These student credit card debt cash advance loan online…

Consentir roulette gratuites telecharger poker pc…

Shall poker 100 gratuites kasino online…

More and more users daily move on to Linux, forget about m$ creating a shitty plugin to support linux OS, eventually someone like my self will evaluate what m$ has created and clone it, but that is not the point here.. Why do you insist to blow out a system that is as important as any other OS such as (in your case Mac)windows, also if you take a closer look at vista, you would realize that a lot of things it has are copied of from linux. Anyways.. some one here was right.. WHY!?!? would Microsoft really want to support Mac system’s when they only support there own? what’s the catch?

Whether Redmond actually wanted to pay homage, sincerely, or this was just some non-tech advertising dweeb’s syllable-sticker/trademark scanner/product namer program, the truth did out.

MS copped the commons code of Scalable Vector Graphics so maybe XAML should really be called SVG 1.3 and the CLR is really just CBASIC2008 or CB-8600 and so maybe it is time to rehabilitate Gary Kildal.

Now lets see if the text actually wraps properly.

1) They didn’t constantly demonstrate that their business model is get you to depend on their technology and then make it a requirement that you use windows in order to use their technology.

2) They didn’t constainly demonstrate that they didn’t mind leaving ISV hanging when it came to real support on non-Microsoft systems.

3) Security is such an afterthought. How long until the first silverlight exploit? $100 says within a month. Anyone?

How did they make all that money anyway?

That’s probably why you don’t see people making entire websites out of only PDF files. People who care about SEO know that there’s no substitute for (POSH) Plain Old Semantic HTML.

No matter how good Silverlight is (and it does look pretty good). I think people would be wise to use it sparingly — the same way they now use Flash.

But Google seems to choose not to crawl Silverlight content. Googlebot avoids displaying XML content to the public that’s intended for proprietary plugins — even when Googlebot is successful in crawling that XML:

http://www.google.com/search?q.....t.net/fox/

This follows Google’s Webmaster Guidelines:

“Use a text browser such as Lynx to examine your site, because most search engine spiders see your site much as Lynx would”

That statement says it all.

Google wants to show results for content that’s accessible to all users, whether or not they have a proprietary plugin or not. For instance, blind users, deaf users, and users with alternative browsers (such as JAWS) would probably never be able to access Silverlight content. This doesn’t mean Google can’t see these files. But, it chooses not to show that kind of content because of two reasons: One, Google can’t verify if some of the XML content is spammy and hidden in the final visual display. Two: the content that’s within Silverlight doesn’t act like a typical web page, so it’s difficult to track linking relationships to and from RIA pages. Linking relationships to and from web pages are a big part of what dictates PageRank.

So, while everyone knows that Googlebot can see the XML. It’s very obvious that anyone who moved all of their content into Silverlight would be committing SEO suicide. Perhaps one day Google will start showing Silverlight content in its search results, but I wouldn’t hold your breath.

And, if you’re a company investing millions of dollars into a website, you’d be foolish to not make your content accessible to ALL user agents (text browsers, audible browsers, etc.) and search bots.