I believe Silverlight died mainly because of the lack of support for the plugin on iPhones. Blame Apple.
On Wed, 30 Jan 2019 at 17:53, Arjang Assadi <arjang.ass...@gmail.com> wrote: > until a rendering engine is included I can not see any benefit to using > blazer or any other WASM equivalents. Flash as bad as it was , was a better > solution , no idea what the big idea was to kill it off , or for that > matter ms unilaterally killing silver light. > > > On Wed, 30 Jan 2019 at 5:26 pm Greg Keogh <gfke...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Folks, has anyone else in here given Blazor a good bash and got comments? >> I've run some sanity tests on 0.7 and it's looking pretty good. You can >> reference packages and projects, there's basic binding (which I hope they >> improve), you can break things up into "components" and nest them, separate >> code-behind if you want, register and inject services, define routing, make >> async web calls, deploy to Azure web apps, etc. All this stuff I mentioned >> is in the docs, but I had to try it myself to see if it really works. The >> only thing I haven't tried yet is rendering a large complex page to see how >> it performs and responds to DOM changes. >> >> So finally it looks like there's a real chance in the .NET ecosystem that >> the crazy zoo of JS frameworks to make SPAs will be displaced by a familiar >> and respected languages and frameworks. Great, but suddenly I was slapped >> hard by a shocking realisation … we're still stuck using the web browser >> and HTML (and some JS glue) for rendering the UI. >> >> The web browser cannot render complex business app UIs. Where are the >> rich controls and layout features we are used to on the desktop, or in >> Silverlight, or Flash or Java Applets for that matter? HTML was created to >> render simple text and pictures and now 27 years later it's completely >> effing stupid that we're still trying to create apps with it. We're >> changing how those apps are written, but we're still stuck with the damn >> browser and HTML for rendering. >> >> I have an example … a few weeks ago I wondered by a web page was taking >> 40s to load. It turned out I was loading a tree (a fake one, as there is no >> tree control) with 4000 nodes, each one in a div and 3880 of them were >> hidden. So the page looked small and tidy, but there were thousands of >> hidden divs. I spent hours of suffering inventing a click-demand-load >> technique. There is no virtualisation in HTML, which is taken for granted >> in real UI frameworks. >> >> There endeth the good news and the bad news. >> >> *Greg K* >> >
