Adobe AIR versus Microsoft Silverlight
15 05 2008I love reading some analysis about the evolution of the RIA space but what is it with tech reporters these days?
There seems to be very little research done and some absolutely ludicrous comparisons made. Here are some examples highlighted by fellow bloggers:
John Dowdell
Brajeshwar Oinam
Mrinal Wadhwa
To avoid any confusion, here’s a little cheat sheet:
- Adobe AIR is a runtime
- Microsoft Silverlight is a browser plugin
- Adobe Flash Player is a browser plugin
Or to put it differently AIR != Silverlight, a runtime is not a browser plugin.
Embed code
<a href="http://www.peterelst.com/blog/2008/05/15/adobe-air-versus-microsoft-silverlight/"><img src="http://www.peterelst.com/buttons/air-silverlight.jpg" width="150" height="56" alt="AIR != Silverlight" /></a>
Help spread the word! Feel free to use the badge above or create your own.
Yes, yes, that’s all true, but what do you think of JavaFx vs Barack Obama, that’s what I’d like to know, and if you can get a new nipple slip from Paris Hilton in the article, I think we’ll have our ad revenue for the month…!
Classic badge.. would help to clear up some misguided perceptions
[...] Peter Elst points out: Adobe AIR is not the same as Microsoft Silverlight. Where he uses words, I will use technology to [...]
[...] using web technologies, it has no real equivalent in the Microsoft world. In response to my posts, Peter Elst started a badge campaign to let the world know that it is wrong to say the words AIR and Silverlight in the same [...]
[...] Peter Elst has started a badge campaign to help spread the word, and Mrinal Wadhwa has created a badge that people can use on their blogs (see the top of this post). What you do makes a difference! Just incase someone ever asks you about Silverlight and AIR, here’s a great quote I read on Mrinal’s blog: Microsoft Silverlight is a browser plugin and is sort of similar to Adobe’s Flash Player and Flex Framework taken together [...]
[...] liked to start by Peter Elst campaign`s logo to that shows to the world that Adobe AIR is not equal to MS Silverlight. And I would like [...]
read my latest post i have clearly mention that adobe air ans microsoft silverlight are different things.
i have also made an extensive summary of both of them including their advantages as well as limitations
i am looking forward for u r response
Nice work. Where can I buy the T-shirt?
You could also go with a graphic that used a > in place of the !=. You could even replace the AIR logo with the Flash Player logo and use > which would still be true.
Don’t you feel obligated to define WPF?
Its not a definitive list Phillip — was just trying to make the point of Silverlight and AIR that seem to be getting compared to eachother more than anything else.
Feel free to add definitions for WPF, JavaFX, …
One down side to the graphic that it does visually equate the two. The natural reaction among some first-time readers would be to look for arguments that the two brands actually do match.
It may be better to focus on their natures: a browser plugin is not a desktop app. AIR goes beyond the browser — uses browser-development techniques to make cross-OS desktop apps.
I’ve started seeing more of the logos across various sites today, and am just worried that it may be fostering the very types of confusion we’ve all been so patiently correcting the last year…?
Silverlight is catch-up-to-Player, and the unanswered question is why Microsoft didn’t just give their Visual Studio customers SWF export. AIR is sui generis, one of a kind, unique. I’m not sure how to give a visual representation of a browser plugin or a desktop app, though….
tx, jd
I think the real battle for turf is between Microsoft Dot Net and AIR.
As per one definition - Microsoft .net is an XML webservices platform that allows the creation of rich applications that enables users to interact with the internet using a wide variety of devices.
AIR is a runtime that comes enabled with REST access for webservices…
FLASH IDE and Microsoft Expression is another battleground
Silverlight plugin and FlashPlugin is also a battleground…
[...] Elst launched a campaign called “AIR not Equal to Silverlight” is I think a brilliant way of countering this misconception. There might be a hidden agenda, [...]
Stupid comparision.
Why you don’t compare AIR with WPF?
Silverlight is comparable be Flashplayer!
WPF is comparable be another desktop application tecnology (AIR is still poor if compare him with another desktop application).
I’m a hybrid in this case: I’m developing since Flash 4 and also building applications with .NET since 1.0.
Your statement AIR != Silverlight is correct but it is not correct that it compares to WPF. WPF is just a part of Microsoft’s RUNTIME: .NET
AIR should be compared to .NET (both are runtimes)
&
Flash should be compared to Silverlight (both are plugins)
I love Flash since the good old days and the current movement into new possibilities are absolutely amazing… but I do know the power of .NET and only from the technical view: Flash developers who don’t know .NET have no clue of this stunning amount of functionalities (not to mention the great MSDN and it’s perfect reference). Hopefully Adobe makes a big step forward with the new capabilities of FP10 (Astro).
Just to clarify my point —
I am not saying that Microsoft is deliberately spreading mistruths, though they don’t seem to be very active in dispelling the widespread myths when it is in their favour.
For that matter I don’t think AIR vs WPF / .NET is a better comparison apart from the two being runtimes — no reasonable thinking person would believe these two have the same feature set nor will likely ever become as powerful. What the Adobe Integrated Runtime allows is using web technologies to deploy cross platform desktop applications. That is an important selling point to those of us that do RIA development which is not necessarily the same developer base as those involved in the .NET stack.
Both companies have some compelling solutions, what bothers me is that a lot of the reporting being done bases its analysis on a poor understanding of what these technologies are and how they relate and/or differ from each other.
Thanks for all the feedback!
Hey Peter,
great response! I absolutely agree with you on that. Until now Silverlight is just a “technical myth” which hasn’t reached the end-users at all. Version 1 was just… a preview in my opinion. The second version is more the one who should be kept in mind. The past shows us that MS has the power (and for sure the money) to leave market leaders behind: Palm, Sony, …
I think we can all be happy that Flash has become a part of Adobe. With this company and the ongoing plans of open-source from Adobe itself and the community projects it will be more powerful than ever before.
a nice read…
http://dnjonline.com/article.aspx?ID=nov07_adobeair
Peter, this same confusion exists with Adobe Flash Lite vs. MS Silverlight, which reportedly, if you believe the press, is slated sometime to come to mobile browsers.
Can I suggest you add these to your cheat sheet?
- Adobe Flash Lite is a mobile presentation layer technology
- Microsoft Silverlight might come to a mobile browser… er, what did you call it?
Cheers.
I have compared silverlight with flex. You can read my posts here
http://fahimilyas.blogspot.com/2008/05/road-to-silverlight-part-1.html
http://fahimilyas.blogspot.com/2008/05/road-to-silverlight-part-ii-flex-vs.html
[...] Peter Elst also finds it important to differentiate.. [...]