ie8 fix

Will Microsoft's Silverlight dampen the appeal of Google's Chrome OS?

By | November 20, 2009, 6:40am PST

Summary: I’m not one of those ready to write Windows an RIP certificate now that Google has finally taken (some of) the wraps off its Chrome OS. In fact, after reading through industry watchers’ questions and Google’s answers about it, I’m thinking that Chrome OS may not look quite so appealing by the time it rolls out in late 2010. Here’s why.

I’m not one of those ready to write Windows an RIP certificate now that Google has finally taken (some of) the wraps off its Chrome OS. In fact, after reading through industry watchers’ questions and Google’s answers about it, I’m thinking that Chrome OS may not look quite so appealing by the time it rolls out in late 2010. Here’s why.

First, as others have noted, Google’s Chrome OS is a new windowing system layered on top of Linux that is being customized to run on netbooks. Chrome OS is an “extension to Chrome,” the company’s browser, in Google execs’ own words. Google officials are billing Chrome OS, among other things, as a way to provide Web applications with the functionality of desktop applications.

Microsoft offers an extension not just to its browser, Internet Explorer, but also to Firefox, Apple’s Safari and Google’s own Chrome. That extension is Silverlight. Among other things, Silverlight is a vehicle for providing increasingly complex consumer and business apps via a browser.

At the Microsoft Professional Developers Conference (PDC) this week, Microsoft rolled out its strategy and plans for Silverlight 4, the version of its browser plug-in that is slated for final release by mid-2010. Silverlight 4 is adding support for data binding, enterprise networking and printing, and lots of other features that are likely to make the platform more appealing to folks writing not just single-function, lightweight Web apps, but enterprise apps, as well.

Silverlight is a slimmed-down, cross-platform version of Microsoft’s Windows Presentation Foundation (WPF) programming model. Each successive iteration of Silverlight includes more and more WPF functionality (and vice versa).

Some day — Microsoft won’t say exactly when — Silverlight and WPF are going to merge into one Web programming and app delivery model that, most likely, will be known as Silverlight, Brad Becker, Director of Product Management for Microsoft’s Rich Client Platforms, told me this week at TechEd the PDC. Now that the two share the same compiled assemblies, tools and the like, that idea isn’t really so far-fetched. Until that happens, Microsoft plans to continue to offer both WPF and Silverlight, steering developers of more complex, resource-intensive applications toward WPF and Web-centric app developers toward Silverlight.

When Google execs were asked during this week’s press conference where they shared more information (but no code or systems) about the Chrome OS as to whether Silverlight would be able to work on Chrome OS, they said no comment. Maybe they see Silverlight might be more foe than friend of the Chrome OS.

I understand Silverlight is not an operating system. But some Google watchers are questioning whether the Chrome OS is actually an operating system, either, or just a glorified browser. Unlike Silverlight, which can run on a variety of PCs and soon, phones, Google OS is going to be a dedicated Linux-based netbook OS that will only work with certain predesignated peripherals. Microsoft already offers a netbook OS — Windows — which doesn’t force you to run all apps inside your browser — and which works with lots of different devices.

Would you go so far as to say the Chrome OS is going to be more of a Silverlight competitor than a WIndows one? I’m thinking right now that may seem a bit far-fetched, but as more and more apps are designed to run in Silverlight, maybe not….?

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily e-mail newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Mary Jo has covered the tech industry for more than 25 years for a variety of publications and Web sites, and is a frequent guest on radio, TV and podcasts, speaking about all things Microsoft-related. She is the author of Microsoft 2.0: How Microsoft plans to stay relevant in the post-Gates era (John Wiley & Sons, 2008).

Disclosure

Mary-Jo Foley

Freelance journalist/blogger Mary Jo Foley has nothing to disclose. WYSIWYG (what you see is what you get). I do not own Microsoft stock or stock in any of its partners or competitors. I have no business ventures that are sponsored by/funded by Microsoft or any of its partners or competitors.

Biography

Mary-Jo Foley

Mary Jo Foley has covered the tech industry for 25 years for a variety of publications, including ZDNet, eWeek and Baseline. She has kept close tabs on Microsoft strategy, products and technologies for the past 10 years. In the late 1990s, she penned the award-winning "At The Evil Empire" column for ZDNet, and more recently the Microsoft Watch blog for Ziff Davis.

Got a tip? Send her an email with your rants, rumors, tips and tattles. Confidentiality guaranteed.

Related Discussions on TechRepublic

Did you know you can take part in these discussions with your ZDNet membership?
128
Comments

Join the conversation!

Just In

RE: Will Microsoft's Silverlight dampen the appeal of Google's Chrome OS?
jackson1984-24316069205748857739440257893812 10th Oct
Astounding publish! I opt for to view a observe up on this subject nfl football jerseys matter??
0 Votes
+ -
MS is the past Google is the future so Nope
Uralbas Updated - 20th Nov 2009
Google is the old MS, MS is the old IBM.

PC_DOS never made it, MS_DOS did.

The driving factor was openness and innovation.

Today and in the near future, Google has
both

Today MS sees profit only and based on that
drives its innovation.

Like in the past, those who adapt faster thrive,
those who are set in their ways languish.

Silverlight requires a lot of computing power to
do the work it does.

Chrome OS will fly from boot time. So MS is in
for harder times still.

HTML 5 and beyond will change the landscape on
how Internet operates. Google and Apple are
prepared for it. MS has Silverlight and has
Windows 7 enough said.
0 Votes
+ -
Profit motivation
hayneiii@... 20th Nov 2009
Profit will motivate. It always has. It will end up producing a better product in the future as it has in the present and the past. Open source will almost always be playing catch up. Not never, but usually, and certainly over time. As computing power continues to increase, the advantages of Silverlight will continue to grow. Boot up times are sometimes irritating, but not as irritating as inferior products. As more and more machine move to solid state memory boot up time reduce as well. Those with old inferior equipment will go with open source, that is what it is designed for after all.
0 Votes
+ -
Any other memes you wish to tell us about?
HypnoToad72 20th Nov 2009
1. Profit motivates profit and nothing more.
2. Recent products (2005~newer) show it's more about profit than quality.
3. There's nore to life than profit: Read Gogole's terms of service, particularly chapter 11. When using their system, they are granting themselves co-ownership and use of rather a lot of a person's intellectual property. Leeching off of others for personal profit. This is why small businesses and not corporate leeches need to be encouraged. And this time, Microsoft is the lesser evil. By far.
"And this time, Microsoft is the lesser evil. By far."



happy
0 Votes
+ -
"Gasp!"
lehnerus2000 23rd Nov 2009
nt

lehnerus2000
0 Votes
+ -
I believe I will side with the others
GuidingLight 20th Nov 2009
and say, no this is really not anything all that new or exciting.

You do not think Google only sees profit? Intersting how all of their products are created to drive business towards them.

I think you see too much of something that is not there in your zest to see Microsoft "disappear".

Goolge wants to change the lanscape to their benefit, unfortunatelly the rest just are not cooperating with them.
0 Votes
+ -
Siding with the others
hayneiii@... 20th Nov 2009
Even though it drives a hole in parts of the argument I was making, you are so right.
0 Votes
+ -
SilverLight nukes Google's gimmick
LBiege Updated - 20th Nov 2009
Check out the features of the latest SilverLight. It's a dream-set for web developers and simply blows competition away. Google's ChromeOS OTH looks like emperor's new cloth.
0 Votes
+ -
Silverlight sucks, the penguin gave Gates rabies.
bendib Updated - 20th Nov 2009
Bill foams at the mouth running into chairs and tables until his heart just stops, when the demons of hell hear, a pit opens up beneath Redmond sucking hell's master Bill Satan Gates back in.
0 Votes
+ -
Loser plus Loser = ?
LBiege Updated - 20th Nov 2009
Linux is a pathetic "but there's always next year" desktop loser.

HTML + JAVASCRIPT + AJAX is another pathetic loser framework for serious APP development.

Combining two losers together into ChromeOS gives you a bigger loser that's twice as pathetic.
0 Votes
+ -
hmm...
Linux Geek Updated - 20th Nov 2009
HTML + JAVASCRIPT + AJAX is another pathetic loser framework for serious APP development.

Isn't Silverlight based on Ajax?
0 Votes
+ -
SilverLight is running rich yet efficient .Net apps inside the browser.
0 Votes
+ -
No
honeymonster 21st Nov 2009
Isn't Silverlight based on Ajax?

No, not at all. Silverlight is based on a
slimmed down version of .NET, called
DLR*. So it is no more based on AJAX
than Flash is.

However, with the new dynamic language features
it offers a seamless binding to HTML. And
JavaScript can be modeled as just another of
the languages which can be used to code for
Silverlight.

Already now, developers can code for
Silverlight using a number of languages, such
as Ruby, C#, VB.NET, Python etc. The clever
thing is that all source code (unlike e.g.
JavaScript) are pre-compiled by the developer
into intermediate language (IL) code - an Ecma
standard. So the Silverlight execution engine
only needs to know how to compile IL to machine
code - it is agnostic to what language was
originally used.

Silverlight is quite impressive. But whether it
will displace JavaScript and/or kill HTML5 is
another story. Not so sure there.
Yes it will!
0 Votes
+ -
I believe!
Lovehog Dorkson 20th Nov 2009
All Linux heathens should believe: Microsoft is God and Loverock Davidson is his prophet.

Repent and convert, before you all turn into nasty, smelly pinguins who take candy away from little children!
0 Votes
+ -
You know what they do to prophets!
maskman01 20th Nov 2009
happy
0 Votes
+ -
Amen my brother!
urbandk 20th Nov 2009
Ashhadu anna la alOSa ila alWindows wa ashhadu anna Loverockan rasuulu Ballmer.
0 Votes
+ -
Don't know a lot about Silverlight, but
Economister Updated - 20th Nov 2009
it seems to me that ANY MS solution will need more expensive HW and will try to generate cash flow to replace what they may lose if they don't sell Windows/Office.

Therefore, if MS really has to compete on price, they start WAY behind the 8-ball. Google can give the stuff away, and vendors can put it on cheaper HW.

Am I missing something here? I just don't see a lot of options for MS
0 Votes
+ -
They have plenty of options.
GuidingLight 20th Nov 2009
The main one is that as long as they have an operating system that allows anyone to create anything that will run on it, then Google is the one with very little in the way of options.

Once you purchase Windows, you need never purchase another Microsoft product if you do not want.

With Google, well once you choose the Google option, you are stuck with what Goolge does, or does not do.
0 Votes
+ -
Those are options?
Economister 20th Nov 2009
You are not even dealing with the issues
0 Votes
+ -
Not sure if I agree...
FearTheDonut 20th Nov 2009
In terms of cost, Silverlight is free, along with the dev tools. Sure, there is more hardware needed, but it is no greater than that of Adobe Flash. And practically all hardware now can run Flash, yes?

So, I don't think cost is an issue here. Especially when you start looking at Windows sales. Windows 7 sales are strong, substantially from Vista sales (and XP, for that matter). Office remains to be seen (I haven't seen any stats, but would like to, especially with Google Docs being more pervasive). If there is going to be a difference in price, it won't be prohibitive by any means.
0 Votes
+ -
Details
Economister 20th Nov 2009
ARM vs Atom
Less RAM
Cheaper storage
Free OS/Apps (mostly)
Smaller battery

It snowballs

This is before any real or perceived advantages/disadvantages re the cloud, security etc.
0 Votes
+ -
My thoughts . . .
CobraA1 20th Nov 2009
"ARM vs Atom"

That battle was fought long ago. CISC vs RISC.

You have all of the same reasoning as the RISC
people did.

But RISC didn't win.

Your average ARM is likely to have far less
computational power in a single clock cycle
than a same speed x86, and due to its RISC
architecture, it will take more instructions to
do the same thing, leading to some code bloat.

"Less RAM"

Means less powerful OS.

It's not as if there's a shortage of RAM
anyways.

And maybe not less RAM:

-It will still need to handle all of the OS
stuff like real OSes do. You know, device
drivers, process management, all of that stuff.
It may be that when they start adding the OS
stuff, it may blow up to become the same size -
as, well, an OS.

-Web pages are blowing up themselves. I'm
actually running Chrome right now (great
browser!!), and some of my tabs use 30 megs, a
couple use 60 megs. That's right in there with
many of my regular apps. And it will only get
bigger as web apps become more complicated.

Flash and Gears take a good chunk of memory,
too.

"Cheaper storage"

Unlikely. They're hinting this thing will use
flash heavily, and flash is not cheaper than
hard drives.

"Free OS/Apps (mostly)"

Because the OS is built in. Just like Windows.

Linux has been free of charge for many, many
years. But it is still struggling against
Windows.

Maybe Chrome OS may level the playing field a
bit, but IMHO it's still in for a big battle if
starts competing directly against Microsoft.

But right now, it does not look like it's
competing directly. It's not a desktop OS.

And oh, yeah, Windows has plenty of free apps.
OpenOffice.org works on Windows, the GIMP works
on Windows, Firefox works on Windows, Chrome
(the browser) works on Windows. You can even
run Chrome OS in a virtual machine in Windows
if you want.

I've seen people run almost completely open
source on a Windows machine. Just because the
OS isn't open source doesn't mean you can't run
open source applications.

"Smaller battery"

If you want to be cut off in the middle of
watching a movie on an airplane.

But then again, you can't do that on an
airplane anyways. Very few flights have
internet. Chrome OS becomes a virtual brick
when there is no internet access.

Email and documents just aren't as entertaining
as a movie, IMO.

Actually, Windows 7 is very nice on batteries
in its current form. Better than XP, even. If
Chrome OS is better, it may not be by much.
0 Votes
+ -
what matters is technology
jk_10 20th Nov 2009
can give me an example which piece of work from google qualifies as technology. that's a bunch of creepy people got lucky.

at the time Bing replaces their search engine. they are gone.

i am disgusted anybody even mentions google as a tech company.
0 Votes
+ -
Ever heard of ....eh....people? (nt)
Economister 20th Nov 2009
nt
0 Votes
+ -
My thoughts . . .
CobraA1 20th Nov 2009
"it seems to me that ANY MS solution will need
more expensive HW and will try to generate cash
flow to replace what they may lose if they
don't sell Windows/Office."

Your magic 8-ball says it will be more
expensive no matter what they do, eh?

I think you underestimate them.

"Therefore, if MS really has to compete on
price, they start WAY behind the 8-ball. Google
can give the stuff away, and vendors can put it
on cheaper HW."

Microsoft may already be working on something.
They've already shown glimpses of a cloud OS
via Live Mesh and Azure.

In addition, it's not unusual for them to be
playing around with experimental OSes behind
closed doors. They are in the OS business,
after all, and it's not unusual for them to be
hiding stuff.

. . . and I'm going to be honest: Windows 7 is
a great OS, and runs well on netbooks. Why use
Chrome OS when I can run Chrome itself in
Windows 7?

. . . and furthermore, Windows 7 can sleep and
wake up almost instantly. While the cold boot
time of Chrome OS may be very impressive, it's
not as if cold booting is common anymore. For
the most part, I just sleep my laptop when not
in use.

"Am I missing something here"

Other than people have predicted Microsoft's
demise before? How are you different?
0 Votes
+ -
nt
0 Votes
+ -
Care to offer a considered reply of your own rather than just whining?
de-void-21165590650301806002836337787023 20th Nov 2009
NT
0 Votes
+ -
Yes I did consider it.
Economister Updated - 20th Nov 2009
There are unfortunately a few people around here who do not seem to have the intellectual capacity to carry on a logical, substantive discussion. I have been learning that the hard way for a while, but I am catching up. You must be one of them.
0 Votes
+ -
All Google is offering is a browser. MS could match their efforts by giving away Windows Mobile and IE. Most people would probably be willing to pay $10 more for local storage. Google is making a mistake by pushing web apps only this early.
0 Votes
+ -
At best Chrome OS is ahead of its time
ericesque 20th Nov 2009
the more likely scenario is that it is simply a product of a misinterpreted market.

With Chrome OS Google is imposing the restrictions of a smartphone on netbooks-- a device that consumers expect to act like a notebook. That restriction is limiting available application to web apps. People look at a smartphone and think apps are a feature that their old dumb phone didn't have. When they see those same simple apps on a netbook they aren't thinking COOL! They're thinking: but my notebook can do MS Office, IM, Quicken etc. What happened to those features?

Another assumption that Google has made is that younger generations are more willing to store their data online. Perhaps they think that if someone is comfortable storing their high school English paper on their servers when they get to college or the work force they will just be used to storing all their content with them.

What happens when Google is wrong? I think a healthy paranoia regarding online privacy and security is something people learn. It's an awareness that is developed as a person matures and the content they are creating and consuming requires more confidentiality.

I like Google, but Chrome OS will be a hard sell. Best of luck!
documents, maybe a spreadsheet here and there,
simple games, etc. Email would be through the
browser. They also want it more appliance like so
that it is instant on, no backups, no messy
configurations and installs, etc.

ChromeOS will do all of that much better than
Windows, with a lot less hassles.

Also, there WILL be a new specially sandboxed hight
level language to increase the performance and
complexity of web applications and offline
capabilities.

So, a lot of this hinges on the state of the
browser and offline capabilities between now and
the time that Chrome is released. In any case, even
it ChromeOS only gets 25% of the netbook market to
start, it will be a huge success.
0 Votes
+ -
I support a lot of users
LiquidLearner 20th Nov 2009
and I just don't see these people who "only want a web browser" and I certainly don't see these people only wanting a web browser at current netbook resolutions. Honestly Donnie, do you only want a web browser? You do nothing more compex with your PC?
the population only uses the basics, and in any
case, they could have a full Linux or Windows
desktop at home, and use ChromeOS for all that is
needed when on the go.

THE LIVES OF MANY DO NOT REVOLVE AROUND COMPUTERS.
0 Votes
+ -
That's funny. How come you've changed your tune Donnie?
de-void-21165590650301806002836337787023 20th Nov 2009
Last week you were blustering that ChomeOS was going to completely free the world of Windows.

What changed your mind?
0 Votes
+ -
I must be part of a demographic with impossibly small odds of encountering members of this broad swath.

I'm not expressly disagreeing with you. I agree that 25% of the netbook market should be considered a huge success-- though it still would not seriously impact Microsoft's market. I just seem to have a different view of the industry, such that achieving that 25% is incredibly unlikely.

Enlighten me.
processing. Most people do not have a job and life
that revolves around computers. Heck, I even have a
cousin that does not have a computer at home. He
would be perfect for ChromeOS. But remember ChromeOS
is ONLY for netbooks to start, and that is a SECOND
computer to use on the road.

In any case, as web applications mature, and offline
mode matures, the functionality you get out of pure
web applications is going to skyrocket.
0 Votes
+ -
It seems you've illustrated why Chrome could flop
ericesque Updated - 20th Nov 2009
You say most people's lives do not revolve around a computer. But ChromeOS is ideal for secondary computers to be used on the road.

Why would somebody that has such little need for a computer want to buy a SECOND computer? If a netbook is for 'on the road' can't the person wait until they get home to check their email?

You also claim that people just need email, web, and word processing. That's the same argument Linux has been making for decades. "Linux has enough functionality for most people". Well, most people still consider total value. They WANT a list of features they don't use now. It means they can get more from the device as they learn new things.

The real issue is users want to have their cake and eat it too. Sure, they want simplicity, but they're not willing to give up anything in exchange for it.

That's not to say Chrome isn't right for anybody-- just that Google may have a hard time convincing users it's right for them. Which has to come after Google explains to most users where the hell the Start button went.
0 Votes
+ -
the PC should have flopped. It really sucked in the beginning. I guess you know the result.

YOUR failure to see potential, for whatever reason, will probably have zero impact on the outcome. Stay with your programming or whatever. You will never make it in any type of strategic planning environment.
0 Votes
+ -
@ericesque: Logic? No comment. (nt)
Economister 20th Nov 2009
nt
0 Votes
+ -
has had for more than 10 years now, and it doesn't
seem that seeing or having potential is enough
nowadays.
small, so you can check email, read the news, search
for a business, chat, etc. Chrome OS will do that
just fine.

For many, a netbook would be ALL that they need,
possibly a bigger screen and keyboard to use at
home.
0 Votes
+ -
That netbook can run Windows 7
markbn 20th Nov 2009
The fact that W7 can do MORE than Chrome OS won't
make people think: "heck, this OS can do more than
the other, I'd better not buy a netbook with it"
(actually that would be a nice way of thinking, but
it seems that people have ignored it for decades)
How much of a difference in price would be between
both anyway?
0 Votes
+ -
Have you EVER used public transport?
de-void-21165590650301806002836337787023 20th Nov 2009
Most people who work in major metropolitan cities (outside the US) primarily use public transport to commute. Few of those public transport facilities offer comprehensive wireless internet connectivity.

Most workers who want to catch up on some email, read documents, read news & blog feeds, write their next blog, etc., need or want to have to do so via a live connection to the web whilst sitting on a bus/train/tube. They generally want to take their data with them and then sync when they arrive at home/work.

What would be the point in commuting to/from work with a chromeOS smartbook in your pocket? It'd be useless for the vast majority of your journey.
People also like to rent movies on itunes and watch them on the plane. Others like to play games while waiting.

ChromeOS will be less useful than a smartphone when there is no internet connection.

The majority of the public isn't going to be interested.
how many even know that Facebook has privacy settings?

Normal people are clueless, only IT people think about that stuff.
Not just online privacy and security, but availability and - most importantly - ownership of said intellectual property.

http://talkback.zdnet.com/5208-12691-0.html?forumID=1&threadID=71841&messageID=1388017&tag=content;col1

Very true and it speaks for itself.

Google is far more worrisome than Microsoft at this juncture. At least, for certain issues. Maybe not as much or not at all for others, but if intellectual property is being defended from pirates, it's got to work both ways.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Will Microsoft's Silverlight dampen the appeal of Google's Chrome OS?
jackson1984-24316069205748857739440257893812 10th Oct
Astounding publish! I opt for to view a observe up on this subject nfl football jerseys matter??

Join the conversation!

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]
ie8 fix

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
ie8 fix