How many of you use WPF
-
I don't know what makes you say that, but you're plain wrong. There's nothing stopping you using C to write a Windows app for Vista. If you feel that just because the general UI is flashy, you would think it's better to use WPF, that's your decision, but WPF is just an option, in XP or in Vista.
Christian Graus Please read this if you don't understand the answer I've given you "also I don't think "TranslateOneToTwoBillion OneHundredAndFortySevenMillion FourHundredAndEightyThreeThousand SixHundredAndFortySeven()" is a very good choice for a function name" - SpacixOne ( offering help to someone who really needed it ) ( spaces added for the benefit of people running at < 1280x1024 )
Christian Graus wrote:
There's nothing stopping you using C to write a Windows app for Vista.
I hope there are not people who think this is no longer possible! egad, that would be a big misconception of how things work. You can use C/C++ even FORTRAN if you want, heaven forbid even COBOL is available along with all the sharps. You are free to use several methods of GUIs, several methods of graphics.
_________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb) John Andrew Holmes "It is well to remember that the entire universe, with one trifling exception, is composed of others."
-
El Corazon wrote:
and also why expanding windows icons looks ugly, shrinking them always looks odd
Looks smooth in Vista. Most icons are pretty large so you can expand them without making them look pixelated.
The Digital World. It is an amazing place in which we primitive humans interact. Our flesh made this synthetic machine. You see, we are so smart, we know a lot of stuff. We were grown from cells that came from the universe, which the matter and physics I'm typing in it is amazing how the universe is working. Human life is very amazing. How I experience this sh*t its like wow.
CataclysmicQuantum wrote:
Looks smooth in Vista. Most icons are pretty large so you can expand them without making them look pixelated.
which always means more memory for every icon. 100 icons at 128x128 with tri-colored and alpha blended ability means you are using a lot more memory than you need to, per se. And that is assuming that Vista doesn't employ mipmapping techniques for minimizing effects during shrinking, that is applying all sizes below your original, 128x128 & 64x64 & 32x32, etc. This technique is common in 3D interfaces which Vista is finally utilizing for its internal pipeline. However, I do see the aliasing artifacts even in Vista. Searching for the next level is what programming is all about, nothing ever remains completely the same. Something is always changing.
_________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb) John Andrew Holmes "It is well to remember that the entire universe, with one trifling exception, is composed of others."
-
Christian Graus wrote:
There's nothing stopping you using C to write a Windows app for Vista.
I hope there are not people who think this is no longer possible! egad, that would be a big misconception of how things work. You can use C/C++ even FORTRAN if you want, heaven forbid even COBOL is available along with all the sharps. You are free to use several methods of GUIs, several methods of graphics.
_________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb) John Andrew Holmes "It is well to remember that the entire universe, with one trifling exception, is composed of others."
I have to assume that isn't what he means, but failing that, I'm not sure what he does mean, I guess he assumes that MS themselves are pushing for WPF apps, which may well be true, doesn't mean we have to use it.
Christian Graus Please read this if you don't understand the answer I've given you "also I don't think "TranslateOneToTwoBillion OneHundredAndFortySevenMillion FourHundredAndEightyThreeThousand SixHundredAndFortySeven()" is a very good choice for a function name" - SpacixOne ( offering help to someone who really needed it ) ( spaces added for the benefit of people running at < 1280x1024 )
-
I'm thinking of just boycotting the technology. Why should I have to learn something new and complicated just for the sake of being up to date? I don't like WPF and how it makes thinks seem messy and more complicated. I should not have to write XML and hoolaguh boolahuh to make a button on a form. WinForms, GDI/+, OpenGL, and DirectX is all we need! Who is with me on this?
The Digital World. It is an amazing place in which we primitive humans interact. Our flesh made this synthetic machine. You see, we are so smart, we know a lot of stuff. We were grown from cells that came from the universe, which the matter and physics I'm typing in it is amazing how the universe is working. Human life is very amazing. How I experience this sh*t its like wow.
It makes Sense to boycout, if u have something inliue of it, giving similar quality of graphic. Although, agreed, WPF has enourmous learning curve involved, it is not as we developers want it, but, it really does give impressive UI and Looks; Hope, Google or Yahoo come up with something they can beat WPF, or atleast, Adobe will (i think), or Adobe will be washed away!
ravis
-
Not me. You don't develop for a living do you? 99% of what clients look for is the Look and Feel of an application rather than the feature set. besides, you can do some really cool things with WPF.
"Every time Lotus Notes starts up, somewhere a puppy, a kitten, a lamb, and a baby seal are killed. Lotus Notes is a conspiracy by the forces of Satan to drive us over the brink into madness. The CRC-32 for each file in the installation includes the numbers 666." Gary Wheeler "You're an idiot." John Simmons, THE Outlaw programmer "I realised that all of my best anecdotes started with "So there we were, pissed". Pete O'Hanlon
Yes you can do lots of neat things with WPF, but your statement that 99% of what clients are after is look and feel is just madness. Clients (well mine anyway) want functionality (100% of what they expect) and they want it to be pleasing to use. 99% just reaks of style over content. To the OP, I agree. I have used WPF on projects where I have been a hired hand but I wouldn't use it out of choice.
The only thing unpredictable about me is just how predictable I'm going to be.
-
I don't use it myself but our application (software for controlling an industrial print machine) uses it. Many of the UI elements would just not be possible (or would be extremely difficult to implement) using Windows Forms.
CataclysmicQuantum wrote:
I should not have to write XML and hoolaguh boolahuh to make a button on a form.
Correct. You should use a toolset such as Expression Blend.
Kevin
Ah the voice of reason. Precisely. Technology used for a reason not finding a reason to use the technology :)
The only thing unpredictable about me is just how predictable I'm going to be.
-
CataclysmicQuantum wrote:
The GUI should be functional not some kind of art show.
Riiiiight. GUI is all about making it look so good you want to lick it.
"Every time Lotus Notes starts up, somewhere a puppy, a kitten, a lamb, and a baby seal are killed. Lotus Notes is a conspiracy by the forces of Satan to drive us over the brink into madness. The CRC-32 for each file in the installation includes the numbers 666." Gary Wheeler "You're an idiot." John Simmons, THE Outlaw programmer "I realised that all of my best anecdotes started with "So there we were, pissed". Pete O'Hanlon
That's a description of a good GUI. But a great GUI is the one you can't remember because you never give it any thought; the program feels like an extension of the user's own thought process. It's all about ease of use.
-
Brady Kelly wrote:
my Intellisense doesn't work for XAML.
That doesn't sound right. Works for me.
:josh: My WPF Blog[^] All of life is just a big rambling blog post.
I think ReSharper screwed it up, but even after disabling ReSharper and reverting to VS Intellisense, it still no longer works. I'm sure nothing short of a complete re-install will fix it.
Pits fall into Chuck Norris.
-
That's a description of a good GUI. But a great GUI is the one you can't remember because you never give it any thought; the program feels like an extension of the user's own thought process. It's all about ease of use.
I agree. You will understand that throughout the whole thread I didn't argue that particular point. Its the simple truth.
"Every time Lotus Notes starts up, somewhere a puppy, a kitten, a lamb, and a baby seal are killed. Lotus Notes is a conspiracy by the forces of Satan to drive us over the brink into madness. The CRC-32 for each file in the installation includes the numbers 666." Gary Wheeler "You're an idiot." John Simmons, THE Outlaw programmer "I realised that all of my best anecdotes started with "So there we were, pissed". Pete O'Hanlon
-
Yes you can do lots of neat things with WPF, but your statement that 99% of what clients are after is look and feel is just madness. Clients (well mine anyway) want functionality (100% of what they expect) and they want it to be pleasing to use. 99% just reaks of style over content. To the OP, I agree. I have used WPF on projects where I have been a hired hand but I wouldn't use it out of choice.
The only thing unpredictable about me is just how predictable I'm going to be.
That was an exaggeration of sorts. I've actually dealt with clients who only cared that it looked stunning. My personal belief and preferred method is the "Google.com look". Extremely simple, intuitive and works like a charm. Other than that, its catering to the whims and tastes of the client.
"Every time Lotus Notes starts up, somewhere a puppy, a kitten, a lamb, and a baby seal are killed. Lotus Notes is a conspiracy by the forces of Satan to drive us over the brink into madness. The CRC-32 for each file in the installation includes the numbers 666." Gary Wheeler "You're an idiot." John Simmons, THE Outlaw programmer "I realised that all of my best anecdotes started with "So there we were, pissed". Pete O'Hanlon
-
wout de zeeuw wrote:
I actually liked the win forms code generation, where you had easy access to the generated UI element fields.
The problem with that approach was that the rules for designer-generated code and regular code were different. That is, you can do things in code that the designer couldn't handle - this effectively meant that the designer-code had to be segregated and touched only with kid gloves, which pretty much put it into the same category as XAML or resource scripts, except without the clearly-defined boundaries.
Citizen 20.1.01
'The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, 'which is to be master - that's all.'
Ah is that why... hmmm... to me it's like throwing the kid out with the bathwater though. I mean in practise I never pushed it that far, so with generated code in a separate partial class file was usable to me (I don't care too much for the academic cases). And second: they could have gone the way of asp.net, which has xml (html) markup and still a simple code file where all fields are defined. Maybe I'll get over it one day :-).
Wout
-
I'm thinking of just boycotting the technology. Why should I have to learn something new and complicated just for the sake of being up to date? I don't like WPF and how it makes thinks seem messy and more complicated. I should not have to write XML and hoolaguh boolahuh to make a button on a form. WinForms, GDI/+, OpenGL, and DirectX is all we need! Who is with me on this?
The Digital World. It is an amazing place in which we primitive humans interact. Our flesh made this synthetic machine. You see, we are so smart, we know a lot of stuff. We were grown from cells that came from the universe, which the matter and physics I'm typing in it is amazing how the universe is working. Human life is very amazing. How I experience this sh*t its like wow.
-
I'm thinking of just boycotting the technology. Why should I have to learn something new and complicated just for the sake of being up to date? I don't like WPF and how it makes thinks seem messy and more complicated. I should not have to write XML and hoolaguh boolahuh to make a button on a form. WinForms, GDI/+, OpenGL, and DirectX is all we need! Who is with me on this?
The Digital World. It is an amazing place in which we primitive humans interact. Our flesh made this synthetic machine. You see, we are so smart, we know a lot of stuff. We were grown from cells that came from the universe, which the matter and physics I'm typing in it is amazing how the universe is working. Human life is very amazing. How I experience this sh*t its like wow.
I agree with you. The question is: how much time should I invest in this new complicated WPF to give my application a better look? does it worth?:confused:
-
You do realize that modern displays require all graphics to be rasterized prior to actually appearing on the screen... right? The advantage of using a vector image as the source and rasterizing only when you know the exact size and resolution that will be required is that you won't distort or lose detail the way you will when scaling a pre-rasterized image.
Citizen 20.1.01
'The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, 'which is to be master - that's all.'
You are arguing with a non-professional programmer who thinks a 2000x2000 bitmap is better than a vector for scaling (see above threads.)
regards, Paul Watson Ireland & South Africa
Fernando A. Gomez F. wrote:
At least he achieved immortality for a few years.
-
CataclysmicQuantum wrote:
I'm thinking of just boycotting the technology.
I better abandon it then, once people hear YOU'RE not using it.... The application that my company sells, uses WPF. Like all new technologies ( or old ones ) it's not perfect. The XAML syntax is too verbose, worse even than VB. There are plenty of bugs in WPF that MS have not fixed despite knowing about them, and some things I regard as design flaws ( there is no facility for managing your own memory, for example, you can't even call Dispose, it's not there ). However, the UI we get from using WPF is a major reason our program has been very successful, with an overwhelmingly positive response and sales beyond our expectations.
Christian Graus Please read this if you don't understand the answer I've given you "also I don't think "TranslateOneToTwoBillion OneHundredAndFortySevenMillion FourHundredAndEightyThreeThousand SixHundredAndFortySeven()" is a very good choice for a function name" - SpacixOne ( offering help to someone who really needed it ) ( spaces added for the benefit of people running at < 1280x1024 )
Christian Graus wrote:
However, the UI we get from using WPF is a major reason our program has been very successful, with an overwhelmingly positive response and sales beyond our expectations.
And you can't argue with that.
regards, Paul Watson Ireland & South Africa
Fernando A. Gomez F. wrote:
At least he achieved immortality for a few years.
-
I'm thinking of just boycotting the technology. Why should I have to learn something new and complicated just for the sake of being up to date? I don't like WPF and how it makes thinks seem messy and more complicated. I should not have to write XML and hoolaguh boolahuh to make a button on a form. WinForms, GDI/+, OpenGL, and DirectX is all we need! Who is with me on this?
The Digital World. It is an amazing place in which we primitive humans interact. Our flesh made this synthetic machine. You see, we are so smart, we know a lot of stuff. We were grown from cells that came from the universe, which the matter and physics I'm typing in it is amazing how the universe is working. Human life is very amazing. How I experience this sh*t its like wow.
Absolutely 100% with you on this, what the world doesn’t need are more wrappers round current technology. Give a programer a graphics/design/technology/tool and it’s an odds on probability they will come up with a mess (same applies to marketing people!). What user want is something that’s consistent from application to application, by default this is the menu/dialog concept, well covered in MFC/GDI/Winforms. Proof - just look how inefficient and 'hated'(and I really do mean hated!) the Microsoft ribbon is. Sad to see grown men and women virtually crying with frustration over its use! Microsoft has a fundamental problem, too many developers, on pointless projects, why develop WPF when your flagship operating system doesn’t work correctly (Vista). Even SP1 probably breaks more than it fixes, well ok at least file copying now works - maybe one day networking will as well....
-
I don't know what makes you say that, but you're plain wrong. There's nothing stopping you using C to write a Windows app for Vista. If you feel that just because the general UI is flashy, you would think it's better to use WPF, that's your decision, but WPF is just an option, in XP or in Vista.
Christian Graus Please read this if you don't understand the answer I've given you "also I don't think "TranslateOneToTwoBillion OneHundredAndFortySevenMillion FourHundredAndEightyThreeThousand SixHundredAndFortySeven()" is a very good choice for a function name" - SpacixOne ( offering help to someone who really needed it ) ( spaces added for the benefit of people running at < 1280x1024 )
Dude, you should go back to my original post. I said, "Fortunately, I am still on XP along with my customer base. I don't have to worry so much about silly new three letter acronyms.". You are the one that said "WPF runs on XP". You are the one that brought up WPF in response to my post. So you can run around telling me I am wrong about WPF? Give me a break. I suggest you reread this thread and put some fiber in your diet.
CodeWiz51 -- Life is not a spectator sport. I came to play. Code's Musings | Code's Articles
-
Christian Graus wrote:
There's nothing stopping you using C to write a Windows app for Vista.
I hope there are not people who think this is no longer possible! egad, that would be a big misconception of how things work. You can use C/C++ even FORTRAN if you want, heaven forbid even COBOL is available along with all the sharps. You are free to use several methods of GUIs, several methods of graphics.
_________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb) John Andrew Holmes "It is well to remember that the entire universe, with one trifling exception, is composed of others."
if you really want to be nuts, someone wrote wrappers(??) so you can call win32 from an x86 asm program. :omg:
You know, every time I tried to win a bar-bet about being able to count to 1000 using my fingers I always got punched out when I reached 4.... -- El Corazon
-
Ah the voice of reason. Precisely. Technology used for a reason not finding a reason to use the technology :)
The only thing unpredictable about me is just how predictable I'm going to be.
We had a project that we researched using WPF. I decided not to use it becase we had such a tight deadline and some of the controls we needed were not there without using some 3rd party controls (data grid for one). I am also hesitant because we jumped into the whole ASP.NET bandwagon when it first came out. Yeah it had some nice features but we also had to deal alot of problems in the enviroment and a lousy tree control. Given that experience, I would like to only use WPF for small apps until it is a little more mature before using it in a big project.
-
You are arguing with a non-professional programmer who thinks a 2000x2000 bitmap is better than a vector for scaling (see above threads.)
regards, Paul Watson Ireland & South Africa
Fernando A. Gomez F. wrote:
At least he achieved immortality for a few years.