Why does Microsoft not force Silverlight onto users machines through a Windows update?

Question

I'm not a Silverlight developer (yet) and what is putting me off - and many others, I think - is the relative lack of browser installations of it compared to Flash.

But I'm not clear on why website visitors have to explicitly install Silverlight themselves - which appears to be the major stumbling block.

Since the vast majority of computer users use Windows, is there a reason that Microsoft are not forcing Silverlight onto Windows machines through a Windows update?

They do this (and continue to do so) with the .NET framework runtimes, so why not with Silverlight? Legal issue, perhaps?

Answer 1

They actually suggest it in Windows Update. I politely refuse it.

Answer 2

Getting sued by all its competitors is what stops this

Answer 3

I suspect that they are waiting for the technology to mature and/or gain more acceptance. Once a critical mass of sites and/or users have it installed they might do.

The other alternative is that they might be waiting until they've completed the "merger" of WPF and Silverlight. I can't see them continuing to keep these two very similar technologies separate.

After all Adobe don't force Flash on everybody.

Answer 4

There may be an anti-trust reason for this also, remember what happened with Java, even when it was from Sun they still had a problem with it. If you keep waiting for Silverlight to catch on, it never will be enough, start developing now and when there are many great web-apps that support Silverlight then maybe it will get more popular, plus it is very easy to install and you can target Mac and Windows, and some extent Moonlight too as it reaches support for Silverlight 2.0 and some 3.0 there may be Mac-Windows-Linux apps you can write.
I recommend Silverlight to anyone who develops in .NET, I am a little biased as I'm writing an application at the moment in Silverlight.

Answer 5

I think that would be the wrong way to go about trying to gain adoption. The product should merit installation on it's own, not lean on the Windows installation base for support. Writing the free version of Office online (EDIT: I meant the Office Web Applications) in Silverlight, however, is a great way to gain adoption (even with the non-SL version available too http://blogs.msdn.com/officewebapps/archive/2009/08/05/9858563.aspx).

Also, since this is a browser plugin, how would that work? Can a Windows update install plugins for firefox, opera, or whatever browser the user prefers? Doesn't seem feasible to me but I'm really not sure.

Answer 6

Can't speak for Microsoft, but I am dismayed by the question. I don't want extra crap pushed to my machine (or into my life in general). I only want extra stuff if I pull it. Stuff like that should always be "opt in" instead of "opt out" or "no option at all."

Answer 7

The european union has filed anti-trust suits against Microsoft which is probably why they don't put it in their updates.

I however don't install it because i don't like unnecessary processor cycles being used up for advertising much in the way that flash is used. Flash I've uninstalled on many of my computers in protest, though i admit it's on my media center in the living room because people use it for you tube.

Answer 8

For all the hype, Silverlight is not all that great to develop in and doesn't bring anything to the user experience that couldn't be better achieved through dhtml/ajax.

Answer 9

There are several reasons why not to do it.

• Users should have choice over what gets installed. I realize from a developer standpoint we know some users who are clueless about what this software does, so why put the choice in their hands? Fine, MS should make it easy for users to install it if they don't have it when they visit a site that uses it. Then they can make an informed decision. Do I want to use this site or not?
• Corporate Approvals. Companies go through software validation procedures and that is why some will still be on XP for some time. If they were forced to validate these pieces because microsoft was forcing them down the pipe, they'd be pissed off. So thus MS gives corporations control over the windows updates that get approved/installed. And corporations are where MS makes their money.
• PC Manufactures choosing what software to preinstall. Here the manufacturers have the ability to push silverlight or not.
• Competitor's software isn't automatically installed. You actually have to install flash. Some PC manufacturers might bundle it with the PC but if you install yourself or for a corporate deployment, it isn't there by default.
• The monopoly power abuse concerns mentioned. But I think this is actually the least important reason.

Silverlight won't hit mainstream adoption till there is that one app that everyone must have that uses it. Like the office online example above.