Comparing and Contrasting Microsoft and Adobe’s Technologies
Whenever you mention Microsoft and Adobe in a blog title, it gets a lot of clicks. Mostly that’s because people love to read about conflict, and right now, that’s in full force. Unfortunately, it’s taking some very negative turns, but that may be understandable because we have more question marks than answers.
A lot of people are confused both about what this RIA thing is, and what Adobe and Microsoft are doing. I talked to a reporter from the Seattle Times today who wanted to write about RIAs and was looking to compare Apollo and WPF/E. I told him that wasn’t necessarily a good comparison, but it’s one that people draw because that’s where the conflict is; Microsoft moving to the web with a Flash competitor and Adobe moving to the desktop with Apollo. The tone of his article sounds like it may have changed a bit based on that, but the fact that a reporter from a major metropolitan newspaper is talking about RIA is fantastic.
So now’s the time that we need help everyone who’s coming into this space for the first time understand what it’s about. Posts like Lee Brimelow’s do that. The next few weeks are going to be *gigantic* because we’re finally going to hear more about what “WPF/E” is and what it can do. I hope everyone is keeping an open mind about all of this, and realize that there is no one, true way, and it comes down to the best technology for the task at hand.
So blog proudly about the technology you know the best, talk about its strengths and weaknesses. Sell people with good arguments and technology examples, not more FUD.
[tags]Rich Internet Applications, Adobe, Microsoft, WPF/E, Apollo[/tags]
Posted in Rich Internet Applications
April 13th, 2007 at 8:49 pm
Folks really tend to miss the big picture when there is competition in the market place. Competition is the biggest driving force in innovation. We as developers will reap the benefits of competition.
Too many developers act like they are SOL if Adobe pulls ahead (further
) or WPF is released and its the best thing since cold beer. They act like there can be no middle ground. I think it has way more to do with some developers (you know who you are), letting there skill set idle and not wanting to have to deal with the learning curve that a lot of the current RIA technologies require. Who ever heard of a developer that wasn’t eager to learn?
I mean really. Whats the worst that can happen if I know how to use Adobe and MS toolsets?
April 13th, 2007 at 11:30 pm
“I talked to a reporter from the Seattle Times today who wanted to write about RIAs and was looking to compare Apollo and WPF/E.”
I wish you had been polled for the Reuters placement too, though.
(I liked how Lee focused clearly on the delivery style (in-browser or desktop) when comparing approaches.)
jd/adobe
April 13th, 2007 at 11:32 pm
John, which Reuters thing? Did I miss something this week? I’ve been heads down more than I usually am.
April 14th, 2007 at 2:38 am
Comparing and Contrasting Microsoft and Adobe’s Technologies: by Ryan Stewart…
“Whenever you mention Microsoft and Adobe in a blog title, it gets a lot of clicks. Mostly that’s because people love to read about conflict, and right now, that’s in full force. Unfortunately, it’s taking some very negative turns, but……
April 14th, 2007 at 3:12 am
Brandon – while developers can easily switch skills, it does take time to become expert rather than a hacker on different platforms. There’s also the fact that companies always prefer one winner to emerge to cut down development costs. In the desktop era, Windows provided that standardisation. That managed to turn into something similar with IE (although server technologies have varied between ASP, PHP, JSP, and now RoR). We’re seeing a similar disruption again – this time Adobe have an advantage of a wider install base than even Windows XP.
Ryan – it is interesting to see the mainstream media beginning to pick up on this (the article in the UK Guardian the other week, etc). Personally, as said before, my feel is it’s less about the technology and more about the relevant communities, and what these technologies will allow those communities to do – if we imagine no MS developers switch to Adobe, and vice versa, what will we see?
April 14th, 2007 at 5:45 am
JulesLt I have to somewhat disagree.
Developers *should* be able to switch skills but in the last nine years that I have made a living as a developer using MS and Adobe/Macromedia technologies, I’ve seen that more developers than not do not have a varied skill set to work with. Consistently, most learn a skill, draw a paycheck and pretty much stay with what they know. I’m not judging them as developers but, I have consistently seen this happen. The problem is – ActionScript, C# and Javascript all come from the same ECMA standard. The syntax is the same. No excuse a developer couldn’t know/use all three.
Your statement of “companies always prefer one winner..” – That would be great if every job were a hammer and every solution were a nail but its not and that has burned a lot of companies out there because instead of using the correct tool for the job, they just use what they have and squeeze out what they can. Sometimes its good enough but rarely is it a success. If companies don’t have the fore thought to be agile in development then they end up ‘turning like a battleship’.
What standardization in the desktop era? Seriously, if you are talking about ‘Market Saturation’ of Windows, Office and IE then yeah they still have the lions share. But it you are talking about standardization of development and implementation of software? Then why do you think it died such a horrible death? VB was the worst, most obtuse language it was ever my misfortune to have to use. Things did get way better with the .NET Framework. That seems to be the one successful (development)implementation MS has had over the last six years.
What it comes down to is that no matter what tools we are required to use at work, a developer that doesn’t keep a varied tool set is of limited use and prolly the first to make noise when changes come via technology that could affect their livelihood.
April 14th, 2007 at 6:34 am
Brandon – I don’t think the issue is with switching between flavours of ECMAScript – it’s more around the components, libraries, frameworks and APIs, which do differ – in name if not functionality. People talk about Flex, not Actionscript 3.0.
There’s also knowing the quirks of your tool – i.e. why some constructs are an enormously bad idea – which just comes from experience.
Your turning like a battleship comparison is a good one – and pretty much what I’m getting at – some systems, by the nature of their size ARE battleships. They can’t always be replaced by a fleet of small rapid boats.
Typically there is a big focus in these systems in reducing the number of technologies and suppliers involved.
I’ve worked with one client where their long term goal was to get all their third-party apps running on the same web app server and database technology, globally.
Of course, you’re talking about developers as individuals, and what they should be doing with their careers, whereas I’m coming at it more from the angle of the company paying to build the battleship. For a developer it may make sense to know both Flex and WPF/E (although she’d be damn lucky if her company will pay to train her in both). As a company, you want to invest in one.
April 14th, 2007 at 6:39 am
Learn all of them
it will make you stronger, not weaker.
Like i say when people call me a sellout for moving to Microsoft “Do you think knowing Flex/Apollo and WPF and WPF/e makes me weaker or stronger going forward?”
be agnostic and you’ll be fine folks let the corporate brands slug the marketshare out and sweat that stuff out, and keep pushing us to do better by casting your votes for each project you start. “Oh MSFT, you suck at xyz, so to punish you i’m going to use this high profile brand in Adobe” and vice versa.
That’s where you hit us the most. This Microsoft vs Adobe thing is only being played out in the blogs and the misconception is that blogs are the pulse of what developers around the world are thinking and doing – yet there are lots whom don’t even read blogs
Agnostic.
April 14th, 2007 at 7:22 am
Ryan, I’ve got no particular info on the Reuters story yet, but I’ve heard from a lot of people who have been contacted recently by reporters (more from business newspapers than tech journals) to provide quotes similar to what you were asked from the Seattle Times.
Such a pattern usually means that there’s been a PR push, contacting many media outlets, trying to get placement for a story.
MS earnings are due the same week as the Las Vegas conference. I’m betting on a higher than average number of newspaper stories in the next two weeks, with frequent comparisons to Adobe work… the requests for quotes tips it off.
I hope you frame the newspaper, and if the WSJ calls, take the call… it’d be great to see you in one of those little black-and-white illustrations they do….
jd/adobe
April 14th, 2007 at 7:37 am
jd,
Of course they would and you’re not that dumb to assume that Microsoft vs Adobe isn’t going to be a story headline (i’d buy the paper for it – i’m shallow as i also buy magazine to get the scoop on Britney Spear’s latest meltdown… it’s what I call lite reading).
I do giggle though as I wonder if you honestly think people haven’t caught onto your posture yet?
Allow me to illustrate:
jd usually comes onto a persons blog, at first comes off diplomatic but when challenged, responds to everything but the actual points in the topic. Only after which, if there is a Microsoft/Competitor spin to be had, he’ll approach the comment with a sort of underlying question that needs to be answered, mainly around hints about Microsoft/Competitor is up to no good. This usually does one of two things, get’s ignored and dies of a natural death by the general population – or – it ignites a Microsoft/Competitor vs Adobe rant fest in which case we have posts like this from Ryan outlining what he kicked off earlier today
You’re good jd, i will give you that, but it’s also amusing at times to see how easily you can manipulate people within blogsphere and than you ride off into the sunset when a new sandpit opens up to be played in
btw? what is your job title at Adobe? i’ve been asked a lot about this and I honestly have no idea.
April 14th, 2007 at 9:01 am
JulesLt – yeah I think you and I are more in agreement knowing which sides we are coming from.
I still believe that companies putting all there eggs in one technology basket is a bad idea and creates a limited environment for developer creativity. Maybe I’m just lucky. I work for a company that allows me to assess the project and choose the tool best suited for the job be it Flash, Flex or HTML for presentation and .net, php or ror on the server. Maybe working in that type of environment has just spoiled me.
I will say this, I don’t think developers have the time to see if work will pay for training. There is very little web dev technology that cannot be learned from google searches. These communities are strong and a better resource than any book or training I’ve ever had.
Scott – Technology Agnostic, that’s what I’ve been saying all along.
Developers win by learning everything they can.
The Adobe vs. Microsoft pissing matches have gotten boring (except for Parvez Ansari, MCP – that was kinda sad, kinda funny). I say Adobe and Microsoft both pick a guy and have a physical fight or drinking contest or something that doesn’t seem like a virtual slap fight.
We can watch it on Joost.
April 14th, 2007 at 9:10 am
Scott Barnes said “be agnostic and you’ll be fine…”.
Now THAT is rich. I recommend following JD’s posts to sharpen your diplomacy skills, Scott. Oh… you already are.
April 14th, 2007 at 1:42 pm
lets be honest here, while the competition factor is good, M$ needs Adobe to be around so they have someone to try and copy from because we damn well know that m$ cant come up with this stuff on their own.
I saw an interview the other day with gates and he says “we pretty much innovate everything (choke gag & puke) we also have gotten pretty good at copying things too”
At least the last part was right.
April 15th, 2007 at 5:11 pm
As a developer of Rich Interactive Websites (RIW?) and RIAs, i have no time to learn an additional development platform. I do read about WPF/e and watch it closely, but unless i stop having some kind of personal life, i cant justify putting any time into actual development. Sure ill do an infamous HelloWorld at some point, but besides of that, WPF/e have to prove that it is substantially better then Flash/Flex (Both how the end-result act, and how you develop it).
And that is the keyword: substantial. If i start calculate the difference in bytes and milliseconds between WPF/e and Flex, i get i will increase the cost, and produce just a small part of what my potential is.
I think the scenario would be the same for developers. As an AS3 developer, ive already played around with Apollo. It is very cool, and i already have ideas for stuff to create with it. However, i cant see why i.e. a .NET developers should care too much yet. I guess thousands of developers are totally aware of Apollo, but just read about it and raises eybrows, then go back to work. Apollo is just beta to them, and WPF/e is just beta to me. Its all gonna be about the showdowns.
I do certainly agree that if a company is not aware of competing technologies and general software evolution, they will lose. This is happening today as we speak with AJAX. Companies will fall behind since AJAX cannot compete with Flex/Flash (and in the future WPF/e) because of productioncost and endresult.
But unless one can afford to invest in a position for testing and validating new technologies, the best they can do is to trust their developers advice and give them room to keep up with the evolution (And when needed invest in courses, conferences, software, etc).
April 16th, 2007 at 12:52 am
Hey, Ryan, the article’s up!
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/businesstechnology/2003667798_adobe16.html
I was reading along, saw you quoted in the newspaper, then did a doubletake as I rememberer back to your warning here. Funny.
Now, if someone gets a photo on Flickr of Ryan autographing newspapers on the streets of Seattle, that’d be fun…
jd/adobe
April 17th, 2007 at 11:20 am
[...] Here is an excellent article about the recent Adobe vs Microsoft hype. [...]