February 26, 2008

Adobe AIR Vs Microsoft Silverlight: It’s All About Numbers

Duncan Riley

79 comments »

I attended the official launch party for Adobe AIR (Pacific Region) today and as much as the tech is impressive, I walked away with one strong observation: this is a user base war.

Adobe’s Pacific technical director Mark Blair gave the keynote, and I can sumarize it as such: online apps offline, platform independent, everywhere. There was a Q&A after the keynote that added to that, but the only main new addition I got from that is that AIR should be coming to Linux this year.

During Blair’s presentation was a slide on the companies developing AIR apps. Some we’ve covered already, like eBay, then there were other names like the NASDAQ developing with AIR. Locally the Commonwealth Bank was developing an AIR app for Brokers. There was also some impressive demonstrations post show, including a TripIt clone that runs on AIR (post still to come).

There’s no arguing that AIR is highly capable, but so is Microsoft’s Silverlight. Adobe and Microsoft have entered a war of attrition, where like HD DVD vs Blu-ray one will eventually come out on top. Having said that both may well happily co-exist side by side for years to come, but history shows that eventually the market will pick a favorite.

Disclosure: Adobe Australia paid for my trip to the launch

Sphere It

This entry was posted on Tuesday, February 26th, 2008 at 4:09 am and is filed under Company & Product Profiles. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

Trackbacks/Pings (Trackback URL)

Charles Freedman

February 26th, 2008 at 10:21 am

Web2.0Blog » Blog Archive » Silverlight VS AIR, paragone proprio?

February 26th, 2008 at 10:58 am

Microsoft adopte FlashLite pour Windows Mobile, en attendant Silverlight

March 25th, 2008 at 12:45 pm

Rags to Riches » Blog Archive » A-list bloggers are so confused about Rich Internet Application technologies

May 8th, 2008 at 9:47 pm

Rags to Riches » Blog Archive » Latest Example ReadWriteWeb: A-list bloggers are so confused about RIA technologies

May 9th, 2008 at 9:46 pm

Comments

RSS feed for comments on this post.

ting

February 26th, 2008 at 4:23 am

I attended the official launch party for Abode AIR ….

abode?
Rob

February 26th, 2008 at 4:24 am

AIR and Silverlight are seductive pollution for the web …. browser wars of the 90’s all over again… yawn..
Hank Williams

February 26th, 2008 at 4:28 am

As I wrote yesterday, I think AIR is a big deal and it is a big threat to microsoft as it essentially eliminates the need to write to the windows API, which has been a pillar of the microsoft monopoly. But dude, you have made a huge mistake and you put it in the headline. AIR is not competitive with silverlight. AIR is a tool that lets you run Flash/flex and HTML/Javascript apps offline. Silverlight is a flash/Flex competitor. But Silverlight wont let you run stuff offline. I know a lot of people have made this mistake but this *is* techcrunch.
Rick Curran

February 26th, 2008 at 4:30 am

I think there’s a big difference between AIR and Silverlight at the moment. It’s fair to say Microsoft will push Silverlight forwards quickly but there’s no fair comparison between them at the moment, it’s far closer to compare Flash and Silverlight for the time being as AIR features a lot more than Silverlight offers.

Flash and PDF have huge market share and AIR brings those plus regular HTML/CSS/JS web development into one runtime as well making easy cross-platform offline / online application development.

It’s certainly good that there’s some competition in the market but AIR’s incorporation of various open source projects such as Webkit as well as the fact that Adobe have open sourced a lot of their own code such as Flex and Flash Player code will hold a lot of mindshare of developers.

As I said, competition is good, and the fact the MS are developing web development apps to challenge Dreamweaver is a good thing. Dreamweaver is a great program but it needs to keep progressing to provide the tools that developers need.

One other aspect that Dreamweaver (Adobe / Macromedia) has done a good job with is support for multiple server platforms such as their own ColdFusion but also PHP and JSP development. I’m not sure we’ll see any of Microsoft’s ‘Expression’ development apps support PHP and JSP any time soon!
Jim Simpson

February 26th, 2008 at 4:36 am

I’m not so sure about your thoughts on one tech ultimately killing off the other. The HD DVD v Blue Ray isn’t a logical comparison IMO. With HD DVD v Blue Ray, the customer has to make an investment. When there is a monetary cost associated to a technology there is a far greater likelihood of one technology ousting the other simply because consumers aren’t going to want to purchase two products for a similar experience. With AIR v Silverlight (although they are two very different things and don’t compare well in the first place), there is no investment required. Users aren’t required to make an additional purchase, they are required to merely perform an unobtrusive download/install.
Johnti

February 26th, 2008 at 4:45 am

Another good alternative to these to that I have happened across is haXe. It was created by the same guy who built MTASC. Its certainly worth checking out as it apparently can do the whole Desktop “thing”.
sourceroot

February 26th, 2008 at 4:52 am

is there a silverlight plugin for firefox? what about MAC or Linux?
eytanl

February 26th, 2008 at 5:08 am

As an ASP.NET Programmer I think:
1. Anyone using .NET to develop web applications will use Silverlight.
2. Regarding PHP programmers - it’s a good question which side will they take, I’m guessing Adobe AIR.

Either way, the web is REALLY going to change when these two technologes become mainstream.
Chad Campbell

February 26th, 2008 at 5:30 am

There is a Silverlight plugin for Firefox. The plugin will also work on Safari and on the MAC. Linux support is available through the Moonlight project. This project is headed by a true leader in the Linux community and Microsoft is providing the media codecs: http://weblogs.asp.net/scottgu.....nced.aspx. Silverlight 1.0 is really about media and banner ad scenarios. Silverlight 2.0 is about creating rich web-based applications (I’m writing a book about Silverlight 2.0 ). This version will have a public release next week at the MIX event (http://blogs.msdn.com/tims/archive/2007/11/29/silverlight-1-1-is-now-silverlight-2-0.aspx)

Ultimately, these technologies (Silverlight / AIR / Flex) are about delivering an experience for users. Because of this, I believe that Silverlight is a better choice. The reason why is because of Performance, Performance, Performance. As an immediate example, I did a search for a cover flow control in Flex and one in Silverlight. The ones I found in Silverlight ran smoothly. The ones I found in Flex were jerky. The reality is, as web applications grow in complexity, performance is going to be an important part of delivering a great user experience.

In addition, Silverlight provides a developer experience that is second-to-none. With Silverlight 2.0, a subset of the powerful .NET Framework will be available for developers to use. In addition, developers can choose to use one-of-two ECMA standardized languages (C# or JavaScript), or they can use Visual Basic.NET, or they can use IronPython or IronRuby. Choice is important.

There are also tools for designers which provide a SEAMLESS collaboration between designers and developers.

DISCLAIMER: I do NOT work for Microsoft.
UltimuM

February 26th, 2008 at 5:33 am

http://www. i-guide .ro
http://www. i-guide .ro
http://www. i-guide .ro
http://www. i-guide .ro
Floyd Price

February 26th, 2008 at 5:33 am

Adobe has an advantage because flex applications can be deployed to the browser using the existing Flash plugin which has 95% penetration

As a Software Developer I’m interesting in the deployment numbers and Adobe in my mind has already won this part of the war!
James Gillmore

February 26th, 2008 at 5:40 am

I guess Microsoft’s plan is to Launch Internet Explorer 8 loaded with Silverlight and not Flash, and try to corner the market once again. Honestly, I doubt Silverlight will be Flash since so many people have invested years into mastering Flash. And chances are Flash is still going to be superior product, especially with the Desktop functionality that AIR brings.

James
from
FaceySpacey.com, Your One Stop Social Media Shop
Joshua Cyr

February 26th, 2008 at 5:51 am

Yea, AIR and Silverlight are different beasts. It is about users and numbers for adoption, but Silverlight isn’t directly competing against AIR. Flash and Flex, yes. AIR no. AND BTW Flex 3 was released yesterday too.

Or has Silverlight now started being a desktop app and removed from the browser, all with native db for offline use and syncing when online?
Silver What?

February 26th, 2008 at 5:57 am

Nobody actually uses silverlight and when they do, it won’t be on Linux. And IF it is on Linux, it won’t be the same experience. And it will take a MS IDE.
Michael C. Neel

February 26th, 2008 at 5:57 am

@7 - Yes, yes, and yes. Microsoft releases SilverLight for Windows/Mac, IE and FF (even Safari). They also support the Moonlight project, which runs SilverLight on Linux (part of the Mono project). The recent releasing of all API docs and an agreement to allow all open source projects to use MS API’s/protocols/etc without threat of lawsuit greatly helps projects like Mono.

Adobe’s track record with Linux has been awful - only after MS announced they support the Linux version did Adobe announce they would update the aging flash runtime for Linux as well. Competition in action, a good thing.

While user’s may have a preference between Flex/SL (as pointed out, AIR is slightly different - it’s more like a local Java VM), it will more important what platform developers build on. The SL IDE (VS2008) is available for free, Flex/AIR is trial only, then $300. There are a legion of .Net developers who already know how to program .Net and can instantly start writing (even porting) apps to SL.

Adobe has a lead in install base of the client, but a 4mb DL for SL isn’t much of a barrier so they need to move quickly. MS needs to catch up in terms of install base, and also attract the design talent normally attracted to the Adobe products. Adobe needs to consider loosening up it’s tech stack - many “advanced” features of Flex only work with an Adobe server (read $$$$).

I think MS has a leg up right now in that many of these apps will first appear as internal corporate apps, built by custom developers in-house. There, browser penetration doesn’t matter, but deployment/maintenance costs do. For any shop that’s already supporting .net Apps in-house, SL is a no-brainer.
HmmConvenient

February 26th, 2008 at 6:15 am

Let us not forget that SilverLight has the 08 Olympics… that should certainly help push platform adoption.
Rick Williams

February 26th, 2008 at 6:19 am

I’m shocked at the inaccuracies of this post and within some of the comments.

Please put some honest, well-educated clarity into an updated post ASAP - this entire thread is misleading and incorrect.

@Michael C. Neel - Flex 3 is OpenSource and a free download including Adobe AIR’s API and documentation. There is NO cost in developing with Flak 3 SDK & AIR. There is a $300 price tag associated with Flex Builder…
Charlie

February 26th, 2008 at 6:20 am

@Floyd: Don’t you need to balance the penetration advantage that Flash enjoys against the client-side installation advantage of Silverlight via Windows and IE? Since AIR is all about access to local resources and offline use, seems to me a key battleground will be deployment of the runtime into the protected client space.
sourceroot

February 26th, 2008 at 6:21 am

@14

you’re certainly right about Adobe having a terrible track record on Linux..
Kapil Tundwal

February 26th, 2008 at 6:29 am

I second Michael C. Neel’s assessment of SL development for internal use.

Microsoft is first choice for corporate developers. Office, Intranet, Reporting, DBs, applications - whatnot.

I believe the adoption will start from there. SL apps will be perceived carrying more value (being corporate apps as opposed to consumer apps). Secondly corporate development has different set of requirements - security, back end connections, hosting environment - all of these favors Silverlight.

Having said that competition is good and hopefully developers will win.
Matt

February 26th, 2008 at 6:35 am

@14… yeah, a “no brainer” ,,, meaning departments that elect to develop an application on SL have “no brains” … hehehe j/k
Judo

February 26th, 2008 at 6:47 am

Why is everyone comparing Silverlight to AIR. Silverlight is actually a Flash competitor NOT an AIR competitor.

Silverlight is for Rich Internet Apps that are accessed online, whereas AIR takes apps offline.

The real rub for ASP.NET guys like myself is we will likely be forced to develop apps that can only be accessed online whereas the rest of the universe develops online/offline apps.
Ha Ha

February 26th, 2008 at 6:52 am

Microsoft has a leg up. Ha Ha.
Brian

February 26th, 2008 at 6:56 am

Air = Web apps offline and on the desktop, with some local access. A hybrid of sorts.

Silverlight = Browser plugin akin to Flash, can do animation, video, etc. Nothing to do with the desktop apps.

In other words, no comparison. You didn’t do your homework here.
phill.nacelli

February 26th, 2008 at 7:00 am

As a software architect using mostly Adobe products for the last 8 years, I’m excited about this “rivalry”, not so much about who’s going to pick sides or who’s going to “win”. Either way whether or not you are using Silverlight or AIR both the technical community and specially the end-users will win! And this is good for our industry. So to all of us, I raise a toast to what I fell will be some exciting and prosperous time ahead…

Cheers..
The Ace of Spades that doesn’t hide in a hole

February 26th, 2008 at 7:24 am

Heather please try and filter TC ads, I’ve got Britney Spears cleavage in the corner of my eye.
Eros

February 26th, 2008 at 7:47 am

I think Silverlight 2 (which is due to be release at Mix08) is going to be ON/Offline too.

check http://weblogs.asp.net/scottgu.....ght-2.aspx
booleanbetrayal

February 26th, 2008 at 7:49 am

Uhmm … So what’s Microsoft’s core competency these days? Silverlight certainly isn’t or won’t be it. They need to choose between leveraging existing product lines or sacrificing them for the goal of future product adoption.
Mr Video

February 26th, 2008 at 7:56 am

Unless every man woman and child move to using Firefox (or AWAY from IE) MS will win this battle. Look what they did to flash embedded content.

OK, at least the MAJORITY of folks will need to leave IE but that is a huge order and why MS continues to be the player that it is. At least online.

MS will break every threat to its hegemony at each and every opportunity.

Wouldn’t you?
openapi

February 26th, 2008 at 7:59 am

good, continue write and debate about air and silverlight, create lots of buzzzzzz, and when all eyes and ears on them , google and others will take the offline market under there nose. desktop is dead , soon offline concept will no longer be valid, we all be connected to cloud os . microsoft using it’s legacy ideas to innovate, let them be, they are relevant
just like “looming scarcity of mainframe skills” .
John

February 26th, 2008 at 8:23 am

Compare AIR to WPF, or Flash to AIR, but it doesn’t make any sense to compare AIR (desktop technology) to Silverlight (web only technology)
Vidar Hokstad

February 26th, 2008 at 8:28 am

Personally I’ve yet to come across a website with Silverlight content. But as others have pointed out, Air is something completely different. I can think of dozens of websites that could benefit from added functionality by releasing an Air version of their site, and all they’d have to do to get started is to package up their existing HTML and javascript and/or Flash/Flex apps.

That’s the beauty of Air - you can take the client side of a web app, turn it into a desktop app and start adding additional functionality, such as taking advantage of local storage, native windows, system tray integration etc.

You only “pay” in terms of development time for the additional offline functionality you add.

Imagine Gmail with no need for the Google notifier, and an offline mode because Gmail itself is running as a local app and can download copies of your mail, for example, yet when you use another computer it’s all still there.

Imagine Google Apps with the ability to use local storage, and ability to function offline.

No need to write an application from scratch - just wrapping the UI in Air and incrementally adding small bits of code to add extra functionality.

Air is the only Adobe product that’s excited me in years.
Mark

February 26th, 2008 at 8:35 am

You people are missing a huge issue in this debate. The designer will play a huge role in how apps get deployed on the web or off with these next gen technologies. FACT: Photoshop/Illustrator/Flash blow Expression’s stuff away. Designers will not switch to Expression. It doesn’t run on a MAC and never will. This gives Adobe a huge leg up here for anything that is going to face the customer. Internal apps are a different story, I could see Silverlight taking a majority of those because of the existing codebase and the fact that they don’t need to look good.
John Dowdell

February 26th, 2008 at 8:38 am

Hi Duncan, can you explain why you look at the release of a new beyond-the-browser initiative, and compare it to future promises of an in-browser plugin which doesn’t add anything new to today’s deployed browsers? That seems to be the missing piece in your post here.

(AIR is a desktop runtime, where anyone can use normal webdev techniques to create cross-OS native applications with local file system access, drag’n'drop, native or neutral windowing systems, much more. AIR is desktop apps. Silverlight promises to be a way for .NET developers to do Flash-like things inside a browser, and they’re ‘way behind on delivery promises. In-browser vs beyond-the-browser, two quite different types of technology.)

As the folks above questioned, what might lead you to link the two concepts? The article’s mystifying as-is.

tx, jd/adobe
Dyde

February 26th, 2008 at 8:43 am

One needs to download AIR runtime to run AIR apps. This is a huge obstacle for its adoption.

I think Adobe tried this before and failed miserable - anyone remember Central? And Flash apps are slower then even Java GUI apps, so for now both Silverlight and Flash are interesting tech demos but nothing more. Of course, Adobe and the Flash camp will scream that AIR will rule the web. Like they were screaming that Flash will one day supercede HTML. Unless it’s faster and easier to developer than the current technologies (HTML/JS) it will be ignored by the majority, like tons of similar technologies - Google Gears, JavaFX, etc.
phil swenson

February 26th, 2008 at 8:46 am

AIR is not comparable to Silverlight. AIR runs on the desktop, not the browser. Silverlight competes with Flex - both run in the browser.

Right now Flex has a big lead because the Flash plugin has 97% browser penetration and a full component model for building web apps + a pretty decent IDE. Silverlight is probably better tech, but years behind in maturity.
Scott

February 26th, 2008 at 8:52 am

Well, I believe the wpf side of vista and I believe can be run in xp is very closely related to silverlight. Silverlight also lets you use visual C#, ruby, python, whatever you want as long as it compiles into your dll. Being able to use the most useful parts of the .net framework like generics and whatnot regardless of what the underlying system is, is great!

Silverlight 1.0 was kind of a joke, and was nothing new since it still used javascript. 1.1 was a step forward, with being able to use C# and the subset of the .net framework. 2.0 I believe is going to be much better, with built in controls and whatnot.

Also, a silverlight app/content does not need to be clicked before giving it focus to then interact with.
dave

February 26th, 2008 at 8:52 am

i also do not understand the comparison that you’re trying to make. is this simply another example of techcrunch writing up stuff and not knowing much about it? did you bother to visit the AIR and Silverlight sites before you clicked ’submit’ ? that would have resolved this issue…
don ho

February 26th, 2008 at 9:05 am

Thank you for using the correct term “slide” instead of the term “PowerPoint”.

“During Blair’s presentation was a slide on the companies developing AIR apps. Some we’ve…”
antje wilsch

February 26th, 2008 at 9:07 am

Adobe courted designers for a long time, slowly moving into the developer’s world (a big push from Flex). MSFT however is the master of providing tools to developers to keep them producing. What will be interesting is seeing their (huge) base of developers start to use silverlight. I work in a .NET development world exclusively and the devs I know are very interested in this. Try asking them to learn Flex (let alone Flash) would have them roll their eyes. Asking designers to start coding would have them rolling their eyes too. The worlds are moving together and this is an interesting time to see how and how much the two skills can overlap.
Ryan Robinson

February 26th, 2008 at 9:35 am

AIR doesn’t have to win any “format war”. It can replace Java and be successful. A lot of Java devs are jumping into ActionScript 3 over Silverlight because the languages are almost identical, and they have an aversion to Microsoft.
Jugo

February 26th, 2008 at 9:50 am

@16 “I’m shocked at the inaccuracies of this post and within some of the comments.”

You obviously haven’t read anything by Duncan before.
Mario Klingemann

February 26th, 2008 at 12:47 pm

Silverlight 2.0 (whoa, quite a jump from 1.1 anyway) as a platform is technically now where Flash Player 6 was in 2003, the only exception being video quality. Sure, developers can choose from a big set of different programming languages to code for it, but for designers who are used to the possibilities of the Flash player this is something like a chef of a 3 star restaurant having to work in a burger joint.

For example: to my knowledge in Silverlight there is currently no way to embed fonts directly in the source, so if you don’t want to risk being sued by font foundries for offering their fonts as a free download on your site you’ll have to stick to the 9 default fonts that MS embedded in the plugin itself or you have to use pre-created bitmaps of your texts just like in the HTML days - not exactly the idea of a dynamic site.

There is also no support for bitmap manipulation, blend modes or filter effects, all ingrediences which allow Flash developers together with designers to create all those visually satisfying and impressive sites. I still have to see one Silverlight demo out there which shows that a designer has laid hand on it and not a coder. Until now I’ve only seen potato print style or PowerPoint chic.
Frank Daley

February 26th, 2008 at 1:24 pm

While Adobe may currently have a competitive advantage versus Silverlight, the reality is that Microsoft’s master plan for Silverlight is much bugger - to turn the web into a Microsoft controlled environment.

What we are currently seeing is merely the first salvo of Microsoft’s competitive attack.

Microsoft will continue to use a potpourri of approaches such as buying hardware vendors and sweetheart deals with content providers in order to drive Silverlight adoption.

To crush Adobe is not Microsoft’s end-game. It has much bigger goals for Silverlight - to gain control of the core web technologies, thereby positioning itself to better compete against both Linux and Google.
marv

February 26th, 2008 at 1:42 pm

Adobe paid for this guy to go to the launch and this was the best he could do?
Simon

February 26th, 2008 at 3:26 pm

I attended this event last night and the messaging was quite clear on the question of Air vs SL…there is no comparison. Period.
Either Duncan, you missed the panel discussion, or maybe the messaging wasn’t clear enough.
Flash vs SL - fair to compare. Both plug-in technologies, both (when SL matures) will be about numbers…developers and installer base.
AIR provides ‘occasionally connected’ desktop clients (permanently connected if ya like!). Very different from any SL messaging I have seen over the last 12 months.
MS Shills are everywhere

February 26th, 2008 at 3:52 pm

Only MS could turn Adobe’s announcement into a promotion for their vaporware.

Flex and Flash are miles ahead of what anyone else is doing. They are here today and they work well. They are not cobbled together and they are being used today.

All you MS shills go hang at Digg.
Oh My Brain

February 26th, 2008 at 3:53 pm

Air still requires that you load software before you can run a projector, which really makes it not a projector. Zinc 3.0 is still leaps ahead of both of them for compiling apps like flash into a true stand alone projector that runs on Os X, Windoze and Linux all at once. Not to mention adding file system and mySQL calls directly to your flash or flex app which they natively do not support.

Zinc has been far superior for my projects.
M

February 26th, 2008 at 6:12 pm

stop comparing AIR with Silverlight 1.0

Silverlight 1.0 competes with Flash

MS has no product to complete with AIR at the moment but they will and it will be years behind.

AIR will be on linux this year … maybe mid year … beta before that of course. See http://blog.digitalbackcountry.com/?p=1289

MS doesn’t do linux… why do they give the monoproject responsibility to port Silverlight to linux? pathetic.

And those who keep saying Government doesn’t allow flash. go fuck yourself. you don’t work for the government you aren’t government contractors. you are talking shit. Some government organizations are stricter than others. They do Flex/Flash … don’t know about Silverlight.

Excuse my language.
Varun Mathur

February 26th, 2008 at 7:33 pm

Market did pick a favorite…its called AJAX.

We made Alertle…a completely single page application (its a RSS feed reader) which demonstrates to what heights AJAX can be taken to. Why would we need either Silverlight or AIR, when AJAX is “good enough” ?

http://www.alertle.com
John Dowdell

February 26th, 2008 at 8:08 pm

“Market did pick a favorite…its called AJAX.”

And AIR is AJAX, so….

“Why would we need … AIR, when AJAX is ‘good enough’?”

If you’ve successfully developed an in-browser JavaScript app, then that’s great. If you’d like to make sure no one can greasemonkey it, or want to customize viewing windows, or want larger local caching or more, then look at AIR delivery. You now have additional delivery options.

MAIN THEME: Adobe Flash Player is a browser plugin, and Microsoft’s Silverlight will soon be a beta plugin. The Adobe Integrated Runtime is a different thing altogether: a very capable desktop shell, an additional environment for browser-type applications. Plugins are in-the-browser; AIR is beyond-the-browser. Two different categories. Duncan, you owe me a beer…

jd/adobe
M

February 26th, 2008 at 8:39 pm

AIR isn’t AJAX but works with AJAX if you make it. AIR out of the box provide support for functionalities AJAX offers. The real advantages of AIR are offline support, data synchronization, cross platform.

Think about this .. very typical use of AIR. A real estate agent has an appointment with a customer. She launches her company’s AIR app to take data associated with that client offline (personal background, photos, data about targeted area(s)). While she is interacting with the customer, she types her notes into the app. When she gets back to her office, she syncs everything back to the server and that info immediately becomes available for other agents. Remember it supports everything Flash supports and PDF … so the list of possibilities goes on.
Asad

February 26th, 2008 at 11:43 pm

To put in a different perspective for people having a wrong idea of Adobe Air, air lets you write your desktop applications in Javascript and HTML.

* It’s easy (and the best) for web developers who do not want to learn another language, but want to get their apps on desktop, whether with online/offline synchronization or NOT!

* You are not forced to write things in Actionscript.

* You write the application for a single browser if the application is to run only in Adobe Air.

* And lastly, Silverlight is not a competitor. That should compete with Flex framework and native Flash.
DjOnline

February 27th, 2008 at 1:22 am

AIR is simple equal to .NET and JAVA!
And like .net and java it will have crossplatform support.

AIR can make all things like .NET and Java, full (or restricted) access to filesystem.
Air application as I thinks right - cannot run directly in browser. It must be downloaded before. As a .NET and Java apps. But flash apps can be ported to AIR. Like ASP.net apps can be ported to .NET. Like java applet can be ported to full java app. There is no invention !
You must compare it for execution speed.

Only difference is that AIR have integrated mysqlite and lastests video/audio decoders. .NET require MS Sql server or MSDE (MS Desktop Engine) or anything you want via ODBC (like Java).

We all know that .NET and JAVA have fast bytecode compiler, and we do not know how fast is perfomance of AIR. But some very CPU intensive computation like audio/video decoding in air are native and fullspeed, in .NET - you depend on system codecs, and in Java - must implement all things in pure java (= no fast perfomance).

Do not forger Google Gears - it is not desktop app, but DB/local cache engine for website based on sqlite too.
Harry

February 27th, 2008 at 1:34 am

Well of course MS is moving to grab a piece of the RIA market, as they always have done (web browsers, media players), when a market appears to emerge (or actuallt when a market has emerged).
Actually I think AIR is greater news for developers than for users. Web enabled desktop apps is nothing new. But the ability to deploy your web app (built in either Flex, AJAX/html) on the desktop out of pretty much the same code base is indeed big news for developers and companies.
Also, this is all client technology. Flex on the web or on desktop/AIR has no problem working with .NET or PHP backend
Ahmad

February 27th, 2008 at 4:04 am

AIR = WPF + MS Synchornisation Framework.
AIR requries a RunTime. Flex 3 Apps require Flash Player 9.0 Plugin which does not exist on 95% of browsers as claimed. So either with Flex 3 or SL the user has t Install a pluggin.

The war has just begun!!!!
Federico

February 27th, 2008 at 6:14 am

Agree with 33.
Don’t think that a .Net developer will start creating Canvas objects just to switch from their AJAX controls to some “smoother” ones.
Yes, performance in Silverlight is awesome, but it still has a long way to go to seriously compete with flash. Not even with Silverlight 2.0 they will accomplish that, since 2.0 still requires designers to use Expression Design, and animators to use Blend, and those products are still in dipers.
I think that Silverlight will be pushed by MS, but won’t make it to the next level soon.. but that doesn’t mean they don’t have a great product between hands.
M

February 27th, 2008 at 7:29 am

56 is right. I think 95% is all versions combined. Flash player 8 I think has the largest portion of that 95%. As video sharing sites go HD, more and more FP 9 will get installed.
John Dowdell

February 27th, 2008 at 12:06 pm

Actually, it was Adobe Flash Player 9 which was tested at 95.7% consumer viewability last December. Only 2.6% of people tested still had an 8.x version installed.
http://weblogs.macromedia.com/.....r_9_11.cfm

This is an issue that I’m not surprised to see people get wrong, because it is such a mindbogglingly unprecedented acceptance rate by the world. 18 months from release to 95.7% public capability. The world pulls for Flash. It’s quite startling, and I’m not surprised to see people surprised by it.

But I’m still not sure how folks like Duncan can confuse in-browser and beyond-the-browser capabilities, then not engage when challenged by readers. I’m almost thinking of doing a post called “AIR, Silverlight, or Britney Spears: Which to choose!?” It’d be about as pertinent. (Disclosure: I have not been paid or otherwise influenced by Britney Spears….

jd/adobe
Alex Linhares

February 27th, 2008 at 8:39 pm

Silverlight will CRUSH Air!!!

Zune will CRUSH iPod!!!!
Igor

February 27th, 2008 at 11:26 pm

This is really disappointing - AIR tries silently to connect to ADOBE after you launch application on it:
http://tinyurl.com/354t6o
M

February 28th, 2008 at 7:53 am

Connect to Adobe to check for an update. What’s wrong with that? Stop whinnig.
W

February 28th, 2008 at 6:46 pm

There are some much more mature RIA applications like Curl and OpenLazlo and AIR is based on a mature product. And those all have a history of being available on other platforms, and being quality. Silverlight’s only chance comes from it being pushed by a company with billions to spend.

Disclaimer: I work for Curl Inc.
John Dowdell

February 28th, 2008 at 9:32 pm

For info on the AIR startup ping, and configuring auto-updates, see here:
http://www.adobe.com/go/kb403175

jd/adobe
ionix5891

March 2nd, 2008 at 3:07 am

wow. talk about comparing apples and oranges

very weak techcrunch, very weak

get the finger out of your behinds and do some proper research before publishing rubbish like this

you completely missed the points of what AIR and Silverlight are, or maybe you did it deliberately to crank up your ad views
Mark

March 2nd, 2008 at 2:39 pm

Adobe is very worried about Silverlight, and rightly so. Once Silverlight 2.0 gets out, then there’s really no comparison on the technical and tooling level. Silverlight absolutely crushes Flash
Michael Sync

March 2nd, 2008 at 10:48 pm

I think AIR is like WPF browser application…
NP

March 6th, 2008 at 1:19 am

There is something shady going on here.
Different authors. Same text content (but different images). Same disclosure:
http://seekingalpha.com/articl.....ilverlight

Plagiarism, in plain sight?
Joseph

March 8th, 2008 at 7:05 pm

Mark, I disagree Flash is better than Silverlight in many ways, read the full report here: http://www.yozef.com/Flex_3_Evaluation.pdf it compares with Silverlight and AJAX.
Anindya Sharma

March 11th, 2008 at 10:31 pm

There is no comparison but some Simple points

AIR:
1.Desktop RIAs
2.Auto Update
3.Integrated Browser(webkit)
4.Desktop presence for websites
5.Devs can create also HTML-javascript based AIR Apps
6. Proper Installer
7. AIR Rocks

Silverlight:
1.Same old browser
2.Just as old version of Flex website
3.Too much pain for developer.
4. Silverlight Sucks

anindya/adobe
derk

March 16th, 2008 at 7:57 pm

ActionScript based Flex is crap. It’s based on nothing but Javascript w/ a turbo charger. Having programmed Asp.Net for so long, I hate my guts out at Javascript. Now this AIR, aka JVM-wannabe, is still promising me a html-javascript solution? Not interested. And another virtual machine to rival M$ desktop? Don’t make me laugh. Java, w/ its colossal development support, has been trying for 10 years to knock M$ out of desktop world and ain’t anywhere close to that goal. Now you want me to believe AIR has what it takes?

Flex may have been in this field longer but it’s not making serious progress partly b/c ActionScript 2.0 is crap. Maybe the 3.0 is better but Adobe hasn’t built up a huge user base yet. So their market share in the real RIA world is very limited. W/ SL2 coming out along w/ C# front and central instead of stupid Javascript, an end to end solution, the proven .Net framework, Visual Studio IDE and an army of .Net programmers having no problem to pick it up, Flex will be left out in a lonely corner used only by those who either have no .Net environment or simply hates everything from M$.
petra

March 18th, 2008 at 3:43 pm

derk, I’m afraid you don’t know what you’re talking about. If, as you say, you’ve not even looked at ActionScript 3, you are *so* far behind the times. Flex 3 is now out, and ActionScript 3 was around during the time of Flex 2. That’s how far behind you are.

AS3 is really light years ahead of something like JavaScript, and with the VM in Flash Player 9 it’s JIT’ed to machine code just like with the JVM and the CLR.

Get up to date by a few years, and then comment.
Chris McFarling

March 22nd, 2008 at 8:31 pm

I see a lot of narrow minded observations in these postings. Many people make the claim that Silverlight shouldn’t even be compared to AIR. The reasoning is that AIR allows for an OOB (out-of-browser) experience while Silverlight is confined to the browser. While that is currently true that will not be the case for long. If I can see the writing on the wall then I’m quite confident that MS can too. This is Web 3.0 that we’re talking about. Shedding what will soon be seen as archaic technologies in favor of a more modern approach that will finally make web enabled apps feel like the dektop apps that we’ve had for years. The archaic technologies I’m talking about include HTML, Javascript, CSS and the like. Every ounce of usefullness has been squeezed out of these technologies for creating web apps and the best that we can get out of them are apps that almost kind of sort of work like an app really should. Those technologies are directly tied to the browser’s abilities or lack there of. Sure that stuff will be around for a long time to come but will be used to create sites that are browse only or offer limited funtionality. The web browser will get back to being just that, a tool for browsing web pages. It may occasionally be used to launch these new Web 3.0 type of apps that are created in AIR or SL or even Java but it won’t be required in most cases. Essentially AIR and Silverlight will be competing with Java. What Silverlight and AIR are attempting to do is nothing new. The problem with Java is that the user experience is dull and the apps are clunky. SL and AIR are addressing that shortcoming by allowing graphicly rich UIs and desktop app like performance.

Flash has not replaced HTML/Javascript/CSS but it’s good to use when you want to create something that would not be possible, or maybe probable, to do using those technologies. I think SL and AIR may experience a similar coexistence. AIR will be used to create cool and functional apps. When you want to create something really cool and really functional though, SL will be the platform of choice due to the power of the .NET framework behind it. MS has been in the development game so much longer than Adobe that there is no comparison. That will most certainly be a factor. Once SL becomes OOB, that whole argument that it’s not even a competitor with AIR is out the window. At that point the irrelevant browser war is over and it becomes a runtime platform war.
Alex Baran

March 26th, 2008 at 4:17 pm

Microsoft Corporation or often just MS, is an American multinational computer technology corporation with 79,000 employees in 102 countries and global annual revenue of US $51.12 billion as of 2007. I’ve read about this at http://www.shapedword.com.