Apollo, WPF, and Shakespeare: Oy

I've just spent some time looking over Apollo. In essence, Apollo is what you get after Flash plugin swallows the web browser inside out then spit out what it couldn't digest, basically all plugins not directly supported by Adobe. What they did is take Flex2/Flash9 code base and mixed it with WebKit HTML browser code (used by Apple's Safari browser), replacing rendering pipeline with Flash9 display list pipeline and erasing the seams between JavaScript and ActionScript, making never-seen-before (unfortunately 2D still) HTML rendering flexibility and performance boost as well as making incestuous containment hierarchy possible.
From purely technical point of view, I am thoroughly impressed with Apollo. From paranoid security point of view, I think Apollo will be seen as a browser by users despite what Adobe does and the thin wall of installation dialog that separates adobe-app: and http: will fail to solidify in users' mind. From business perspective, I think it's lack of support for popular non-Adobe content types (QuickTime, WMV, etc.) through plugins will impede Apollo's popularity. I am also concerned about native code integration support because it would be rather tedious to write full applications in JavaScript, particularly since JavaScript lacks expansive collection of third-party libraries like Java, Python, and Perl does. .NET is weak in this area as well but not as badly.
It's kind a funny that Apollo and WPF are in a similar situation with third-party content type support. Apollo will handle HTML, PDF, and Flash well in 2D while lacking 3D and WMP support. WPF will handle 3D and WMP supported movies nimbly but fails to support HTML, PDF, and Flash seamlessly. Both treats makes QuickTime like some poor cousin despite the fact that Apple will keep it a rather noticeable sore thumb for years to come. Gosh. I think even Shakespeare would have had a hard time contriving a more tragic narcissistic love triangle (?!?). Oy. What a tragedy.

Tags: , ,