08.27.10
Microsoft Does Not Rebut Claims of Silverlight Demise, Messengers Attacked Though
Smearing a person does not constitute a
valid rebuttal (unless conflict of interests is shown)
Summary: Techrights is being smeared for stating what Microsoft is unable to refute, except by personal attacks, speculations, and spin
MICROSOFT’S SILVERLIGHT HAS LOST a lot of very major customers. We named some of them. We also referenced several articles from the mainstream press — articles which said that Silverlight had failed to gain traction. It is just a load of hype. Even the hype is muted by now.
“Truth hurts sometimes, but it doesn’t mean it should therefore be suppressed or censored.”The thing about calling these facts out, people often resort trolling me personally, especially in Twitter and less occasionally via E-mail or IRC (using the messenger’s name as a punch bag). One can get used to it. Truth hurts sometimes, but it doesn’t mean it should therefore be suppressed or censored. That was the case when a Zune fan site (yes, a whole site dedicated just to Zune) featured a post from Techrights this week and then approached a spokesperson from Microsoft trying to calm down the poor fans, whose dedication to Zune is likely to end soon because Zune is a dying brand and project. We explained why that’s the case and also highlighted the close relationship with KIN, whose death renders Zune software rather obsolete. If Zune fans are going to attack those who simply point out the obvious, it is them who lose credibility, not Techrights, which merely quoted a former Wal-Mart manager about Wal-Mart’s stock of Zunes.
We are getting a similar type of backlash at the moment because of Silverlight, not just Moonlight, which had the Mono boosters and Novell employees intimidate and smear us. For just over a year we’ve been tracking news headlines about “Silverlight” in order to spot trends. We have seen it mentioned less and less over time, until it was not mentioned at all or mentioned about once a week (sometimes because it’s dumped by early adopters, which generates headlines). Last night a recent post of ours was featured in TechDirt and the comments there are quite predictable (see how the Microsoft apologists joined the discussion just hours later, posting “damage control”/PR after all the regular readers of the site). To quote just one response to the Microsoft apologists:
You are assuming that Windows Phone 7 OS will be a huge success. I rather doubt it at so many levels. Even the name of the OS is wrong. Is Windows Phone 7 OS – Windows 7 running on a phone if so why or if not why not? It is very confusing. It is too little too late. Even Blackberry’s latest OS is losing traction.
The innovations are moving WAY too fast for Microsoft to continue to play catch up. The problems lies a the CEO level.
I remember when Ballmer used to ridicule running applications on a browser and now he is playing catch up. I remember when Ballmer ridiculed running a browser on a phone. Now he is playing catch up. etc, etc.
As this comment implies, the ‘Silverlight brigade’ is using Vista Phone 7 [sic] to say that Silverlight is needed, but that is just nonsense. Judging by the failure of KIN, the only sales of Vista Phone 7 one ought to expect is the giving of such phones to all employees of Microsoft (whether they want it or not) and the huge spendings of $250,000,000 just pushing this “too little, too late” piece of junk into the market. Based on the silence surrounding Silverlight (and Moonlight too), there is not much development going on and even vapourware hardly ever appears anymore. By many indications, Silverlight will remain as widespread as Zune. It’s a niche product which even Microsoft partners like MSNBC refuse to use. █
dyfet said,
August 27, 2010 at 9:57 am
I assume the original kin mfg’s were burned on expected volume commitments, especially after the product was canceled after only a few hundred were sold. Then there was all that investment in design house time by the mfg, etc. To gear up to supply phones is I would image a very low margin/high volume business. Perhaps Microsoft’s giveaway is more about having to artificially meet some very initial volume commitment that these third parties imposed having been badly burned on the kin, and hence now require before even touching another phone product from Microsoft?