Microsoft scrap plans for Silverlight 1.1 (and call it Silverlight 2.0 instead)

! Warning: this post hasn't been updated in over three years and so may contain out of date information.

“Big Blue”, the SIlverlight logoIt appears that it has finally dawned on Microsoft that adding major new features to Silverlight (.NET support, “proper” controls that support layout management , sockets, data-binding, templates and networking and support for cross-domain networking) and then just issuing it as a minor release (1.1) wasn’t such a clever idea after all. So look out for a beta of Silverlight 2.0 early in 2008.

Read more about it on Somasegar’s blog

2 thoughts on “Microsoft scrap plans for Silverlight 1.1 (and call it Silverlight 2.0 instead)

  1. “scrapped plans” is an awfully strong phrase for a product version number rename. In the end, that’s all it is. These other features were coming whether it was called 1.1 or 2.0.


  2. The glib reply is that “Microsoft change the name of Silverlight 1.1 to Silverlight 2.0” doesn’t make for as interesting a title. 😉

    There is of course more to it than than though. Version numbers tend to be the subject of battles between development and marketing departments and involve lots of politics. Take Flash player version 9, update 3 as an example. Functionally it was a significant update to the player as it added H.264 support to Flash. It could be argued that such a major new feature deserved a new version number of the player. However Adobe, and Macromedia before them, make big news of the percentage of users that are using a certain version of Flash. A new version sets the penetration rate back at 0%. And update lets them claim high penetration of the product as it is still version 9.

    Another example is with Java. Internally the current version is known as v1.6. Sun’s marketing machine though promotes it as version 6. There is no difference between 1.6 and 6 functionally, but version 6 sounds a far more advanced product than v1.6.

    Whether Silverlight’s number change was due to less features ending up in v1.0 than intended, more planned for v2.0 than originally intended or simply someone winning an internal political battle, we will never know. However when Microsoft decided to rename Silverlight 1.1 to Silverlight 2.0, you can be sure it wasn’t just a “product version number rename” whim.

Comments are closed.