Another super scientific survey and- as usual- another set of interesting results. This time, the survey this blog asked you to indicate your plans for Silverlight. Are you using Silverlight 2? Have you been waiting for Silverlight 3 to get started? Or are you still on the fence waiting for a future version?
Almost two years ago, I ran a different survey asking about your plans for Silverlight 2 (then called Silverlight 1.1). At the time, 82% of respondents said they were waiting for Silverlight 2 to get started with Microsoft's RIA platform and only 11% had no plans to use Silverlight. Then, about a year ago, I tried to re-gauge Silverlight excitement and I asked you to indicate how Silverlight ranked on your list of new Microsoft technologies that you were going to use. A full 62% of you were most excited about Silverlight 2, and only 2% indicated they'd stick with what they know.
Fast forward to today, and the picture looks much different. It seems you have started to become much more aware of the limits of Silverlight and are now focusing on specific features before you adopt. Only 20% of you actually ended-up adopting Silverlight 2, but 30% claim they're jumping-in with the recently released Silverlight 3. Add to that the 14% that still want to use Silverlight but need a more mature platform, and we discover that 64% of you are currently- or will eventually- build applications for Silverlight. (Startling similar figure the 62% measurement from one year ago.)
Perhaps most interesting to me, then, is the "jump" in people deciding to not use Silverlight. More than a third- 36%- of respondents have no plans to do any Silverlight development. That's much higher than the 11% two years ago and the 2% that weren't looking to learn anything new last year. What happened? Did you evaluate Silverlight and decided that standards-based technology is "good enough" for your needs? Is the idea of building on a proprietary browser plug-in an issue for you? Sound-off in the comments and let us know!
Thanks again to everyone for voting. Don't forget to vote in the next survey running on Telerik Watch now...
5 comments:
silverlight isn't installed on enough machines yet (and it may never be) and it isn't truelly cross platform. moonlight is so far behind the actual release version that you invariably shrug and go "oh well". well, i do anyway.
pete
@Pete - Interesting perspective. How important is Linux support to your clients / organization? Obviously, I agree that full cross-plat is an advantage of standards-based dev, but I'm curious how many people really need to support Linux.
-Todd
To me, Silverlight is one of those areas where the enthusiasm for technology by developers way exceeds the desire for it by users or practical applications for it with the current internet status.
public and government agencies push for cross platform support (especially here in the uk). look at the bbc iplayer for a classic example of what happens when you don't support linux. and in the recession, they're one of the few big players that are still spending.
ultimately though, its about more than this. it's taken till v3.5 to get mvc support. webcontrols still produce shoddy markup and we won't be able to control client id's until verions 4 comes out. The point is, MS just doesn't get web development and we have to say to our clients "sorry, can't do that" or spend hours trying to build work arounds.
cheers
pete
I've been a webdeveloper since 96 and have seen so many techs come and go. Back then was such a "pioneering" time one was tempted to try almost each and everything that came out. To be the next "big thing" though in such a now mature development environment, it has to
a) Offer something dramatically new and "must have" .. in practical rather than cosmetic terms
b) Have robust dev tools and offer convincing arguments that it is worth a dev learning yet another set of skills.
I don't see either point having been addressed.
MS tried a flash beater back in the late 90s (the name escapes me), it didn't work then, I doubt it will now.
\dave
Post a Comment