 2008 at 4:32 pm, Telmo Carlos responded:
Wonder if we ever are going to have the keyboard and mouse “surfaced” to the table when we get to our desk…
On May 7th, 2008 at 3:58 pm, Ash responded:
I wonder how blind people use Surface…. Also, how the hell do the visually impaired use an i-phone?
All this touchscreeny stuff is all very well, but surely blind folks will suffer
On May 9th, 2008 at 8:47 am, Matthew Hill responded:
Hey, this is the brave new world of Web 2.0 — you’re supposed to ignore things like good accessibility! Everybody knows that!
;-)
On June 4th, 2009 at 9:47 pm, brudinie responded:
Silverlight is a joke.
When Sir Tim created the internet he did so with the philosophy that information was to be made available via standards so that it would work independently of platform.
So basically, Silverlight is nothing less than a Microsoft tactic to try to own the web- pretty much the same tactic as integrating a poor standards compliant browser (ie) in to their operating system. The majority of conscientious developers want to develop apps that will work on anything and thats why standards compliant browsers have eaten in to Microsoft’s market share. IE8 isn’t bad standards wise but still has a long way to go in catching up to other browsers on the ACID3 test.
I use Ubuntu - Moonlight (the Novel version) is rubbish and will always be 1.5 versions behind Silverlight- hardly any silversh1te sites work correctly with it.
All you lazy developers who can’t be bothered to learn w3c standards technologies make me sick,
Browser plugins (Flash, Silverlight, etc) are not Web Technologies - they are not ratified by the w3c.