I think it takes more than just putting M$ name on some product to make it great and widely accepted especially in the developer community. I believe that developers will ultimately gravitate towards product easier to use rather than the one managers could be pushing for.

TK
  ----- Original Message -----
  From: Haggerty, Mike
  To: CF-Talk
  Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2003 3:46 PM
  Subject: RE: M$ "flash killer"

  Microsoft's decision to promote this technology is great because it
  shows real innovation and creative thinking.

  For what it is worth, I expect this product will fail to persuade
  developers to use it similar to the way Microsoft Music Producer and
  Microsoft Direct Animation did. But 'Sparkle' is such a better name
  than, say, 'Microsoft Vector Image Display' - it's nice to see the
  company making progress on naming their projects.

  M

  -----Original Message-----
  From: Samuel Neff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2003 3:14 PM
  To: CF-Talk
  Subject: RE: M$ "flash killer"

  It'll be 7-10 years before you can consider using this for any real
  application.  It requires the avalon sub-system which means we're
  talking
  2006, and will only work for longhorne users, which means a very limited
  user base for a long time (how many people still use windows 98?).

  Also, a lot can change in that timeframe.  OSX is growing in popularity
  so
  MS might not even have so much of a monopoly and cross-platform support
  could be even more of an issue--which would negate any possibility of
  using
  avalon-specific technologies.

  However, I could see something to render XAML in Flash or an XSLT to
  convert
  XAML to LZX or whatever Royale will use.

  My $0.02.

  Sam

  ----------------------------------------------
  Blog:  http://www.rewindlife.com
  Chart: http://www.blinex.com/products/charting
  ----------------------------------------------

[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]

Reply via email to