5 ms·

Silverlight's phase-out primarily stemmed from the browser ecosystem's shift away from plugins. It's worth noting that Silverlight 5 was supported until October

Silverlight's phase-out primarily stemmed from the browser ecosystem's shift away from plugins. It's worth noting that Silverlight 5 was supported until October 2021, a decade after its release, indicating substantial longevity despite the changing landscape.

v-erne 3y ago
Ok first thing first - allow me to vent my existential frustration with few off the cuff (mostly rhetorical) questions ... You call decade a substantial longevity? Is this some kind of a joke? Is your ability to assess being held hostage by js ecosystem expererience? But seriously - I expect a bit more from platform that could potentially waste my life and my venture. I am still happily supporting some Java (and JSF) code that I have written for clients 15 years ago (don't you just love that sweet support fees that you get mostly for being alive and breathing ?). Meanwhile my friend that build whole company around product written in silverlight almost went bankrupt. Now after few years working in AI (going into it a bit too soon) he is trying to create same product in ... yes you guessed it, Blazor. Maybe some people do not learn from their mistakes :)?
- miffy900 3y ago
  > Maybe some people do not learn from their mistakes :)? Maybe some people do learn, and in this case it's Microsoft, who are not repeating the same thing with Blazor as they did with Silverlight.
- unsignedint 3y ago
  Yes, I would call that fairly substantial considering its underlying architecture is no longer viable -- not because of Microsoft's fault, but as the industry as whole moved away from the plugin-based AIR. Silverlight was somewhat of a unique situation, as it was a platform where it heavily relied on the platform that was phasing out. (And to clarify, that "decade" is the period that Microsoft was committed to support for latest Silverlight 5. Their first version was released in 2007, so it had about 14 years of history.) As with Java or any other languages, you can still run it if the environment it runs can be resurrected. (I would not connect that to the internet, though) And many parts of what actually powered Silverlight still thrive in a form of .Net. I mean where they can support, Microsoft tends to keep its compatibility fairly intact, for instance modern Windows still can run many of the 32-bit binaries from early days. (And you even could do the same for 16-bit apps on a 32-bit platform, not sure if that's still possible, though.)
- progmetaldev 3y ago
  The difference is that Blazor is built on web standards (WebAssembly), not a proprietary technology. Sure, Microsoft could discontinue support for Blazor, but WebAssembly will keep running. C#/Blazor are not the only technologies using WebAssembly. I personally wouldn't use Blazor for a public facing website, and would only use it for an internal LOB app where I know I can dictate what browser technologies can be used, as well as knowing the binary blob for the runtime will be cached in most users' browsers. I still use traditional MVC structure with C# for applications that will have a variety of users over different connection types, and use progressive enhancement with JavaScript for things that enhance the user experience (for example, creating multiple items of some type on screen, instead of only being able to create one at a time like with a standard form). The thing is, I've already separated out my application logic so that I can change the front-end technology at any time. That really shouldn't have anything to do with Blazor, and is just a way to make sure your application can adapt to future front-end technologies.
  - NicoJuicy 3y ago
    Correct. Silverlight came when flash was being dismantled shortly after. Different days back then.
- no_wizard 3y ago
  No knock on C# or Java developers meant here, however I find that C# and Java Developers find 10 years of support not long enough, nearly every other ecosystem you're lucky if you get 3 year time horizons of backward compatibility and/or support. 10 years is pretty amazing, all told, IMO.

v-erne 3y ago

Ok first thing first - allow me to vent my existential frustration with few off the cuff (mostly rhetorical) questions ... You call decade a substantial longevity? Is this some kind of a joke? Is your ability to assess being held hostage by js ecosystem expererience? But seriously - I expect a bit more from platform that could potentially waste my life and my venture. I am still happily supporting some Java (and JSF) code that I have written for clients 15 years ago (don't you just love that sweet support fees that you get mostly for being alive and breathing ?). Meanwhile my friend that build whole company around product written in silverlight almost went bankrupt. Now after few years working in AI (going into it a bit too soon) he is trying to create same product in ... yes you guessed it, Blazor. Maybe some people do not learn from their mistakes :)?

miffy900 3y ago
> Maybe some people do not learn from their mistakes :)? Maybe some people do learn, and in this case it's Microsoft, who are not repeating the same thing with Blazor as they did with Silverlight.
unsignedint 3y ago
Yes, I would call that fairly substantial considering its underlying architecture is no longer viable -- not because of Microsoft's fault, but as the industry as whole moved away from the plugin-based AIR. Silverlight was somewhat of a unique situation, as it was a platform where it heavily relied on the platform that was phasing out. (And to clarify, that "decade" is the period that Microsoft was committed to support for latest Silverlight 5. Their first version was released in 2007, so it had about 14 years of history.) As with Java or any other languages, you can still run it if the environment it runs can be resurrected. (I would not connect that to the internet, though) And many parts of what actually powered Silverlight still thrive in a form of .Net. I mean where they can support, Microsoft tends to keep its compatibility fairly intact, for instance modern Windows still can run many of the 32-bit binaries from early days. (And you even could do the same for 16-bit apps on a 32-bit platform, not sure if that's still possible, though.)
progmetaldev 3y ago
The difference is that Blazor is built on web standards (WebAssembly), not a proprietary technology. Sure, Microsoft could discontinue support for Blazor, but WebAssembly will keep running. C#/Blazor are not the only technologies using WebAssembly. I personally wouldn't use Blazor for a public facing website, and would only use it for an internal LOB app where I know I can dictate what browser technologies can be used, as well as knowing the binary blob for the runtime will be cached in most users' browsers. I still use traditional MVC structure with C# for applications that will have a variety of users over different connection types, and use progressive enhancement with JavaScript for things that enhance the user experience (for example, creating multiple items of some type on screen, instead of only being able to create one at a time like with a standard form). The thing is, I've already separated out my application logic so that I can change the front-end technology at any time. That really shouldn't have anything to do with Blazor, and is just a way to make sure your application can adapt to future front-end technologies.
- NicoJuicy 3y ago
  Correct. Silverlight came when flash was being dismantled shortly after. Different days back then.
no_wizard 3y ago
No knock on C# or Java developers meant here, however I find that C# and Java Developers find 10 years of support not long enough, nearly every other ecosystem you're lucky if you get 3 year time horizons of backward compatibility and/or support. 10 years is pretty amazing, all told, IMO.