1/12/2024 0 Comments Silverlight for mac pro![]() You should also perhaps consider the 3.5 "client profile" setup not sure how wide-spread this is in reality. The "requires full framework" is also one of the largest benefits: "has full framework". This gives you much more control (and power) at the client, as well as a far greater range of existing resources to use (for example, if you need, you can use some legacy winform code on the WPF surface). Actually, building a ClickOnce manifest is much easier than Silverlight etc, since the IDE will do almost all of it for you you just have to host the files somewhere (could be a web URL could be a network UNC). If it is a business app that demands a client, I would tend to go with the full framework and ClickOnce the main difference here (re deployment) is that the client must have the framework installed - but past that, ClickOnce deployment is very pain free. Has less functionality compared with full Wpf (anyone got a good resource that documents differences?)īetter access to low level parts of the computerįirst, I would evaluate whether a web client (ideally MVC+jQuery) can't do the job. You can update all your users apps easily.Ĭan't interact with client's file system etc If your users login, you dont have to worry with activation keys or similar stuff. I'll start the ball rolling ( Edit Added in some answers from artur carvalho):īetter control of users. My boss likes the idea of a Silverlight app as it means easier deployment. In our case we are looking at quite a complex business app that will be used by 100s (not 1000s) of people, So I'm leaning towards a click-once app. Recently there’s been some improvement in SEO for Flash and Flex, using external JavaScript objects such as SWFObject (for dynamic loading) and SWFAddress (for deep linking), at least for those who to take the trouble to revamp their Flash sites Silverlight 3 addresses both SEO and deep linking internally.We are starting a new project and I'm trying to decide which of the Wpf-esque develop/deploy strategies we should go with. A search engine such as Google can only see the text on a Web page RIA applications historically have not displayed usable text or allowed external links to states “deep” inside the animation, concentrating instead on their forte-flashy graphics. ![]() One problem area that Flash and Silverlight have had in common is SEO (search engine optimization). Those deficiencies are all fixed in Silverlight 3. In addition, Silverlight 2 lacked 3-D graphics, pixel shader effects, writing to bitmaps, animation effects, themes, decent data binding, and a reasonable assortment of controls. ![]() For designers, the Expression Blend 3 Preview already imports Adobe Photoshop and Illustrator files, another lack in Blend 2, and will add “SketchFlow” prototyping and interactive behaviors in a future release. That will be fixed in Expression Blend 3 and Visual Studio 2010, both of which have solid betas. What else was wrong with Silverlight 2? From a developer’s point of view, no single tool covered all needs Expression Blend 2 did graphical XAML design but couldn’t edit code, and Visual Studio 2008 did code editing and XAML editing and preview, but couldn’t do graphical XAML design. Silverlight 3 addresses those issues very nicely, with easy ways to install Silverlight applications on a desktop, update them in place, detect Internet connectivity state changes, and store information locally and securely. Silverlight 2 didn’t have a viable way to run on a desktop the best a developer could do along those lines was to build a desktop WPF (Windows Presentation Foundation) application based loosely on a corresponding Silverlight RIA (rich Internet application).
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |