WPF, love it or hate it?
-
WPF sounds like a good idea, but I'm wondering if it's worth the learning curve. Has anyone here actually used it successfully? Any positive or negative comments?
DP
I took a look at it, could find no justification for using it in the business apps I write, however I might look at it again next new project I embark on simply for the lone fact that I like the idea of a UI done with vector graphics, the rest is irrelevant to me.
"It's so simple to be wise. Just think of something stupid to say and then don't say it." -Sam Levenson
-
WPF sounds like a good idea, but I'm wondering if it's worth the learning curve. Has anyone here actually used it successfully? Any positive or negative comments?
DP
My product was written in WPF. I love it. The wow factor of WPF was almost certainly a factor in us selling the company in a little over 6 months of operation. It's not perfect, but it's worth learning, and it makes for a very cool UI.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista.
-
WPF sounds like a good idea, but I'm wondering if it's worth the learning curve. Has anyone here actually used it successfully? Any positive or negative comments?
DP
I started off being very cynical about WPF, but I'm now a huge fan of it. So much so, I joined the WPF Disciples.
"WPF has many lovers. It's a veritable porn star!" - Josh Smith
-
My product was written in WPF. I love it. The wow factor of WPF was almost certainly a factor in us selling the company in a little over 6 months of operation. It's not perfect, but it's worth learning, and it makes for a very cool UI.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista.
What is it about WPF that gives it a "Wow" advantage over using standard controls? I've heard comments like this, but I don't understand the difference. I'm sure that's because I know little about WPF at this point, but I'd love it if you could elaborate.
DP
-
What is it about WPF that gives it a "Wow" advantage over using standard controls? I've heard comments like this, but I don't understand the difference. I'm sure that's because I know little about WPF at this point, but I'd love it if you could elaborate.
DP
Well, WPF is built on DirectX. which means that any traditional limitations of controls, don't exist. It means all controls are integrated. It means you can draw a control any way you like. It also means you can animate things, such as windows that fly open, tabs that animate shut, etc.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista.
-
What is it about WPF that gives it a "Wow" advantage over using standard controls? I've heard comments like this, but I don't understand the difference. I'm sure that's because I know little about WPF at this point, but I'd love it if you could elaborate.
DP
If you don't like the look of a control, just restyle it to change it. Want rounded textboxes, then just apply a CornerRadius. How about animated buttons - just apply a trigger.
"WPF has many lovers. It's a veritable porn star!" - Josh Smith
-
WPF sounds like a good idea, but I'm wondering if it's worth the learning curve. Has anyone here actually used it successfully? Any positive or negative comments?
DP
I have, in small apps. I like it. The declarativeness, the ease of binding data to the UI.
-
WPF sounds like a good idea, but I'm wondering if it's worth the learning curve. Has anyone here actually used it successfully? Any positive or negative comments?
DP
-
WPF sounds like a good idea, but I'm wondering if it's worth the learning curve. Has anyone here actually used it successfully? Any positive or negative comments?
DP
Loved it, used it successfully. Won't do WinForm anymore if I can avoid it. In a way WPF is to WinForm what C# is C. Sure you can do the same thing in both.. but in WPF it's easier, more inherently safe, etc.. If you are a "business application writer" who only care about rows of text box and label you could still, at the very least, tremendously enjoy databinding! These Videos about a plugin to improve LOB developement will gives you some ideas... http://karlshifflett.wordpress.com/xaml-power-toys/[^]
A train station is where the train stops. A bus station is where the bus stops. On my desk, I have a work station.... _________________________________________________________ My programs never have bugs, they just develop random features.
-
WPF sounds like a good idea, but I'm wondering if it's worth the learning curve. Has anyone here actually used it successfully? Any positive or negative comments?
DP
What I don't like about it, is that often people (mis)use it to make obscenely flashy programs. What kind of value does that add to a program? IMO none at all, unless it's your purpose to make it look like an ad. Also I really don't like the way it nearly forces ClearType on you, why should it ignore a system-wide setting? ClearType looks like rainbows on CRT screens, so those of us who still have them (they're cheap, and with the crisis and all..) are stuck with applications with rainbowy text.
-
WPF sounds like a good idea, but I'm wondering if it's worth the learning curve. Has anyone here actually used it successfully? Any positive or negative comments?
DP
I love it. It's quite a learning curve compared to WinForms, especially with XAML and the new Blend tool (we're programmers, not designers). But I'm having grief with Silverlight and its limitations... :sigh:
"A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine." - Thomas Jefferson "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin Edbert Sydney, Australia
-
WPF sounds like a good idea, but I'm wondering if it's worth the learning curve. Has anyone here actually used it successfully? Any positive or negative comments?
DP
I've tried really hard to like it but I keep falling back to the hate side. The concepts in WPF would be great if it wasn't wrapped up in XAML. I fricken hate XAML. So instead of having something like a nice InitializeComponent method where you can see the code being written for you, WPF takes your XAML and craps out a mysterious .g file behind the scenes. Want to debug or look at that? Good Luck. And oh yes, there will be compile problems in your .g file at least once a week. Then you have to stare at your XAML and wonder why, no error displayed in there. For me WPF could be a great technology if it wasn't ruined by XAML. You can pull off most of what WPF has to offer without XAML but good luck finding examples for that. Good display technology, horribly broken interface. There is also no visual inheritance to speak of. You can hack your way to something close to visual inheritance but it's just not the same. I give it a D-.
-
I love it. It's quite a learning curve compared to WinForms, especially with XAML and the new Blend tool (we're programmers, not designers). But I'm having grief with Silverlight and its limitations... :sigh:
"A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine." - Thomas Jefferson "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin Edbert Sydney, Australia
Edbert P wrote:
we're programmers, not designers
Now that's my problem. I'm a data centric developer, I'm bloody hopeless at good GUI design (the reason I hate the web - all presentation) and WPF seems to be all about GUI. I have all my GUIs set up for late binding and no longer have to think about it and along comes WPF which wants let me bind EVERYTHING. Bloody new fangled technologies, MS always putting up new toys to play with and you can never be sure which ones will last grumble grumble mutter mutter
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity RAH
-
WPF sounds like a good idea, but I'm wondering if it's worth the learning curve. Has anyone here actually used it successfully? Any positive or negative comments?
DP
I used WPF in a couple of small open-source projects and one midsize LOB app. I'm generally impressed with the results, though I wouldn't recommend WPF for, e.g., writing VS plug-ins. I still stick to WinForms for these applications.
-
I've tried really hard to like it but I keep falling back to the hate side. The concepts in WPF would be great if it wasn't wrapped up in XAML. I fricken hate XAML. So instead of having something like a nice InitializeComponent method where you can see the code being written for you, WPF takes your XAML and craps out a mysterious .g file behind the scenes. Want to debug or look at that? Good Luck. And oh yes, there will be compile problems in your .g file at least once a week. Then you have to stare at your XAML and wonder why, no error displayed in there. For me WPF could be a great technology if it wasn't ruined by XAML. You can pull off most of what WPF has to offer without XAML but good luck finding examples for that. Good display technology, horribly broken interface. There is also no visual inheritance to speak of. You can hack your way to something close to visual inheritance but it's just not the same. I give it a D-.
That's my biggest gripe with it as well. Why use XML? honestly! Things would be so much simpler to understand if it used a format that was more tailored to the purpose. XAML is so exceedingly hard to read, one wonders why it was done that way. I'm sure there are lots of good technical reasons, it is just a shame is all. WPF has so many great concepts, but some parts of it are just mind bogglingly frustrating.
-
WPF sounds like a good idea, but I'm wondering if it's worth the learning curve. Has anyone here actually used it successfully? Any positive or negative comments?
DP
I love it!!! But I still have to find the "wow" factor. Cause I like it while developing on windows application. But don't like on web application. It behaves like downloading a ActiveX control on your computer to run the web page. Any how I am a novice on WPF...
Regards Anil
-
I love it!!! But I still have to find the "wow" factor. Cause I like it while developing on windows application. But don't like on web application. It behaves like downloading a ActiveX control on your computer to run the web page. Any how I am a novice on WPF...
Regards Anil
-
I've tried really hard to like it but I keep falling back to the hate side. The concepts in WPF would be great if it wasn't wrapped up in XAML. I fricken hate XAML. So instead of having something like a nice InitializeComponent method where you can see the code being written for you, WPF takes your XAML and craps out a mysterious .g file behind the scenes. Want to debug or look at that? Good Luck. And oh yes, there will be compile problems in your .g file at least once a week. Then you have to stare at your XAML and wonder why, no error displayed in there. For me WPF could be a great technology if it wasn't ruined by XAML. You can pull off most of what WPF has to offer without XAML but good luck finding examples for that. Good display technology, horribly broken interface. There is also no visual inheritance to speak of. You can hack your way to something close to visual inheritance but it's just not the same. I give it a D-.
Well if you think you must use XAML to use WPF, then you should go back and learn more about it. You really do not have to do that, although it is very convenient and elegant when used correctly. All the classes used in WPF are part of the dotnet framework so you can do everything manually if this is your vehicle of choice, but XAML will help keep complexity down.
thrakazog wrote:
There is also no visual inheritance
There is actually visual inheritance, although it could be improved. This is what templates are about.
-
WPF sounds like a good idea, but I'm wondering if it's worth the learning curve. Has anyone here actually used it successfully? Any positive or negative comments?
DP
My experience so far, it's great for business and non business apps that have rich UI. What lets WPF down it when it comes to process large amounts of information. For example I have a SQL studio written in Winforms that uses a custom listview for output/results, using the listview in WPF is 50% slower, this is purely down to the way WPF presents and renders UI and data. I thought going direct through DirectX would improved performance.
Software Kinetics - Moving software