none
Will Silverlight work with Visual Studio 2017?

    Question

  • I'm pretty sure they dropped support in VS 2017 (which seems dumb considering end of life for SL is 2021), but I wonder if there is a way to get it to still work with VS 2017.

    Anybody know if it will and what steps need to be taken to make it work?  I'd like to work with the new VS 2017 while maintaining SL 5 apps.


    • Edited by Mark Tiede Wednesday, March 08, 2017 3:43 PM
    Wednesday, March 08, 2017 3:26 PM

Answers

  • https://www.visualstudio.com/en-us/productinfo/vs2017-compatibility-vs

    Silverlight

    Silverlight projects are not supported in this version of Visual Studio. To maintain Silverlight applications, continue to use Visual Studio 2015.


    egr

    Monday, March 13, 2017 11:34 AM

All replies

  • Sorry I don't have the answer and I'm waiting for it ;)

    Saturday, March 11, 2017 7:54 PM
  • https://www.visualstudio.com/en-us/productinfo/vs2017-compatibility-vs

    Silverlight

    Silverlight projects are not supported in this version of Visual Studio. To maintain Silverlight applications, continue to use Visual Studio 2015.


    egr

    Monday, March 13, 2017 11:34 AM
  • Yeah that EOL of 2021- we were just kidding about that.
    -Microsoft
    Tuesday, March 14, 2017 10:54 PM
  • Yeah that EOL of 2021- we were just kidding about that.
    -Microsoft

    Yes this is a very bad news....

    Come on, at least support it until 2017, so it will be far more easy to have two visual studio versions side by side thanks to the improvement installation process... 

    Pls vote the uservoice item : 

    https://visualstudio.uservoice.com/forums/121579-visual-studio-ide/suggestions/18610774-support-silverlight-projects-in-visual-studio-2017

    Wednesday, March 15, 2017 3:52 PM
  • Not quite sure what you meant about the side by side Visual Studios. You CAN do that. I run VS 2013 and now 2017.  2013 is where I do my SL, but I wanted to move it up to 2017 and get rid of the old VS versions that I have taking up space.

    And I sure wish that had something as good as Silverlight to take its place.  I hate getting sucked into Silverlight and LOVING it only to have it screwed over with no good replacement.  The best alternative seems to be take a zillion different javascript libraries and piece meal stuff here and there.

    I loved doing Silverlight in Pascal (RemObject's Oxygene language).  It was a beautiful thing.  The best I've seen in my 45 year career doing programming.

    And now I can't even compiler it in VS 2017.  And it isn't even 2021 yet.  Oh well.  At least I saw a security update for Silverlight come through today.

    Wednesday, March 15, 2017 5:29 PM
  • Hi Mark,

    Based on the official information for the VS2017, it doesn't support the Silverlight like Alexander Egorov's suggestion.

    So if possible, you could use the VS2015 for it.

    Actually this issue has been reported to the product team here:

    https://visualstudio.uservoice.com/forums/121579-visual-studio-ide/suggestions/18610774-support-silverlight-projects-in-visual-studio-2017

    If possible, you could vote and add your comment here.

    For the 2012, it is the Product support lifecycle information for Silverlight, I think you could get the information here:

    https://support.microsoft.com/en-sg/lifecycle/search?alpha=Microsoft%20Silverlight%205

    Best Regards,

    Jack


    MSDN Community Support
    Please remember to click "Mark as Answer" the responses that resolved your issue, and to click "Unmark as Answer" if not. This can be beneficial to other community members reading this thread. If you have any compliments or complaints to MSDN Support, feel free to contact MSDNFSF@microsoft.com.

    Thursday, March 16, 2017 5:45 AM
    Moderator
  • This is really "nice"

    I have to keep VS2008 because I have a lot of recent ! Hardware(Trimble High Accuracy GPS) that uses Windows Mobile 6.5 and no other VS can produce code for this.

    And now I have 50 GB VS2017 Download (i will try Xamarin) , additional to my VS2013 that I have to keep because we have a big Intranet Silverlight solution that will surely live until 2020! And before any question come up ... it is not so easy, partly impossible because of performance reasons to replace it with Javascript.

    I give all of my votes!


    Freudi


    Freudi

    Wednesday, March 22, 2017 11:59 AM
  • SL5 is not supported in VS 2017.  I was falsely told by Microsoft that I should upgrade my SL5 projects in VS 2015 to VS 2017 because the "designer" in VS 2017 has better performance and is more stable.  So I asked the Microsoft rep how this is possible since VS 2017 doesn't support SL5 and got no further response.

    I've come to the same conclusion that most developers already have, Microsoft doesn't want a developer community unless it's "in house" (i.e. for Microsoft).

    I'm still waiting for ANY web technology that can be "As good" as SL5?  

    1.  OOB experience ... nope HTML5, Javascript, ASPX, can't do that

    2.  Full access to local resources with requested elevated permissions, nope not available in HTML5, Javascript, etc.

    The ONLY way to get the same level of power as SL5 is to go back to deploying multiple OS native apps (Windows Forms, iOS, OSX, Android, etc.).  So much for "progress" ... it died about the same time Microsoft assumed all developers are evil hackers and never came up with a working solution for those of us that aren't evil hackers and just want to solve real world problems.

    There were far better solutions to SL5 than just kill the project and declare Apple's vision as the winner, but Microsoft senior management have long since lacked any vision or clarity, just always playing catchup and getting paid well for failures.

    Cheers, Rob.




    Thursday, May 18, 2017 3:18 PM
  • Think you mean to say "javascript" instead of "java".

    But agree with the rest of what you said.

    Thursday, May 18, 2017 4:01 PM
  • Oops, yes Javascript, sorry.

    Cheers, Rob.

    Thursday, May 18, 2017 4:14 PM
  •    It is a huge problem that Microsoft drops support of legacy systems at will even before official EOL. More over I don't understand the reasons behind that. It should cost nothing. They had full support in VS 2015, why don't just reuse that code in VS 2017 and make it available for those who still need to support the system at least until EOL. I'm also looking for a good alternative for SL. HTML/javascript does not inspire me at all. I have a little hope that a project like Bridge.NET will eventually grow to enterprise level but until than it is a nightmare.

    Alex

    Thursday, June 01, 2017 2:44 PM
  • Yeah, the irritating thing for me is SL was GREAT and anything else currently available is like going back 10 years. I can see dropping something when something better comes along, but I have yet to see that. Instead we are expected to just go back to the mishmash that is HTML with collections of various javascript libraries that you can't even tell which ones are the "current" "preferred" ones.

    Sad, really.

    Thursday, June 01, 2017 2:53 PM
  • SL's demise was a by-product of poor executive management decisions based on fear ... there was no technical or security reason to abandon SL.  In fact, NOT A SINGLE verified exploited vulnerability has been attributed to SL5 ... NOT A SINGLE ONE.

    So much for the myth about "add-on" modules, looking thru all the security information I get from places like QualSys (we have to be PADS/PCI compliant) and the vulnerabilities being report come from HTML5,  open ports on servers that should be closed, etc. etc. ... AGAIN, NOT A SINGLE MENTION about SL5 vulnerabilities.

    We're moving away from web based application front ends, sure we'll use them for really basic front end stuff like links to stand alone application that will download and install (be it Windows OS, OSX, iOS, Android).  It's sad that we have to produce 4 OS specific applications rather than ONE SL5 application that could have accomplished everything.  HTML5 is technically a lame duck, probably the most inefficient way to accomplish a task I've ever encountered.

    But welcome to ignorance, fear, and poor executive management ... aka Microsoft.

    And I do realize posting here is nothing more than venting of times gone by.  Those that moderate this site are just looking for the "Mark as Answered" as I guess it meets some artificial "count" that their managers need to see to verify they are doing their job?  

    It's really a sad place where we (developers) are at with Microsoft.  And Microsoft still keep sending me endless surveys and links to "feedback" sites ... but after 10 years of filling out these surveys with explicit technical details it was clearly a waste of my time and is simply a tool to make one "feel they have a voice" when in reality Microsoft will do whatever they want to do, we are simply NOT RELEVANT to their goals/objectives.

    As such, I've made MICROSOFT IRRELEVANT to our clients and customers.  It's a two way street and Microsoft is not the only game in town.

    Cheers, Rob.

    Thursday, June 01, 2017 3:21 PM
  • FWIW, I assumed that the problem with SL was not the security risk of a plugin. As you've stated, they seemed to do a good job of sandboxing.

    I assumed that the reason they ditched it was that it wasn't something they could sell through the store.  If we write a SL app, Microsoft gets nothing (other than we use their platform).  If it is a store app, they get 30% (or whatever the current cut is) for just being the middle man.  Easy money for them.

    And of course, all the browsers banned plugins.

    I was hoping the big vendors would come up with SOMETHING that would allow compiled applications on the web, but it doesn't look like that will happen.

    Thursday, June 01, 2017 6:28 PM
  • I doubt it has anything to do with the Microsoft "Store" ... I can write HTML5, or ASPX, or JavaScript or ... that's still supported by Microsoft and works across multi-browsers/platforms.

    All the "mobile" browsers don't allow plugins ... actually at the time it was ONLY Apple's iOS/Safari that prevented plugin use, OSX/Safari still works with Silverlight 5, as does IE11 and older or hacked versions of Chrome.

    But if you think about it, what was stopping Microsoft from simply integrating SL into the Browser (IE or Edge) just like Apple have integrated "special functionality" into Safari and just like Google have integrated "special functionality" into Chrome to support those companies specific platform needs.

    Anyway, we're going to be moving back to OS specific applications, huge chunk less work in terms of getting PADS/PCI security approvals for merchants.

    I have checked recently as I've only done a couple of Click Once deployments ... I assume that Click Once is no longer support by Microsoft and isn't in VS 2017?  

    Cheers, Rob.


    Thursday, June 01, 2017 9:07 PM
  • SL5 is not supported in VS 2017.  I was falsely told by Microsoft that I should upgrade my SL5 projects in VS 2015 to VS 2017 because the "designer" in VS 2017 has better performance and is more stable.  So I asked the Microsoft rep how this is possible since VS 2017 doesn't support SL5 and got no further response.

    I've come to the same conclusion that most developers already have, Microsoft doesn't want a developer community unless it's "in house" (i.e. for Microsoft).

    I'm still waiting for ANY web technology that can be "As good" as SL5?  

    1.  OOB experience ... nope HTML5, Javascript, ASPX, can't do that

    2.  Full access to local resources with requested elevated permissions, nope not available in HTML5, Javascript, etc.

    The ONLY way to get the same level of power as SL5 is to go back to deploying multiple OS native apps (Windows Forms, iOS, OSX, Android, etc.).  So much for "progress" ... it died about the same time Microsoft assumed all developers are evil hackers and never came up with a working solution for those of us that aren't evil hackers and just want to solve real world problems.

    There were far better solutions to SL5 than just kill the project and declare Apple's vision as the winner, but Microsoft senior management have long since lacked any vision or clarity, just always playing catchup and getting paid well for failures.

    Cheers, Rob.




    Browser support. It was dead in the water when browsers were heading away from plugins like that.

    Also who would even try to exploit silverlight? Relatively no marketshare.

    Having said that I want SL support in VS2017. We still use it unfortunately.

    Thursday, August 17, 2017 10:46 PM

  • Browser support. It was dead in the water when browsers were heading away from plugins like that.

    Also who would even try to exploit silverlight? Relatively no marketshare.

    Having said that I want SL support in VS2017. We still use it unfortunately.

    And yet Browsers still support their "own" specific plug-ins and/or have incorporated the plug-in code into the base browser code and just calling it a new Browser feature ... you mean that exclusivity?

    Find me a better web solution today that can be as functional and as secure as Silverlight?  Any takers???  We've looked, there are NONE, NADA, ZIPPO, just really old technology trying to present itself as "new technology".  HTML5 is a joke when it comes to development resources, time, and featureless and slow with zero DX accelerated support.  

    I get it, Silverlight was killed because it frankly would have made things like the Apple Store and Microsoft Store obsolete and Microsoft couldn't extort money out of development groups.  So Microsoft joined in with Apple to try and get their slice of pie.  So kill an extremely good technology and open a "Store" to collect on our hard work.  What's so "unfortunate" about that?

    Anyway, point being that Microsoft representative indicated I move to VS 2017 to solve SL5 performance issues in the debugger ... and VS 2017 it doesn't support SL5.  Just more of the same WRONG information we get out of Microsoft.

    Cheers, Rob.

    Thursday, August 17, 2017 11:16 PM

  • Browser support. It was dead in the water when browsers were heading away from plugins like that.

    Also who would even try to exploit silverlight? Relatively no marketshare.

    Having said that I want SL support in VS2017. We still use it unfortunately.

    And yet Browsers still support their "own" specific plug-ins and/or have incorporated the plug-in code into the base browser code and just calling it a new Browser feature ... you mean that exclusivity?

    Find me a better web solution today that can be as functional and as secure as Silverlight?  Any takers???  We've looked, there are NONE, NADA, ZIPPO, just really old technology trying to present itself as "new technology".  HTML5 is a joke when it comes to development resources, time, and featureless and slow with zero DX accelerated support.  

    I get it, Silverlight was killed because it frankly would have made things like the Apple Store and Microsoft Store obsolete and Microsoft couldn't extort money out of development groups.  So Microsoft joined in with Apple to try and get their slice of pie.  So kill an extremely good technology and open a "Store" to collect on our hard work.  What's so "unfortunate" about that?

    Anyway, point being that Microsoft representative indicated I move to VS 2017 to solve SL5 performance issues in the debugger ... and VS 2017 it doesn't support SL5.  Just more of the same WRONG information we get out of Microsoft.

    Cheers, Rob.

    Browsers support their own plugin APIs. If you can port silverlight to that then go for it but that is not the architecture of SL. The problem with SL as with Flash is ironically ubiquity. Single implementer. That means the same flaw is available on all platforms by default. Now I accept HTML5/js is not a capable replacement but the truth is SL and Flash style plugins needed to be removed. Mainly because of how Flash was a PoC of how badly it can go.

    You cannot claim SL is secure because nobody tried to exploit it. NO platform is secure. .NET has had many critical flaws, and therefore by extension it's reasonable to assume SL has had many that were simply not exploited because people didn't try.

    Also there were plenty of security issues with SL. There were many security patches for critical exploit vectors. Just google Silverlight security update. To make the assumption it's not possible is completely false.

    Thursday, August 17, 2017 11:48 PM