Why... [modified]
-
Man that's such tripe - what freakin Expression are you using? A beta? The UI is fairly standard in terms of colour scheme with a LOT of design / graphics-ish type applications (see Blender for a kick off), and for the record, I'm WELL over 30, and work on a 5 year old laptop with a 15" screen. FWIW it can also be changed. I've never experienced issues with layouts, and would be rather surprised if anyone else does either. I really don't see what you mean about the menus being unintuitive - ffs, use your brain - just because something is different to what you're used to, and you're struggling to get your head around it / understand it, doesn't make it useless. Nish was very right - it's a substantial learning curve, but (as I've said before), WPF is a HELL of a lot better than anything else we have to play with - I KNOW you remember MFC...you're honestly telling me that was a better way to do UIs?
C# has already designed away most of the tedium of C++.
I'm not denigrating WPF or XAML at all; in fact, I'm starting to like them. There are a whole lot of things in WPF that are going to make my job a lot easier (I do the UI's for our products). XAML is starting to feel somewhat intuitive, although that may be to my history with XML. Expression Blend, on the other hand, is another kettle of fish. I'm using version 2, with the latest service updates, by the way. I've not used the other Expression applications. The Blend UI has two color scheme choices for itself, 'dark' and 'light'. The dark scheme renders its UI elements in shades of about 15% gray to black. The light scheme renders in the range 30% gray to black. Neither of these choices render well on anything except a good quality flat panel that can handle the contrast requirements. If you mean "the UI can be changed" refers to these choices, well, neither one works. On a standard CRT it is very difficult to visually differentiate UI elements due to the lack of contrast. Disabled UI elements often render identically to elements that simply don't have the focus. I don't understand why they would deliberately ignore the user's appearance preferences. I've used a number of 'designer' applications. Most of them go out of their way to avoid forcing a certain workflow on you. Layout management and consistency is part of that. Blend is heavily sequence dependent. Select this palette here, click on that item in your design, click this toolbar button, in that order, and maybe it will do what you asked. Maybe not. Menu items enable and disable seemingly at random. The online tutorials are difficult to use, since they don't correspond to the application. They routinely mention menu items or toolbar buttons that can't be found, or don't appear when you expect them to. I simply find it ironic when a company creates a tool for doing UI design that treats the user with such contempt.
Software Zen:
delete this;
Fold With Us![^] -
...does WPF have to suck as bad as WWF? [EDIT] Ouch - those '1' votes really hurt. I think I'm going to cry... not. Almost an hour later, and WPF still sucks. All the '1' votes in the world won't change that.
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001modified on Sunday, December 28, 2008 9:21 AM
WPF is pretty cool . But it's fiddly, the open ended UI means you find you have to play a lot to get simple things done. I still have not figured how to build ui that resizes nicely when you resize a form, I think you need to nest hundreds of docking panels to do that. I acutally did a ton of WPF ui before Xmas, and at one stage spent a day trying to get a complex path onto a button. But, after a hell of a week, I turned the corner and feel I can build WPF UI reasonably well now, although I still have a lot to learn.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista.
-
Yes, but Expression Blend really, really, really sucks. For a UI design tool, its user interface is horrible. Non-standard and counter-intuitive menus and controls, a layout that varies from run to run without rhyme or reason, and a color scheme that is unusable unless you're under the age of 30 and have a very high-end flat panel. I've had more luck coding XAML by hand in Visual Studio than I've had using Expression Blend.
Software Zen:
delete this;
Fold With Us![^]Gary R. Wheeler wrote:
Non-standard and counter-intuitive menus and controls, a layout that varies from run to run without rhyme or reason, and a color scheme that is unusable unless you're under the age of 30 and have a very high-end flat panel.
Agreed. Keeps reminding me of old versions of Blender; a UI written by programmers who spent too much time with one particular tool and decided to use it for everything.
----
You're right. These facts that you've laid out totally contradict the wild ramblings that I pulled off the back of cornflakes packets.
-
That's a pretty crappy excuse, you must admit. If the VS design time support is unstable, why should anyone bother getting Yet-Another-Microsoft-Tool just to begin learning it? Why should you have to use two different tools, one to "design" the appearance, and another to program the behavior. I agree with John: if the native tool set doesn't work,then it is beta crap that Microsoft is dumping on customers. The fact that they have Expression Blend working makes the offense of not fixing the VS designers in a service pack even less forgivable. This seems to be the only industry in which a supplier can sell defective product to its customers and not get sued. It's a damn good thing Microsoft doesn't build bridges.
I agree 200%. The Blend/VS thing sucks. Of course, Winforms is just as bad, in terms of the designer breaking when you use it. In WPF, I have found that XAML pasted directly, if moved into a control to clean up the code, will break the designer. I've given up on trying to work out why, I use the designer for preview until it breaks, then live without it.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista.
-
Easy to say, that's another $500 to shell out for tools.
Even when I got it for free, I still found Blend to be not worth the price, although I sometimes use it to help me with generating paths, it's ability to merge shapes into a path is about the only good thing it does.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista.
-
Rob Graham wrote:
the only industry in which a supplier can sell defective product to its customers and not get sued.
The good ol' license takes care of that: Microsoft expressly denies any warranty of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose.
such as... actually working? :suss:
"mostly watching the human race is like watching dogs watch tv ... they see the pictures move but the meaning escapes them"
-
Rob Graham wrote:
Why should you have to use two different tools, one to "design" the appearance, and another to program the behavior.
That's one of the main POINTS of Expression - most devs couldn't design a decent UI in a fit, and most designers would puke at having to use VS - the point of the shared project / file formats is so that you can code up what you want in VS, then pass to someone with an eye for the aesthetics to tart it up in Expression.
C# has already designed away most of the tedium of C++.
RichardGrimmer wrote:
most devs couldn't design a decent UI in a fit
And most "designers" wouldn't know "usability" if it came up and bit them in the ass, so where does that leave us?
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001 -
Use Expression Blend for designing and the IDE for code behind.
Software Kinetics - Moving software
Does Expression Blend cost money? Like $600/seat? I refuse to spend that kind of money for development at home, especially for something that's probably a half-assed tool to start out with.
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001 -
Your issue is probably more of a VS issue than anything to do with the WPF API. I actually think WPF is way nicer than Winforms, for many things (not all). But sure, it is not as mature as Winforms. Also the VS designer suuuuuuuuuucks big time. And yes, WWF is one ridiculously bad API - what a waste of developer time.
"When you have made evil the means of survival, do not expect men to remain good. Do not expect them to stay moral and lose their lives for the purpose of becoming the fodder of the immoral. Do not expect them to produce, when production is punished and looting rewarded. Do not ask, `Who is destroying the world?' You are."
-Atlas Shrugged, Ayn RandRohde wrote:
I actually think WPF is way nicer than Winforms
In what possible way is it "nicer" than winforms? I want to put some controls on a freakin' form. WPF apparently can't do that (through the VS IDE). If I can't use the tools Ive already paid for to implement one of Microsoft's new half-implemented technologies, what the f*ck good is it?
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001 -
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
When the freakin' IDE breaks when you're trying to design a form, it sucks.
That's really a VS issue there. Have you tried using Expression Blend? It's a lot stabler than VS is for designing WPF UI. What a lot of folks do is to create UI in Blend, and then copy/paste the Xaml into VS.
Regards, Nish
Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET (my blog)
My latest book : C++/CLI in Action / Amazon.com linkIf the tools don't work, what the hell good is the technology?
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001 -
Rohde wrote:
I actually think WPF is way nicer than Winforms
In what possible way is it "nicer" than winforms? I want to put some controls on a freakin' form. WPF apparently can't do that (through the VS IDE). If I can't use the tools Ive already paid for to implement one of Microsoft's new half-implemented technologies, what the f*ck good is it?
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001If you're having problems with arranging controls on the form, you need to read up on the various layout managers. Although, yes the designer sucks.
"When you have made evil the means of survival, do not expect men to remain good. Do not expect them to stay moral and lose their lives for the purpose of becoming the fodder of the immoral. Do not expect them to produce, when production is punished and looting rewarded. Do not ask, `Who is destroying the world?' You are."
-Atlas Shrugged, Ayn Rand -
...does WPF have to suck as bad as WWF? [EDIT] Ouch - those '1' votes really hurt. I think I'm going to cry... not. Almost an hour later, and WPF still sucks. All the '1' votes in the world won't change that.
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001modified on Sunday, December 28, 2008 9:21 AM
No, it could suck more, or suck less. I guess Microsoft opted for consistency.
-
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
When the freakin' IDE breaks when you're trying to design a form, it sucks.
That's really a VS issue there. Have you tried using Expression Blend? It's a lot stabler than VS is for designing WPF UI. What a lot of folks do is to create UI in Blend, and then copy/paste the Xaml into VS.
Regards, Nish
Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET (my blog)
My latest book : C++/CLI in Action / Amazon.com linkNishant Sivakumar wrote:
What a lot of folks do is to create UI in Blend, and then copy/paste the Xaml into VS.
I'm sorry, but that is totally lame. Not that I expect an IDE to do everything, and in fact would actually prefer that the VS IDE were pared down a bit--all this massive integration ends up, IMO, as a badly put together product (TFS comes to mind). I guess all this XML stuff makes is a different world and Microsoft hasn't figured out yet how to support it in a seamless, professional, manner. Marc
Available for consulting and full time employment. Contact me. Interacx
-
Does Expression Blend cost money? Like $600/seat? I refuse to spend that kind of money for development at home, especially for something that's probably a half-assed tool to start out with.
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001Blend really only helps if you have a lot of time to learn how it works, and then only for layout of XAML, that's what it is, a WYSIWYG UI editor.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista.
-
...does WPF have to suck as bad as WWF? [EDIT] Ouch - those '1' votes really hurt. I think I'm going to cry... not. Almost an hour later, and WPF still sucks. All the '1' votes in the world won't change that.
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001modified on Sunday, December 28, 2008 9:21 AM
I helped you out with a 5. Until more developers master the fundamentals no Windows Technology will matter much. All they are doing is lowering the bar making it easier for people to come in and write bad code. .NET 2.0 was mostly perfect. I think MS should have just focused on fixing and improving the framework rather than adding new "features". But then that is my opinion.
Need software developed? Offering C# development all over the United States, ERL GLOBAL, Inc is the only call you will have to make.
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know. -- Ernest Hemingway
Most of this sig is for Google, not ego. -
That's a pretty crappy excuse, you must admit. If the VS design time support is unstable, why should anyone bother getting Yet-Another-Microsoft-Tool just to begin learning it? Why should you have to use two different tools, one to "design" the appearance, and another to program the behavior. I agree with John: if the native tool set doesn't work,then it is beta crap that Microsoft is dumping on customers. The fact that they have Expression Blend working makes the offense of not fixing the VS designers in a service pack even less forgivable. This seems to be the only industry in which a supplier can sell defective product to its customers and not get sued. It's a damn good thing Microsoft doesn't build bridges.
Rob Graham wrote:
It's a damn good thing Microsoft doesn't build bridges.
Oh, I don't know. If they did design bridges, they'd probably put them under things, instead of over them. That would make them more survivable in the inevitable crash.
"A Journey of a Thousand Rest Stops Begins with a Single Movement"
-
If the tools don't work, what the hell good is the technology?
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001 -
...does WPF have to suck as bad as WWF? [EDIT] Ouch - those '1' votes really hurt. I think I'm going to cry... not. Almost an hour later, and WPF still sucks. All the '1' votes in the world won't change that.
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001modified on Sunday, December 28, 2008 9:21 AM
I don't know WWF. But I think it's you, probably you are too old to adapt? Or maybe this is the whole XAML thing? I, myself, I will admit it has a certain tendancy to raise the expectency only to unexpectedly frustratingly refusing to deliver at times...
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.
-
I don't know WWF. But I think it's you, probably you are too old to adapt? Or maybe this is the whole XAML thing? I, myself, I will admit it has a certain tendancy to raise the expectency only to unexpectedly frustratingly refusing to deliver at times...
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.
Super Lloyd wrote:
But I think it's you, probably you are too old to adapt?
If that were the case, I would still be doing C++. And being able/unable to adapt doesn't have anything to do with the fact that the current tools (the WPF designer in the IDE) suck.
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001 -
Super Lloyd wrote:
But I think it's you, probably you are too old to adapt?
If that were the case, I would still be doing C++. And being able/unable to adapt doesn't have anything to do with the fact that the current tools (the WPF designer in the IDE) suck.
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001If you think WPF is bad after all those years, give a go to the lightweight Silverlight. Your browser will start hanging more than ever before, 8GB of RAM won't help you and be prepared for some odd UIs, designed for Vista-bloat candy lovers. And it is 2009.. wow. Redmond has been high on flowers since 2006.. it is darn obvious, but as with all MS-related, they managed to sell it real well via blogs, PDCs etc to the 'high-tech' Java Swing 4.0 + XML crowd. No wonder Adobe and Google people keep laughing their socks off.. [On the topic of adaptation and catching up, it is the .NET crowd that is light years behind. It takes some adaptation, decades and playing with all their bloat to realise that fact :) Please continue to invalidate an entire cache with a WPF button and simple control, it is Space Oddysey 2010 after all ]
modified on Monday, December 29, 2008 6:21 AM
