CannotResolveSymbol wrote:

Regardless of who "wins" this, though, it's nice to see some good competition in the market.  It's great for the people using these tools, because it means that they (Adobe and Microsoft's suites) actually need to improve with each release in order to compete

Part 1 : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lGdr3dCmxe4
Part 2:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d9IjZJ0D_bo
Part 3:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lsfOe_MCEbg

In any case Adobe knows designers. Microsoft does not. This is exactly what they want, and completely closes the gap that exists in the Adobe designer to dev workflow around RIA. Of course rendering one of my pet projects useless in a year, but hey that’s how it goes.

Graphics tags etc.. but done visually, complete integration with the entire CS suite, + a whole lot more. Now that Flash 10 will have hardware accelerated 3d, much better text flow and layout, not to mention all the other goodies, I really don’t see Silverlight having any chance at all...Unless they really come out with some wow stuff. I guess the battle just got a whole lot harder for MS.

I have to say when the time came to choose I’m quite glad I chose Flex (at the moment).

YearOfTheLinuxDesktop wrote:



Sourcecode wrote:  Here is the Adobe side of the story just to even it out.. On Microsoft, PDF and the threat to open standards It also states in that post that PDF is in fact an ISO standard.

the comments in that page say it all on how weak the Adobe's side of the story was. it is clear that Adobe didn't want MS to include PDF support because that way they would have lost all their precious money from Acrobat sales since most people use Adobe just to save office documents in PDF. they tried masquerading their choice as a "fear
 of open standards being threatened" however it looks like they failed.

Anyway no rights, no wrongs but they both could have sat down and fixed the issue so that their customers and IP from both sides would benefit and be secured.

But we still have not answered the OP’s original question…

Why did MS not just go with PDF instead of developing their own format? They could have worked with Adobe for that. So why didn't they....

Ahhhh... same coin different side me thinks..

W3bbo wrote:

And PDF is controlled by a Adobe. Whilst the specification is available, it is liable to change at any time, and it hasn't been submitted to any standards organization for standardization.

YearOfTheLinuxDesktop wrote:



Ray6 wrote: Seems that all this stuff about document formats is about interoperability amongst other things. So I was wondering; why not PDF as a document format? Is it only suitable for rendering? Is there a technical reason why you can't edit PDF documents in a word processor?

because Adobe seemed to be all this "open" about his beloved PDF but as soon as MS tried to implement it in Office 2007 Adobe showed the true self by threatening to sue Microsoft. if only MS pushed an XPS viewer through WU I swear I'd convert all of the PDF documents on my websites to XPS just because of Adobe's behaviour!

Mike Chambers wrote:


First, PDF is an open ISO standard (actually incorporated into a number of ISO standards).

jamie wrote:

or the current way:
ps - does vista fix this?  ..forget.  This may have been posted elsewhere - but i see this everytime i need to grab fonts.. scroll..scroll

Your right that this should be moved into it's own folder if for nothing else but tidiness sake.

Stebet wrote:



Sourcecode wrote: I'm not as versed in Video as i'd like to be, and far from most folks but; H.264 seems to be the defacto standard going forward. HD DVD, Blue Ray et al (hence the choice).  Plus they added support for ACC audio. Not to mention multi-core hardware acceleration. So Premier and After Effects will output directly making the workflow seamless. Plus all the other goodies that this format provides that FLV does not (proper scrubbing, chapters, subtitles, list goes on.). As every media company is scrambling to grab a piece of the (put your content online) wave and have realized that experience matters, and given that silverlight does not support this standard (AFAIK).. Will it be painful to silverlight ?  I think it will be.

Actually VC-1 is by far the preferred codec for HD DVD and many Blu-Ray titles as well.

H.264 requires A LOT of cpu power for decoding if no hardware acceleration is available and i'm not sure Flash is able to leverage GPU hardware acceleration, which means that you propably won't be seeing all that many high-def H.264 flash videos for the time being. This is one of the BIG advantages VC-1 has. It's a lot easier on the CPU for decoding purposes as well as being seemingly better than H.264 for HD content at high bitrates (it's supposed to preserve film grain a lot better for example).

Camcorder Info wrote:


The reason H.264 is so highly sought after stems from its support of high quality video at a low bit rates, High Efficiency AAC (HE-AAC) audio support, and full screen playback. A derivative of the MPEG-4 format, H.264 is utilized by Blu-Ray and HD-DVD players, supporting high definition video and premium audio content.

ReadWrite wrote:



3) It means "hardware acceleration" for Web video.

Randall also said that ...

Ted wrote:



At Adobe MAX 2007 in Chicago we are going showing off the next full release of Flash Player code named "Astro". The features are mind numbing and add capabilities far beyond anything the market today. The future of Adobe Flash Player looks very bright indeed.

W3bbo wrote:



Sourcecode wrote: Wow, at least Flash *has* H.264...

Flash now has VP6 in addition to H.264, which was pragmatically superior to H.264, according to their developers.

Tom Servo wrote:

Get Solaris builds going. Shouldn't exactly be an issue, considering it offers more or less the same libraries and components these days. Don't be (I need to watch my language)s like Adobe with it's Flash player (well, we got Flash 9 for Solaris, but it's yet again lagging behind with H.264 for no damn reason).

--edit: Nevermind, it'll be Moonlight. At least I can get this working here.

W3bbo wrote:



markpr wrote: Check out this site written by developers for developers: http://www.exchangeyourcareer.com

Before I realised this was a Microsoft website, I flagged this post as spam.

Mark, we've never seen you around here before, so it helps to have a little introduction about who you are and why you're posting this link (which isn't even a link, it's just some text). Otherwise people will assume you're a spammer (as I did).

littleguru wrote:

The website is not looking that bad. I find it highly interesting and browsed through quite the whole. Very different and very nice to browse through.

I hope the team gets some nice people to work with them

Ubiquitous HD video across all platforms. Video on the web just changed big time.

Real tech details:

http://www.kaourantin.net/2007/08/what-just-happened-to-video-on-web_20.html

Other thoughts:

http://blogs.zdnet.com/Stewart/?p=501

http://www.techbizmedia.com/industry-news/2007/08/20/adobe-flash-supports-h264-video-codec/

cool!!

Minh wrote:



kettch wrote:  In order to fill out the form I had to type with one finger at the rate of 1 character per second.

To be fair, Silverlight 1.1 does NOT ship with any standard UI elements. But I'd think that it'll be heckuvalot easier to write libraries (UI or otherwise) for Silverlight than Flash (don't know Flash programming that well, though)

Tom Servo wrote:

Since an Adobe developer is here, derailing this thread...

What are the plans for Flash support on Solaris?

corona_coder wrote:



RoyalSchrubber wrote:  corona_coder wrote: Unless its GPL its not Open Source.  The MPL is incompatiblee with the GPL..  This makes no difference. FSF is no authority to declare which license is open source or not.

The FSF is an authority on what licenses can be used with the GPL and the MPL is not compatible.  Sorry.

W3bbo wrote:

Lest I risk running away from my detractors, I feel obliged to answer to them. But there's a high "drama potential" here.

Sourcecode wrote:  W3bbo wrote: I received this in my college inbox back in November, but I figured I'd pass it around.Can the bloggers and hipsters amongst us digg it? I'd love make a real chav famous for once (Lilly Allen is a faux-chav, a "mockney" if you will) W3bbo wrote:  the email also crashed the Exchange servers, possibly because of her sheer ugliness scaring the crap out of the server? Holy (I need to watch my language) man. Who are you to stereotype and criticize people?? Do you even know this person?? Wow !!! If I’m misunderstanding your meaning forgive me, but what the hell she do to you? I’ll wait for you to correct my wrong impression of this situation, please.

Do you really believe I was being serious with that description in the Digg blurb? No, I was being facetious, it's a joke. She's hardly going to be a nominee for Miss Universe

W3bbo wrote:



Sourcecode wrote: I really don’t find anything about this funny. Just out right mean!

I'm not slighting her at all, just her email. It's a case of "stupid person uses email with amusing results", nothing more, nothing less. I think you're reading too much into this. I don't even know her.

W3bbo wrote:



Sourcecode wrote: Anyone in your college stop to think that maybe this person (human being) is suffering a low self esteem, abused or worse and perhaps could use a helping hand.

Whoa... that's jumping to conclusions there, I'd bet she'd actually feel insulted with a statement like that.

No, she's a chav, and there is zero evidence to suggest she is being abused "or worse". She's attending optional FE, presumably to make herself a better person (admirable), I don't see how you can judge a person's circumstances based on a single, silly, email.

W3bbo wrote:



Sourcecode wrote: W3bbo wrote: and no-one knows where she is now To boot she is now missing. WTF !

Ugh. When I say "no-one knows where she is now" I meant I don't know if she got suspended for the email or not, or left the college after realising she'd made a spectacle out of herself, but I haven't spoken to anyone about it, but in all likleyhood, she's probably still at the college, just not spamming emails around.

No-one has gone "missing".

W3bbo wrote:



Sourcecode wrote: So smart to make a worse situation out of an already potentially horrible one. I can’t believe you posted this on Digg man.. EDIT: This really needs explaining on your part W3bbo. I’m quite disappointed in you. Please; please correct my assumptions here.

I hope I just have.

W3bbo wrote:



borosen wrote: Bullying on the net is a real, increasing, problem. Now even the weakest ones are able to participate. I guess the anonymity on the net is one reason. Bullying in the real world can in most cases be solved, either the parties get along or one of them move. On the net it is almost impossible, the word is out there and very hard to get rid of, and will haunt the involved for a long time.

Whilst I agree this digg isn't exactly a "nice" one, it is far, far, far from any kind of "bullying". I don't know her personally, and I'm not engaging in any ad-hom. I'm referencing the embodiment of stereotypical chav culture in the email.

W3bbo wrote:



Sourcecode wrote:  borosen wrote: Bullying on the net is a real, increasing, problem. Now even the weakest ones are able to participate. I guess the anonymity on the net is one reason. Bullying in the real world can in most cases be solved, either the parties get along or one of them move. On the net it is almost impossible, the word is out there and very hard to get rid of, and will haunt the involved for a long time. I agree, and yet sometimes, just sometimes (if the stars are aligned just right) it can really backfire. Where the bully becomes the bullied.

Actually, in my real-life case, it was the other way around. I've learned from mistakes when I've been in both situations, there's no way I'd willingly cause intentional emotional damage to another individuals.

W3bbo wrote:



Sourcecode wrote: I just can’t believe this was posted here and on digg by someone I respect...

I doubt the veracity of that statement.

W3bbo wrote:



Sourcecode wrote: ...and really hope he realizes what he has potentially done to this person by doing so.

Potentially given them 15-minutes of fame?

borosen wrote:

Bullying on the net is a real, increasing, problem.

Now even the weakest ones are able to participate. I guess the anonymity on the net is one reason.

Bullying in the real world can in most cases be solved, either the parties get along or one of them move.

On the net it is almost impossible, the word is out there and very hard to get rid of, and will haunt the involved for a long time.

I just can’t believe this was posted here and on digg by someone I respect, and really hope he realizes what he has potentially done to this person by doing so.

W3bbo wrote:

and no-one knows where she is now

So smart to make a worse situation out of an already potentially horrible one.

I can’t believe you posted this on Digg man..


EDIT: This really needs explaining on your part W3bbo. I’m quite disappointed in you. Please; please correct my assumptions here.

W3bbo wrote:

I received this in my college inbox back in November, but I figured I'd pass it around.Can the bloggers and hipsters amongst us digg it? I'd love make a real chav famous for once (Lilly Allen is a faux-chav, a "mockney" if you will)

W3bbo wrote:

 the email also crashed the Exchange servers, possibly because of her sheer ugliness scaring the crap out of the server?