So it is nearing the dawn of the New Year and two things are hot topics around the water cooler. WPFe and DRM

Windows Presentation Foundation Everywhere is Microsoft’s Flash killer. Only so far it is not everywhere and is struggling to have the equivalent functionality that Flash does. The Party line for why create WPFe is that C# developers wanted the same capabilities as Flash and Flex but wanted to continue using only Microsoft Technology. Which is interesting because they created their own MXML like tags for layout, and they are targeting users that want to leverage experience with JavaScript and HTML, and I can swear I can hear them singing “I can do anything you can do better!…. I can do anything better then you!!!!” But is there truth to MS’s motivational claims? Do they need to build their Flash killer so that RIA apps can better work with existing MS technology?


In my opinion Flex and Flash focus on following standards whenever possible. This is one of the reasons you can use Flash or Flex as a presentation layer for almost anything. Flash-Lite has provided capabilities on devices, and Apollo will fill specialized usage on the desktop. These currently work with MS server side and client side technologies where ever there are standards in between. So why you WPFe. Is it more a matter for religion?Perhaps there is some advantage in the use of Windows Media Player Video. MS has some degree of Digital Rights Management. For some companies this is a perceived requirement. Many developers, and media pirates for that matter, will tell you DRM is a waste of time and money. Any solution can be defeated. By implementing DRM you make big corporations happy, mildly annoy media pirates, and really tick off consumers that feel their fair use rights are violated.I’m inclined to believe there is truth in both camps. My question is more along the lines of, how much security is too much. Clearly, upsetting the legit consumer is not the primary concern in every DRM solution. Although several times I have heard a non-technical users angrily identify Flash as the reason they could not store internet videos on their hard drive any more. I suppose from there perspective FLV is a form of DRM. Did that restriction save some companies money? Did it stop a large number of users from republishing FLVs?