Silverlight vs Flash vs HTML5, should I care?

Question

I have read a range of articles on advantages/disadvantages of Microsoft Silverlight framework in comparisson to Flash.

Fact that there were two version of Silverlight in the past 18 months worries me, as well as the fact that over 97% of web browsers already have Flash pre-installed.

I'm a .NET developer and I'm very happy with what I can do in the framework. At the moment I feel like I have to put my own preference to a side and decide whether I need to integrage flash with .NET instead of using Silverlight with WPF.

Did anybody try integrating Flash with .NET? What challanges did you come across? How easy was it in comparisson to working in Silverlight?

I have also read about recent talks between Microsoft and Adobe. Whatever way I go It feels very unstable. Can HTML 5 really compete with what's offered by Flash and Silverlight?

Thank you

Booma

Answer 1

I have integrated both Flash and Silverlight into my ASP.Net applications. I have to say that working with Silverlight was by far the easier way to go. Communication with the server is easier, initial setup was easier (along with a ASP.Net application or a simple HTML page). Integration into the ASP.Net application was the easiest part (as I'm sure you imagined it would be). If you're a .Net developer, then this is the way to go.

Also, I wouldn't worry about either of these technologies going away anytime soon. HTML5 is not going to take over. It'll take some of the market share, not all.

EDIT

Here are some links to other SO posts on the subject:

• Which is the future of web development: HTML5 or Silverlight(or other RIA framework)?
• Should I Abandon Adobe Flash for HTML5 and ?
• Can HTML5 do most of what Flash does today?

Canary

I have started looking at a XBAP (ClickOnce) applications. Have you written anything using this type of solution? I like the idea that application will get an access to a full .NET framework, rather than a subset of .NET with Silverlight. But the idea of installing entire .NET framework on client's machine is really putting me off. This beats the entire purpose of what I'd like to achieve. – Booma

Hi, I'm just waiting to see if anybody else has came across the same decision making problem. – Booma

I added some links to other questions that were posted here on StackOverflow.com to my answer. – Canary

Thank you for this. Sorry for the late reply - was away. – Booma

Answer 2

This is basically the way I pick web technologies:

• do you need to support every available platform made now, in the past and in the future? HTML4 (yes, 4!)
• Do you have to make stuff that is not possible with HTML4, and are ready to sacrifice some user base? HTML5
• Can you limit yourself to desktop users (no mobile devices) and need a very interactive application (more so than a "website")? Flash or Silverlight
• Do you need to integrate with .NET? Silverlight
• Are you familiar with .NET (more so than Flash)? Silverlight
• Do you want to reach the absolute maximum number of users? Flash
• Do you know Flash/ActionScript (more so than .NET)? Flash
• Do you need even more features than what Silverlight provides, and can you limit your deployment to intranets? WPF/XBAP

The whole debate around Silverlight being dead is completely flawed in my opinion: those that thought Silverlight would be completely multiplatform really were not connected with the reality: just by looking at Flash it was clear from the beginning that iOS & co. would never support Silverlight.

HTML5 will probably be the real "universal multiplatform" environment (what is HTML4 now), but with all the nightmares we all know of html. If you are targeting desktops and need more interactivity, better tooling, unit testing & co. then Flash and Silverlight will still be the first choice.

Silverlight's user base is quickly coming close to Flash, so between those two it really comes down to the one you know better and the ease of integration with an existing backend.

The fact that Silverlight got a new major version every 9 months until now is just a sign of how much they are pushing it. Now that it's reached a mature stage you can expect to see larger intervals.

Lousewort

Answer 3

Frankly, AS3 is not hard to learn if you already know OOP. It will take a week or so. If you don't like all the frames stuff in Flash, you can create a single frame app and then manage everything from your custom AS classes.

I'm also a .NET developer, and I had no trouble learning AS3.0. Of course, one week is not enough to become an expert (it takes years to become an expert in any field). But if you simply need to create video or mp3 players, create drag and drop basic games/apps to add to an ASP.NET page, it's worth spending 20 or 30 hours on AS3. There are great video trainings out there . Seven or 8 hours training should take the 20 to 30 hours I mentioned. I went for AS3.0 a few years ago, rather than SL, simply because everybody has Flash plugin installed.

AS3.0 is typed (simple types like Number, String etc), but at least it's typed. There are plenty of functions, classes and methods allowing to implement hit tests, drag/drop, event listening (mouse events, keyboard events etc). Really cool and fun language.

Take care.

Bahr

Thanks for motivating on Learning AS3 , +1 for that :) – Impart

Answer 4

Microsoft recently announced a "change of direction" with Silverlight with more emphasis on mobile rather than desktop.

Posh

Thanks for the article. This is very frustrating. Can the same happen to ClickOnce applications, how can we be sure :S Made me really thinking whether I need to look at ActionScript in more detail. – Booma

@vikp - No, you need to look at HTML5, SVG and canvas in more detail. The frustration you express is the same as mine about six years ago when I started in web dev using .NET. I left Microsoft products then and have not touched them since, including Windows. – Posh

If .NET and IE 9 will support HTML5, than surely Microsoft will provide development tools to work with HTML 5 and SVG? – Booma

@vikp - SVG tools have been around for a long time. HTML5 tools have been around for quite a while, too. Why do you need Microsoft to supply them? They have no background or experience there. – Posh

I clearly don't have enough knowledge in these areas. I'll get back to this post once I do some reading. Thank you :) – Booma

Answer 5

HTML5 has SVG and Canvas and video. It's perfectly possible that at one point someone creative is going to create a very nice animation package that generates SVG files. There already are SVG generators there of course, but obviously they're not good enough because SVG and Flash is, so far, never mentioned in the same sentence. But is ought to be possible. SVG does structured vector graphics, embedded scripting. The things you see done in Flash has to all be possible in SVG. Flash also has this awful notion of frames, which was a major design flaw from day one. They should have just let you determine that you want to move an object from point A to B along a path determined by a line or curve or freehand path, and that the times of A and B can be anything and not just confined to a particular frame. Then at playback, the faster your computer is, the better the frame rate ends up being. Slower computer, slower frame rate. As long as the object moves from A to B. Then there are the bugs and just overall clumsy handling of Flash. Flash can be done so much better. So, I think that someone will at one point soon make an amazing SVG animation package that will just crush Flash.

I'm against Silverlight because it's Microsoft. Microsoft means proprietary. They do whatever they want to do. You've already mentioned different version numbers. This means your customers have to have the right version downloaded. You can count on your customers having to download major upgrades, and before you know it their entire .net install needs updating, before you can show your animations and applications. Silverlight also doesn't work on Linux. It's supposed to, through Novell's efforts with Mono, etc, but in practice, in the field, it just does not work where you need it to. I don't know if and how well, in practice, Silverlight works on the Mac, but I don't trust it.

Eventually, I think, that future HTML5/SVG (Canvas maybe?) is the way to go. It'll even do 3D using OpenGL accelerated graphics... (but I don't know if that's portable enough). In the meantime, Flash is your safe bet, and it's almost guaranteed to run anywhere.

I wonder if anyone has created an animation package that outputs to swf files that's better than the Flash IDE. Shouldn't be too hard, given Flash IDE's clumsiness.

Outgoing

Here's something very basic. Long way to go. Lots of these types of tinker toys all over the web, but none of them take it anywhere near enough it seems. svg-edit.googlecode.com/svn/branches/2.5.1/editor/… – Outgoing

I agree with your point on frequent releases of Silverlight. HTML5 is claimed to be a standard, but I think it won't become a standard until all browser developers will fully comply with it. In regards to not trusting Microsoft, I think that every company out there is in the field for money, and not for the good of men kind, just like Google or Apple. I require rich drag and drop functionality, but I don't think that I can achieve it with HTML, it will be very clumsy. Also, do you know if silverlight app can be decompiled easily? I'm worried on how much end users might be able to see. Thanks! – Booma

@vikp - Standards are based on implementation. Standards bodies rarely invent anything. So browsers will, and do, implement HTML5 functionality long before the spec is ever finalized. For example, CSS2.1 was only finalized last year yet I doubt any of us just started using those properties then. – Posh

Answer 6

Flex/Flash and SilverL. now are very similar... using webservice for the clientt/server comunication you can work well with both.

Sure, for .NET developer with Visual Studio to use SilverL. is much more FAST and you need C# only.

But, Flash is more available on PCs, also for mobile devices... you could think for Flash if you need portability.

Otalgia

I don't agree: the only mobile devices that (partially) support flash actually are Symbian and Android. iOS: no, Blackberry: no, WP7: no. If you want portability HTML4 is the way to go. HTML5 in the future. If you are ok with Win and MacOS choose between Flash and Silverlight. – Lousewort