Microsoft smacks down new Media Player too…

Oh, Microsoft didn’t let Adobe have all the NAB fun. Here’s Beet.TV with Microsoft’s Forest Key who announces a new media player strategy for Microsoft too (based around its WPF/E technology). Here’s Adobe’s announcements on Google News and here’s Microsoft’s news, also on Google News.

So, here’s why this is important:

1) Microsoft doesn’t want to lose more market share to the future YouTube’s.
2) Adobe has more distribution than WPF/E has so far (Flash is on nearly everything and is the technology behind most of today’s popular video sites). It’s hoping to use that distribution to sell a series of servers.
3) Adobe’s development tools are more cross-platform than Microsoft’s are and are hoping its new media player keeps the Microsoft side of the fence from looking very attractive (Apple today announced that it has sold 800,000 copies of Final Cut Pro — those media developers aren’t very likely to jump on Microsoft’s bandwagon).
4) Microsoft’s technology is flashier (no pun intended) but isn’t proven in the marketplace yet. Yeah, Microsoft has pulled out some big guns that are saying they are supporting its new technology.
5) Microsoft has a HUGE lead over Adobe in HDTV. That’s going to be where Microsoft will get a lot of traction and where Adobe is still chasing Microsoft’s tail. Will that lead matter, though? Not to ABC.com. It already has all of ABC’s TV shows online in a near-HDTV format and player (based on Move Networks) and doesn’t need either Adobe or Microsoft’s stuff. Same with Joost, which is getting to be very popular if my Twitter friends are a good judge of things. Same with Stage6.divx.com. No Adobe or Microsoft stuff in either of those. So, really both Microsoft and Adobe are losing marketshare to other HDTV distribution and display technologies.

What do you think? How does Adobe’s and Microsoft’s announcements change the marketplace?

98 thoughts on “Microsoft smacks down new Media Player too…

  1. “Is Linux really cheaper to manage? How so? I’ve heard that Windows tends to be cheaper to manage because (1) there are more people who know how to do it and (2) there are more admin tools avaialbe. I could be wrong.”

    Of course there are ;) Universities have been admin’ing *nix for years.

    Linux tools are all there, debconf and apt-get local repo’s for Ubuntu/debian, and I know the other distribs have their own tools. Then there’s thin clients, the Linux Terminal Services Project, openLDAP, etc. Groupware programs exist as well, like Zimbra and OpenScalix and others.

    Anyways I’m not an advertisement or anything, but this statement just jumped out at me.

  2. “Is Linux really cheaper to manage? How so? I’ve heard that Windows tends to be cheaper to manage because (1) there are more people who know how to do it and (2) there are more admin tools avaialbe. I could be wrong.”

    Of course there are ;) Universities have been admin’ing *nix for years.

    Linux tools are all there, debconf and apt-get local repo’s for Ubuntu/debian, and I know the other distribs have their own tools. Then there’s thin clients, the Linux Terminal Services Project, openLDAP, etc. Groupware programs exist as well, like Zimbra and OpenScalix and others.

    Anyways I’m not an advertisement or anything, but this statement just jumped out at me.

  3. John, that’s the point: it is a joke, and it’s even created by a Microsoft employee. I’m not the only one making the “not favorable” mental connections.

  4. John, that’s the point: it is a joke, and it’s even created by a Microsoft employee. I’m not the only one making the “not favorable” mental connections.

  5. Robinson, would you care to show me where I’ve gone against my initial position?

    Hmm…let’s see:

    I initially said:

    I’ll believe it when I don’t see non-MS platforms in the “Shitacular WM Experience” ghetto that Microsoft has worked so hard to put them in. When I can play full on WM11 video with DRM in Firefox on Linux or Mac OS X, and I can to it as a full shipping product for more than a single product cycle, I’ll believe it. That was in comment #2

    I do in fact have extreme doubts that Microsoft will support this beyond an initial release in a cross-platform stance. This is based on two points among many. First, the initial BS about Active X being cross-platform. That got double-tapped and buried in the ditch out back pretty fast. More recently, Rotor, which went from being supported on a number of platforms with version 1.x to a Windows – only toy with version 2. Another example? The way WM was, and still is by the way, treated on non-Microsoft platforms. Another example of Microsoft being full of hot air about interop? Port25, their big “Look at our open source committment” site, which quickly turned into a shill for how great WIndows is, and how you can run all your open source software on Windows.

    In comment #19, I pointed out to Wreck that WM is a real issue in the business world for !MS platform users. I pointed out to notaprguy that if you are a Windows-only shop, and all your customers are Windows only, WM is just fine. It’s when you try to branch out past Microsoft platforms that it becomes a real problem, and that outside of Windows, the dev tools for Silverlight are rather limited.

    I did say, and I still say, that Silverlight is a decent name. It has little to do with WPF, but it’s easy to remember, catchy, and creates a tangible image when you think of the word. That’s a great bit of marketing there, and for a company like Microsoft that specializes in turning cool names into crap, a real accomplishment.

    Moving on to comment #20, that other than MP3, Silverlight only supports Microsoft codecs, so if you’re using H.264 for HD, because it’s an open standard, then you have to transcode. That’s not a great option, transcoding is never perfectly clean. Based on that information, gained from the Silverlight FAQ, I said that it’s an improvement for WM in a cross-platform sense, but that it’s not on a par with Flash at either the client or dev tools level.

    #23 was just me being impressed with Coulter pulling in some cool references for Silverlight. I still am.

    #36 was after you tried to use a really inane example, (Xbox references on 30 Rock as a way of showing Microsoft is cool???) and tried to justify your own mindless swilling of the Microsoft PR Flavor-Aid. I’m still being consistent. Silverlight is a cool name. But it’s one name. That’s not a “new” anything, it’s just a random occurrence, especially when compared to the continual pathetic comedy that is the WIndowsMSNOfficeLive branding clusterfuck.

    I also pointed out that a cool name doesn’t make up for deficiences in the product, and that if the Xbox 360 is so cool, how come it can’t outsell the PS/2 month to month? I was kind, and left off how Microsoft got busted channel-stuffing the 360.

    #41 was a reply to Scott Barnes, pointing out the limitations of Silverlight, esp. with regard to Linux and using non-MS codecs. MP3 support is hardly some blinding flash of a new open attitude. I also reiterated my point that short of using text editors or other hacks, for a company to start doing real dev work on Silverlight, they have to move that work onto Windows boxes and Microsoft tools. that’s going to be a real limitation for a segment used to working on, well, whatever.

    I also pointed out that Microsoft has made grandiose interop statements before, and none of them lasted long enough to really count, and how Silverlight still reeks of the old Microsoft that is still the current Microsoft.

    Also note that I disagree with Goebbels’ opinion of Silverlight. (I’m the one that likes the name, DO try to keep it straight), but I agree with his opinion that Microsoft branding/marketing is far from “fixed” as you want to believe it is based on less than a handful of products.

    Dude, you have about as much “play” skills as a 3 year old, only you’re less cute. Good job on showing where I’ve tried to distance myself from my points. This whole “arguing with people out of kindergarten” is new to you, isn’t it.

  6. Robinson, would you care to show me where I’ve gone against my initial position?

    Hmm…let’s see:

    I initially said:

    I’ll believe it when I don’t see non-MS platforms in the “Shitacular WM Experience” ghetto that Microsoft has worked so hard to put them in. When I can play full on WM11 video with DRM in Firefox on Linux or Mac OS X, and I can to it as a full shipping product for more than a single product cycle, I’ll believe it. That was in comment #2

    I do in fact have extreme doubts that Microsoft will support this beyond an initial release in a cross-platform stance. This is based on two points among many. First, the initial BS about Active X being cross-platform. That got double-tapped and buried in the ditch out back pretty fast. More recently, Rotor, which went from being supported on a number of platforms with version 1.x to a Windows – only toy with version 2. Another example? The way WM was, and still is by the way, treated on non-Microsoft platforms. Another example of Microsoft being full of hot air about interop? Port25, their big “Look at our open source committment” site, which quickly turned into a shill for how great WIndows is, and how you can run all your open source software on Windows.

    In comment #19, I pointed out to Wreck that WM is a real issue in the business world for !MS platform users. I pointed out to notaprguy that if you are a Windows-only shop, and all your customers are Windows only, WM is just fine. It’s when you try to branch out past Microsoft platforms that it becomes a real problem, and that outside of Windows, the dev tools for Silverlight are rather limited.

    I did say, and I still say, that Silverlight is a decent name. It has little to do with WPF, but it’s easy to remember, catchy, and creates a tangible image when you think of the word. That’s a great bit of marketing there, and for a company like Microsoft that specializes in turning cool names into crap, a real accomplishment.

    Moving on to comment #20, that other than MP3, Silverlight only supports Microsoft codecs, so if you’re using H.264 for HD, because it’s an open standard, then you have to transcode. That’s not a great option, transcoding is never perfectly clean. Based on that information, gained from the Silverlight FAQ, I said that it’s an improvement for WM in a cross-platform sense, but that it’s not on a par with Flash at either the client or dev tools level.

    #23 was just me being impressed with Coulter pulling in some cool references for Silverlight. I still am.

    #36 was after you tried to use a really inane example, (Xbox references on 30 Rock as a way of showing Microsoft is cool???) and tried to justify your own mindless swilling of the Microsoft PR Flavor-Aid. I’m still being consistent. Silverlight is a cool name. But it’s one name. That’s not a “new” anything, it’s just a random occurrence, especially when compared to the continual pathetic comedy that is the WIndowsMSNOfficeLive branding clusterfuck.

    I also pointed out that a cool name doesn’t make up for deficiences in the product, and that if the Xbox 360 is so cool, how come it can’t outsell the PS/2 month to month? I was kind, and left off how Microsoft got busted channel-stuffing the 360.

    #41 was a reply to Scott Barnes, pointing out the limitations of Silverlight, esp. with regard to Linux and using non-MS codecs. MP3 support is hardly some blinding flash of a new open attitude. I also reiterated my point that short of using text editors or other hacks, for a company to start doing real dev work on Silverlight, they have to move that work onto Windows boxes and Microsoft tools. that’s going to be a real limitation for a segment used to working on, well, whatever.

    I also pointed out that Microsoft has made grandiose interop statements before, and none of them lasted long enough to really count, and how Silverlight still reeks of the old Microsoft that is still the current Microsoft.

    Also note that I disagree with Goebbels’ opinion of Silverlight. (I’m the one that likes the name, DO try to keep it straight), but I agree with his opinion that Microsoft branding/marketing is far from “fixed” as you want to believe it is based on less than a handful of products.

    Dude, you have about as much “play” skills as a 3 year old, only you’re less cute. Good job on showing where I’ve tried to distance myself from my points. This whole “arguing with people out of kindergarten” is new to you, isn’t it.

  7. “But, John…? But, John, eve you disagree with me? Don’t you?

    Oops.”

    LOL
    Goebbels, what you missed is how easy it is to play Welch. He compliments Microsoft on the name, then I push his buttons a bit (very easy to do with him), and I get him all riled going against his initial position (or, at least trying to distance himself from it) and agreeing with you. It’s hilarious!

  8. “But, John…? But, John, eve you disagree with me? Don’t you?

    Oops.”

    LOL
    Goebbels, what you missed is how easy it is to play Welch. He compliments Microsoft on the name, then I push his buttons a bit (very easy to do with him), and I get him all riled going against his initial position (or, at least trying to distance himself from it) and agreeing with you. It’s hilarious!

  9. “The Xbox is a more popular pop-culture reference? That means less than it used to since the Xbox 360 STILL can’t outsell the PS/2. When it’s outselling a five-year old system, you let me know. “

    Welch, I’m not talking about sales, I’m talking about brand names. “Xbox” is more used in pop culture than is “Playstation”. Sorry if that pisses you off (actually, I’m not, I’m happy to see you pissed off). And that means that the name “Xbox”, initially mocked, turned out to be a good name. “iPod” was initially mocked too (but as a Jobs Sycophant, you gloss over that part).

    And regarding video game console sales, you’re seriously comparing a $400 sytstem to a $130 system? Porsche has fewer sales than Hyundai, but which is more prevelant in pop-culture? Which do you see in (the god awful) music videos as status symbols? Anyway, “Playstation” is a more powerful brandname in the marketplace, but it’s not as “cool” a name as “Xbox” (and I use pop culture to back that up), which is what I was getting at.

    BTW, “Xbox” is referred to in much pop-culture besides 30 Rock; that was just an example.

    Oh, and 30 Rock is a great show, IMO. But to each his own. Resorting to bashing me because of a show that I like shows that you really have no argument to make. Goebbels is a joke, but you’re much worse. Because, unlike Goebbels, you’re actually intelligent. Intelligent enough to know that much of what you say is garbage, but you say it anyway. You’re also much ruder and cruder than Goebbels. I don’t know what you’re problem is, or why your posts are so often angry, but you need help.

  10. “The Xbox is a more popular pop-culture reference? That means less than it used to since the Xbox 360 STILL can’t outsell the PS/2. When it’s outselling a five-year old system, you let me know. “

    Welch, I’m not talking about sales, I’m talking about brand names. “Xbox” is more used in pop culture than is “Playstation”. Sorry if that pisses you off (actually, I’m not, I’m happy to see you pissed off). And that means that the name “Xbox”, initially mocked, turned out to be a good name. “iPod” was initially mocked too (but as a Jobs Sycophant, you gloss over that part).

    And regarding video game console sales, you’re seriously comparing a $400 sytstem to a $130 system? Porsche has fewer sales than Hyundai, but which is more prevelant in pop-culture? Which do you see in (the god awful) music videos as status symbols? Anyway, “Playstation” is a more powerful brandname in the marketplace, but it’s not as “cool” a name as “Xbox” (and I use pop culture to back that up), which is what I was getting at.

    BTW, “Xbox” is referred to in much pop-culture besides 30 Rock; that was just an example.

    Oh, and 30 Rock is a great show, IMO. But to each his own. Resorting to bashing me because of a show that I like shows that you really have no argument to make. Goebbels is a joke, but you’re much worse. Because, unlike Goebbels, you’re actually intelligent. Intelligent enough to know that much of what you say is garbage, but you say it anyway. You’re also much ruder and cruder than Goebbels. I don’t know what you’re problem is, or why your posts are so often angry, but you need help.

  11. It will push both developers and designers to more extremes in the audio / video space and along with Animation techniques.

    As long as they don’t care about Linux users and use only Microsoft video codecs.

    I doubt anyones stupid to think that Microsoft just wokeup one morning and went “ya know what, wouldn’t mind a piece of that runtime space, figure i’ll take a punt”… theres more to the story.

    Sure: “Shit, people are still using stuff that isn’t WM. We aren’t the only player in that space. GRAAAAGH, BALLMER SMASH!!!”

    Overall, i think its exciting times ahead and while I don’t think SilverLight is the “Flash Killer”, I do think that Adobe will push just that little harder to do better, which translates to much smarter tools (input/output) for developers.

    As long as you don’t care about Linux users, and don’t mind moving your dev environments to Windows, or using text editors for your dev work. Sure, that’s a much better solution.

    Guys like yourself may also get more interesting video online (ever thought of some closeups now? hehe).

    As long as Robert wants to alienate Linux users, and limit himself to WIndows Video codecs.

    Are you beginning to see where people who aren’t living in a solely Windows world would have issues with this. Yes, you can get a Mac version of the Silverlight plugin. For how long? Anyone can do something once. Show me they’re in this for the long haul on !Windows. Rotor 1.x was cross platform, Rotor 2? Yeah, Windows only. Active X was cross-platform once.

    Where are the !Windows Dev tools, and no, i don’t mean a good XML editor.

    Where’s a FF linux plugin?

    Microsoft is still hitting us with PR fluff on this, and it still stinks of old “cross-platform” scams from the Windows group.

  12. It will push both developers and designers to more extremes in the audio / video space and along with Animation techniques.

    As long as they don’t care about Linux users and use only Microsoft video codecs.

    I doubt anyones stupid to think that Microsoft just wokeup one morning and went “ya know what, wouldn’t mind a piece of that runtime space, figure i’ll take a punt”… theres more to the story.

    Sure: “Shit, people are still using stuff that isn’t WM. We aren’t the only player in that space. GRAAAAGH, BALLMER SMASH!!!”

    Overall, i think its exciting times ahead and while I don’t think SilverLight is the “Flash Killer”, I do think that Adobe will push just that little harder to do better, which translates to much smarter tools (input/output) for developers.

    As long as you don’t care about Linux users, and don’t mind moving your dev environments to Windows, or using text editors for your dev work. Sure, that’s a much better solution.

    Guys like yourself may also get more interesting video online (ever thought of some closeups now? hehe).

    As long as Robert wants to alienate Linux users, and limit himself to WIndows Video codecs.

    Are you beginning to see where people who aren’t living in a solely Windows world would have issues with this. Yes, you can get a Mac version of the Silverlight plugin. For how long? Anyone can do something once. Show me they’re in this for the long haul on !Windows. Rotor 1.x was cross platform, Rotor 2? Yeah, Windows only. Active X was cross-platform once.

    Where are the !Windows Dev tools, and no, i don’t mean a good XML editor.

    Where’s a FF linux plugin?

    Microsoft is still hitting us with PR fluff on this, and it still stinks of old “cross-platform” scams from the Windows group.

  13. “30 Rock”???? Is that show still on? What’s that pull in the ratings? About a 2? And that’s being used as a cultural barometer?

  14. “30 Rock”???? Is that show still on? What’s that pull in the ratings? About a 2? And that’s being used as a cultural barometer?

  15. To be honest Robert,

    It will push both developers and designers to more extremes in the audio / video space and along with Animation techniques.

    I doubt anyones stupid to think that Microsoft just wokeup one morning and went “ya know what, wouldn’t mind a piece of that runtime space, figure i’ll take a punt”… theres more to the story.

    Overall, i think its exciting times ahead and while I don’t think SilverLight is the “Flash Killer”, I do think that Adobe will push just that little harder to do better, which translates to much smarter tools (input/output) for developers.

    Guys like yourself may also get more interesting video online (ever thought of some closeups now? hehe).

    Scott Barnes
    Developer Evangelist
    Microsoft.

  16. To be honest Robert,

    It will push both developers and designers to more extremes in the audio / video space and along with Animation techniques.

    I doubt anyones stupid to think that Microsoft just wokeup one morning and went “ya know what, wouldn’t mind a piece of that runtime space, figure i’ll take a punt”… theres more to the story.

    Overall, i think its exciting times ahead and while I don’t think SilverLight is the “Flash Killer”, I do think that Adobe will push just that little harder to do better, which translates to much smarter tools (input/output) for developers.

    Guys like yourself may also get more interesting video online (ever thought of some closeups now? hehe).

    Scott Barnes
    Developer Evangelist
    Microsoft.

  17. It suprises me that MS haven’t done more with their media center, and web distro of TV.

    I have a lot of friends who intend to have Mediacenter as their next TV experience.

  18. It suprises me that MS haven’t done more with their media center, and web distro of TV.

    I have a lot of friends who intend to have Mediacenter as their next TV experience.

  19. “I will say I’m impressed with the name. How many Bothans died to get something that decent through Microsoft’s Branding Swamp of Eternal Stench.”

    It’s the new Microsoft. Their naming and packaging have been much better since they made that MS/iPod video. You’re going to have to find other reasons to bash the company. But I see from the above post, that even your compliments are bashes, so I guess you can keep doing that for a while. It’s pretty tired though.

    Oh cry me a river. I’ve been hearing “it’s the new Microsoft crapola for a decade now, and it never is. Sorry if I’m not getting Windows logo tattoos for a product *name* that not only doesn’t suck, but is kinda cool. However, the product NAME doesn’t make up for deficiencies in the PRODUCT.

    And as Geobbels pointed out, if this is the “new” Microsoft, the explain, por favor, the Windows Office MSN Live *debacle* that is still unraveling?

    You mean, like the name “iPod” was mocked when it was first released? Or like the “Xbox” name was mocked but now is a recognized household name, surpassing “Playstation” in pop-culture references? (30 Rock has had at least six shows with Halo/Xbox references.)

    The Xbox is a more popular pop-culture reference? That means less than it used to since the Xbox 360 STILL can’t outsell the PS/2. When it’s outselling a five-year old system, you let me know.

    If you’re going to call someone a laughing stock, then I will recommend that you get a better “big gun fact” than 30 ROCK. ‘Cause that kind of kills your moral high ground there.

  20. “I will say I’m impressed with the name. How many Bothans died to get something that decent through Microsoft’s Branding Swamp of Eternal Stench.”

    It’s the new Microsoft. Their naming and packaging have been much better since they made that MS/iPod video. You’re going to have to find other reasons to bash the company. But I see from the above post, that even your compliments are bashes, so I guess you can keep doing that for a while. It’s pretty tired though.

    Oh cry me a river. I’ve been hearing “it’s the new Microsoft crapola for a decade now, and it never is. Sorry if I’m not getting Windows logo tattoos for a product *name* that not only doesn’t suck, but is kinda cool. However, the product NAME doesn’t make up for deficiencies in the PRODUCT.

    And as Geobbels pointed out, if this is the “new” Microsoft, the explain, por favor, the Windows Office MSN Live *debacle* that is still unraveling?

    You mean, like the name “iPod” was mocked when it was first released? Or like the “Xbox” name was mocked but now is a recognized household name, surpassing “Playstation” in pop-culture references? (30 Rock has had at least six shows with Halo/Xbox references.)

    The Xbox is a more popular pop-culture reference? That means less than it used to since the Xbox 360 STILL can’t outsell the PS/2. When it’s outselling a five-year old system, you let me know.

    If you’re going to call someone a laughing stock, then I will recommend that you get a better “big gun fact” than 30 ROCK. ‘Cause that kind of kills your moral high ground there.

  21. Oh boo hoo, Mr. Robinson.

    If you don’t see that the iPod has been accepted as a name and is an astonishingly good name, sorry for you.

    The Xbox is a decent name. Of course, the 360 was a stupid idea. I’ve even seen Gates laugh at and wonder what the hell they’ll call the next version.

    Sorry, if I misspoke: I don’t give more than a few seconds to be concerned about whether I typed Silverline or Silverlight or Silverskin.

    If you haven’t seen anyone questioning the name, you haven’t read the comments here.

    Oh, and I could give a flying fck if anyone thinks I’m a laughing stock or not.

  22. Oh boo hoo, Mr. Robinson.

    If you don’t see that the iPod has been accepted as a name and is an astonishingly good name, sorry for you.

    The Xbox is a decent name. Of course, the 360 was a stupid idea. I’ve even seen Gates laugh at and wonder what the hell they’ll call the next version.

    Sorry, if I misspoke: I don’t give more than a few seconds to be concerned about whether I typed Silverline or Silverlight or Silverskin.

    If you haven’t seen anyone questioning the name, you haven’t read the comments here.

    Oh, and I could give a flying fck if anyone thinks I’m a laughing stock or not.

  23. Oh, and Goebbels, even your MS-bashing cohort Welch admits (grudgingly, as you can see from his post) that “Silverlight” is a good name. If it’s so deserving of being made fun of, how come I’ve not seen it today, and I’ve read many message boards about it today, including many messages from MS-haters such as yourself. Not once, have I seen the name “made fun of”.

    But, why am I debating with someone that names himself after one of history’s most villainous monsters? Believe whatever you want.

  24. Oh, and Goebbels, even your MS-bashing cohort Welch admits (grudgingly, as you can see from his post) that “Silverlight” is a good name. If it’s so deserving of being made fun of, how come I’ve not seen it today, and I’ve read many message boards about it today, including many messages from MS-haters such as yourself. Not once, have I seen the name “made fun of”.

    But, why am I debating with someone that names himself after one of history’s most villainous monsters? Believe whatever you want.

  25. “(Zune and Silverline are stupid and laughable names, worthy of being made fun of.) “

    LOL
    You mean, like the name “iPod” was mocked when it was first released? Or like the “Xbox” name was mocked but now is a recognized household name, surpassing “Playstation” in pop-culture references? (30 Rock has had at least six shows with Halo/Xbox references.)

    Goebbels, you are the laughing stock of this blog. The sad thing is that you don’t even realize it. LOL

    Oh, and if you’re going to “make fun of” the name “Silverline”, at least get the name right.

  26. “(Zune and Silverline are stupid and laughable names, worthy of being made fun of.) “

    LOL
    You mean, like the name “iPod” was mocked when it was first released? Or like the “Xbox” name was mocked but now is a recognized household name, surpassing “Playstation” in pop-culture references? (30 Rock has had at least six shows with Halo/Xbox references.)

    Goebbels, you are the laughing stock of this blog. The sad thing is that you don’t even realize it. LOL

    Oh, and if you’re going to “make fun of” the name “Silverline”, at least get the name right.

  27. “Their naming and packaging have been much better since they made that MS/iPod video.”

    I’d say just the opposite. Their products and culture do not match a marketing strategy they are trying to emulate so their efforts seem forced, lame, and counterproductive. (Zune and Silverline are stupid and laughable names, worthy of being made fun of.) Also, their past traditions are not dead: just look at Windows Live Service names and the SKUs for Windows.

  28. “Their naming and packaging have been much better since they made that MS/iPod video.”

    I’d say just the opposite. Their products and culture do not match a marketing strategy they are trying to emulate so their efforts seem forced, lame, and counterproductive. (Zune and Silverline are stupid and laughable names, worthy of being made fun of.) Also, their past traditions are not dead: just look at Windows Live Service names and the SKUs for Windows.

  29. @26 I’m right there with ya. The only time I use my PC/Laptop to watch video of any value is when I’m on a plane.

    @28. You are not addressing the issue. Either Windows is entrenched or it’s not. We are not talking about acquisition costs. You said once a technology is entrenched its impossible to unseat it. You’ve not provided evidence as to why it’s harder technically, to unseat Flash than it is Windows. In a greenfield environment in theory, may Linux is cheaper to deploy. But we are talking about unsteating an incumbent technology. What data points do you have to support your contention? Your anecdotal evidence is not sufficent to support your position. Do you have any broader evidence?

  30. @26 I’m right there with ya. The only time I use my PC/Laptop to watch video of any value is when I’m on a plane.

    @28. You are not addressing the issue. Either Windows is entrenched or it’s not. We are not talking about acquisition costs. You said once a technology is entrenched its impossible to unseat it. You’ve not provided evidence as to why it’s harder technically, to unseat Flash than it is Windows. In a greenfield environment in theory, may Linux is cheaper to deploy. But we are talking about unsteating an incumbent technology. What data points do you have to support your contention? Your anecdotal evidence is not sufficent to support your position. Do you have any broader evidence?

  31. “I will say I’m impressed with the name. How many Bothans died to get something that decent through Microsoft’s Branding Swamp of Eternal Stench.”

    It’s the new Microsoft. Their naming and packaging have been much better since they made that MS/iPod video. You’re going to have to find other reasons to bash the company. But I see from the above post, that even your compliments are bashes, so I guess you can keep doing that for a while. It’s pretty tired though.

  32. “I will say I’m impressed with the name. How many Bothans died to get something that decent through Microsoft’s Branding Swamp of Eternal Stench.”

    It’s the new Microsoft. Their naming and packaging have been much better since they made that MS/iPod video. You’re going to have to find other reasons to bash the company. But I see from the above post, that even your compliments are bashes, so I guess you can keep doing that for a while. It’s pretty tired though.

  33. Wreck – so where do you get your info that businesses are replacing Windows with Linux? I’m curious. I’m guessing that if there is any significant migration to Linux it is coming at the expense of Unix servers, not Windows. Windows marketshare on the client and server is steady.

    Is Linux really cheaper to manage? How so? I’ve heard that Windows tends to be cheaper to manage because (1) there are more people who know how to do it and (2) there are more admin tools avaialbe. I could be wrong.

    So…why is Flash “great tehcnology?” Do you know or are you parroting the hype? Which flavors of Unix do you administer? Quick! Answer in 10 seconds or less or we’ll all know you’re blowing smoke. Just kidding.

  34. Wreck – so where do you get your info that businesses are replacing Windows with Linux? I’m curious. I’m guessing that if there is any significant migration to Linux it is coming at the expense of Unix servers, not Windows. Windows marketshare on the client and server is steady.

    Is Linux really cheaper to manage? How so? I’ve heard that Windows tends to be cheaper to manage because (1) there are more people who know how to do it and (2) there are more admin tools avaialbe. I could be wrong.

    So…why is Flash “great tehcnology?” Do you know or are you parroting the hype? Which flavors of Unix do you administer? Quick! Answer in 10 seconds or less or we’ll all know you’re blowing smoke. Just kidding.

  35. @24

    Slightly different there…

    Businesses are replacing Windows with Linux because it makes great business sense to do so. Why pay for licenses when you don’t need to. Despite all the lies written by the MS-sponsored TCO papers, Linux is far cheaper to deploy and maintain.

    Flash is great technology. People actually like it. Windows is junk for the most part, and is far more unreliable than any *nix-based OS. I know. I’ve been a *nix sysadmin for almost 10 years. I’ve rarely had properly maintained *nix boxes go down. Almost every Windows server I’ve ever worked with has had issues at one point in time or another.

  36. @24

    Slightly different there…

    Businesses are replacing Windows with Linux because it makes great business sense to do so. Why pay for licenses when you don’t need to. Despite all the lies written by the MS-sponsored TCO papers, Linux is far cheaper to deploy and maintain.

    Flash is great technology. People actually like it. Windows is junk for the most part, and is far more unreliable than any *nix-based OS. I know. I’ve been a *nix sysadmin for almost 10 years. I’ve rarely had properly maintained *nix boxes go down. Almost every Windows server I’ve ever worked with has had issues at one point in time or another.

Comments are closed.