Microsoft vs Adobe: Comparable Runtimes
DIGG IT!
15
Comments
Published
Tuesday, February 26, 2008
at
11:13 AM
.
I keep seeing everyone (press, bloggers) mix up the comparable technology offerings between Microsoft and Adobe. Not that they really compare in quality but rather the deployment targets are identical. There is a huge difference between a browser plug-in and a cross-platform desktop runtime.
Here is how things are comparable:
Web Browser Plug-ins:
Adobe Flash Player 9.0 (soon 10.0)
vs.
Microsoft SilverLight 1.0 (soon 2.0)
Cross-Platform Desktop Runtimes:
Adobe AIR 1.0
vs.
Microsoft ________ (aka ... nada, zip zilch)
Note: Microsoft doesn't have a cross-platform desktop runtime and has not shown one publicly at this time.
In other words:
Adobe Flash Player 9.0 is to the web browser
as
Microsoft Silverlight 1.0 is to the web browser.
Adobe AIR 1.0 is to the desktop
as
Microsoft ________ is to the desktop.
Hope that helps clear the AIR!
Ted :)
"in other words ... "
"Microsoft" + WPF + " is to the desktop"
sure, only for vista ...
Just a guess, but perhaps the _____ is Windows??? (Remember, Windows can run on the Mac too.)
And since I like to vision the direction of things, what about extending the chart:
ms: word.. adobe: buzzword
ms: excel.. adobe: blist
ms: powerpoint.. adobe: sliderocket
ms: netmeeting.. adobe: brio
ms: fettered mess.. adobe: blazeds
Oh, I get it... we should be comparing Silverlight with Flex, and AIR with Visual Studio, is that what you're saying here...? ;-)
jd/adobe
Scott Barnes in 3...2...1... ;-)
The Cross-Platform part of the desktop runtime is the key. You could argue that Silverlight and AIR are similar on a windows environment, since Silverlight is .Net and you could potentially use the same (or very similar) codebase for a .Net desktop app.
I'm by no means a .Net developer, so I'm speculating complete on my very light experience with .Net and colleagues conversations. That said, I would be surprised if deploying a Silverlight application to a windows desktop is as easy as deploying a Flex application to any Desktop via AIR.
Beau
Microsoft WPF? In other words... WTF.
wpf runs on xp too. too bad not on linux, but maybe mono will support it [anyone uses that stuff anyways?].
on the other hand, flash is maybe more equivalent with silverlight 1.1 [alpha], because that has c# behind, not javascript. anyway, silverlight in the current state sucks hard for serious development, for example there are no components, and you need ms blend too to design for it.
adobe technology is used everywhere, i dont really think that silverlight would come near.
on the other hand, i don't really believe in AIR, people are just too lazy & lame to install another runtime. just my .02
Wow, this is brilliant. You impressed me :)
Your explanation was accurate enough, but did you intend to leave out WPF? When I saw it first I thought--hey, that's like Flex... now I see it's very much like AIR --albeit for Vista only (and XP if you go through heroic efforts to install stuff).
I think it's misguided to really compare the products--it's more a per-project sort of thing for me. If you have a Windows only deployment then you can include WPF... if you don't, then there's no point.
Maybe you could comment more on WPF?
Oh man... this is ridiculous.
OK, let me come up with a nice comparison:
Powerful, integrated Development platform:
Adobe____ nada
vs.
Microsoft __ .NET (version 3.5)
Florian,
Have you taken a look at Flex Builder lately? Profiler, Debugger, Refactoring on extensible Eclipse.
Now mind you Flex Builder is focused on client side development as any server-side software will integrate with Flex. >net and Java too. Plus the SDK is free and now fully open source including all compilers, components, and the Flex framework.
Ted :)
The dev environment might have getten better.
But if you want to build powerful desktop apps, what has does the Adobe "platform" got to offer beyond UI and unrestricted file access? Pushing data to the server via proprietary AMF?
Contrast that with WPF/.NET 3.5 - Communication, Workflow, Threading, Security, 3D, native interop,...
Florian,
1. Flex doesn't lock you into using Microsoft Vista or XP. Companies can choose the best OS and run applications anywhere browser or desktop on WIN/OSX/LINUX.
2. Flex works with any backend, Java, .NET, Ruby, Python, in existence today. You can use language on any server that can emmit XML or ASCII text or the now open AMF protocol. Actually we support Binary Sockets in Flash Player so you can exchange binary data with any server supporting TCP/IP sockets. The socket API matches the java socket class and is very similar to how C# handles Sockets too.
3. Code can run in both Flash Player or AIR so components and client code can be shared/reused to target the web browser or the desktop on WIN/OSX/Linux.
4. Silverlight 1.0 is supported on 2% of browsers today. It will be a long time before Silverlight is even deployable for end user facing applications.
Adobe Flash Player 9 is supported on 95% of browsers today and all can install Adobe AIR with 1 click.
Anyone choosing Silverlight for a customer facing application should have their head examined. Targeting a plug-in with 2% market share is not a sane business decision. The only exception is if you are being paid by Microsoft to go against the grain and push Silverlight.
Ted :)
If Microsoft made WPF cross-platfom, they'd be onto something huge. Actually, Silverlight 2.0 is going to be pretty stellar, if they deliver like they're talking, and they probably will. After using Flex Builder and MSFT tools for years, I'd prefer Visual Studio hands down -- though, I'll gripe about the 3 gig download for the latest version!
I've seen some really impressive WPF applications (I know, not Silverlight app, as those said above Silverlight 1.0 isn't an application development platform). Adobe AIR is really closest to WPF, except cross-platform and with a cross-platform dev environment -- something MSFT doesn't have a story for. However, WPF is much, much, much, much more poweful as it has access to everything .NET, and native graphics acceleration.
I've yet to see a kick-ass AIR application that is awe-inspiring. (Saffron looks like it's going to be pretty promising, Buzzword doesn't impress me as much as everyone else). And when I use the term kick-ass, I'm not talking about some Flex-based web app that is all shiny with fancy skins, yet lacking in substance, which is what a lot of the apps out there I see are.
Look at the Adobe AIR market place and there's a whole lot of neat little toys, maybe, and not much more. But, I see huge potential with the platfrom. I also see a huge need for a cross-platform development toolset that isn't C++ based, nor as antiquated as Java Swing. (I know about QT, for those of you wanting to jump in to tell me about QT for java and C++).
But for me, I'm still torn: Adobe has a good track record of delivering cross-platform applications. But Microsoft's WPF kicks some serious ass, though only runs on Windows. I'm placing the gamble on Adobe AIR 2.0 being a little less restrictive and a little less at targeting HTML developrs to create desktop applications, and more at targeting desktop application developers to create real applications without the limitations presently in AIR. (Ted has some other post that is quite exciting about the c++ navite compiler to flex stuff)....
I don't think id'll be a big deal for MSFT to wrap up thier cross-platform portion of WPF, the Silverlight stuff, and make a launcher for that on OSX, then they'd be at a similar place Adobe is with AIR (minus the cross-platform dev environment), though that would put us back to where we are with AIR...a limited desktop development environment.
(I get the feeling MSFT has a lot more resources working on RIA than Adobe does, though this is purely speculation, though it would be natural just becasue of the pure size of the MSFT developer community.)
Time will tell. In a couple of years, I'm sure all this RIA talk, AIR/WPF, etc..will be commodity tools like databases are today, and we as independent devs will have good tools from multiple vendors, and choice, to deliver what our clients need and want.
My comment was on AIR, not on the Flash plugin.
Talking about cross plattform - I'm almost sure, the Mono guys will bring the Moonlight rendering engine to the Linux/MacOSX desktop(!) as well.
And btw. I am not paid by Microsoft, just a fanboy ;)
cheers
Florian
It would still be interesting to see a comparison. In a more useful light: I would like to see the mono runtime embeded into Flash Player, which would make larger projects easier to develop, debug and maintain.
The number crunching applications I write definitly runs faster on mono, so maybe there would be some performace gain too.