M$ - new API's with no new offering in terms of capability and missed out on rise of smartphones
-
no, i really got scared, controls inside the tabs header :~ never thought someone would want it... conversely, one time a client asked for a combobox inside a button inside a slider :~ he even draw it to us! don't know how my boss convinced him it was a bad idea :doh:
I'm brazilian and english (well, human languages in general) aren't my best skill, so, sorry by my english. (if you want we can speak in C# or VB.Net =p)
-
Sentenryu wrote:
your link really scared me
Was it because you thought you had somehow been downgraded back to IE7 on Windows XP? :laugh:
AspDotNetDev wrote:
downgraded back to IE7 on Windows XP?
in fact, i installed win XP SP3 in a VM another day due to a school homework i needed to do... i found it comes with IE6, I'm still having nightmares...
I'm brazilian and english (well, human languages in general) aren't my best skill, so, sorry by my english. (if you want we can speak in C# or VB.Net =p)
-
no, i really got scared, controls inside the tabs header :~ never thought someone would want it... conversely, one time a client asked for a combobox inside a button inside a slider :~ he even draw it to us! don't know how my boss convinced him it was a bad idea :doh:
I'm brazilian and english (well, human languages in general) aren't my best skill, so, sorry by my english. (if you want we can speak in C# or VB.Net =p)
-
sorry Marc, I do appreciate ability to code up UI declaratively, I do think it's cool. This said, you can start coding Winform with almost zero learning curve. No data triggers, no data binding expressions, no dependency properties ... etc. With Winform, you just start coding on day-one! The ability for developers to focus on the issue at hand (for me, derivative risk/trading apps) carries a much higher level of precedence than yet another "Paradigm Shift".
dev
devvvy wrote:
you can start coding Winform with almost zero learning curve.
You can what now? A long time ago we had MS DOS, and trust me on this, going from DOS to Windows had a pretty big learning curve. Or try jumping from [Win32|MFC|WinForm|WPF|Metro] to Objective-C...
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur.
-
devvvy wrote:
you can start coding Winform with almost zero learning curve.
You can what now? A long time ago we had MS DOS, and trust me on this, going from DOS to Windows had a pretty big learning curve. Or try jumping from [Win32|MFC|WinForm|WPF|Metro] to Objective-C...
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur.
-
How much time you wasted moving from Win32>MFC>WinForm>WPF and now Metro?!? How much time you wasted moving from raw socket>asmx>WCF? And now[^], because our apps needs to look like it runs on a tablet we need to abandon .NET and rewrite on top of WinRT? Way I see it, vendors like Infragistics/DevExpress produces values - we pay for it. M$ has fallen in love with year-on-year API overhaul which leads to nothing. They keep doing this long enuf even loyal M$ developer will jump boat. Who the hell is actually steering M$ development effort and product offering these days?!
dev
After reading this month's special MSDN magazine on WinRT, I was really just shocked at the amount of hoops[^] .NET has to goto to get into WinRT code. Granted, this may be nothing for what already happens to .NET to Win32, but still...it sounded like more room for bugs to creep in than anything else.
-
After reading this month's special MSDN magazine on WinRT, I was really just shocked at the amount of hoops[^] .NET has to goto to get into WinRT code. Granted, this may be nothing for what already happens to .NET to Win32, but still...it sounded like more room for bugs to creep in than anything else.
-
And this is why our next generation server is running on Linux.
*pre-emptive celebratory nipple tassle jiggle* - Sean Ewington
"Mind bleach! Send me mind bleach!" - Nagy Vilmos
CodeStash - Online Snippet Management | My blog | MoXAML PowerToys | Mole 2010 - debugging made easier
-
forget ridiculous demands focus on things which actually matters - brush it off can you? sometimes you can't just do everything your client request economically.
dev
Agreed. actually i think my boss used the product price to make the client forget his request :laugh:
I'm brazilian and english (well, human languages in general) aren't my best skill, so, sorry by my english. (if you want we can speak in C# or VB.Net =p)
-
How much time you wasted moving from Win32>MFC>WinForm>WPF and now Metro?!? How much time you wasted moving from raw socket>asmx>WCF? And now[^], because our apps needs to look like it runs on a tablet we need to abandon .NET and rewrite on top of WinRT? Way I see it, vendors like Infragistics/DevExpress produces values - we pay for it. M$ has fallen in love with year-on-year API overhaul which leads to nothing. They keep doing this long enuf even loyal M$ developer will jump boat. Who the hell is actually steering M$ development effort and product offering these days?!
dev
It a matter of choices - I avoid being locked into a single vendors "paradigm" By way of example (i.e., web based apps), I use javaScript and .php . Didn't (wouldn't) even install Silverlight. When feasible, I will recreate features from scratch so as to make them transportable, over time, to a useful new platform should I need to adopt one (done more w/C++). Avoid implementation specific functionality. Beyond coding, I expanded this to real-life situations, where possible. ALL of my email is via forwards so that I don't have a dependency upon any internet provider. If I don't like my domain service I can transfer them to a new one. There's a price that those who wish all the shiny pretty new stuff may not wish to pay. It's a wide spread mental deficiency - much like that which causes people to line up for days to overpay for the latest iCowpie. Just make a firm decision: try to be modern and on top of the latest and be an early adopter or stick with robust systems with broad bases and adopt the things that stand the test of time (such as it is within the IT world). Then just stick with your choice and enjoy the ride.
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein
"As far as we know, our computer has never had an undetected error." - Weisert
"If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010
-
devvvy wrote:
you can start coding Winform with almost zero learning curve. No data triggers, no data binding expressions, no dependency properties ... etc. With Winform, you just start coding on day-one!
Well, that's a good point - one of the reasons I haven't dived into WPF is because of the learning curve and the lack of needing to learn WPF. I would have to say though, that to do anything useful in WinForms, one has to learn about data triggers, binding, properties, etc., and so ultimately has a learning curve associated with it. Personally, some of the syntax in WPF is just bizarre, which has been an obstacle to my learning it. I've done similar things with backing classes in MyXaml, and it seems a lot more intuitive, but ultimately, it's just a syntactical difference.
devvvy wrote:
The ability for developers to focus on the issue at hand (for me, derivative risk/trading apps) carries a much higher level of precedence than yet another "Paradigm Shift".
I do hear that. A new framework / API / OS / UI presentation definitely can get in the way of "the issue at hand". I got pretty screwed many years ago when Borland made a huge change to their OWL framework, then again when I moved to MFC, waking up to the realization that my code was entangled with framework dependencies. Personally, nowadays I tend to wrap frameworks in my own API calls to get some measure of independence (and it also allows some flexibility in, for example, working with Oracle vs. SQL Server), and I definitely try to ensure a clean separation between the UI and everything else, because as you point out, the UI keeps changing! Anyways, I ramble... Marc
Reverse Engineering Legacy Applications
How To Think Like a Functional Programmer
My Blog
Computational Types in C# and F#With this discussion Marc I personally have found it a level headed view on the matter keep rambling about it! :thumbsup:
Lobster Thermidor aux crevettes with a Mornay sauce, served in a Provençale manner with shallots and aubergines, garnished with truffle pate, brandy and a fried egg on top and Spam - Monty Python Spam Sketch
-
devvvy wrote:
How much time you wasted moving from Win32>MFC>WinForm>WPF and now Metro?!?
None. Still doing WinForms, which is just a neat layer around Win32.
devvvy wrote:
They keep doing this long enuf even loyal M$ developer will jump boat. Who the hell is actually steering M$ development effort and product offering these days?!
..the old things did not go away, have you noticed it? WinForms is still available, and with all the software that people wrote, I imagine Microsoft supporting it for quite some time to come. Not everyone is using the latest gradients, opacity-effects and animations; in return, it's compatible with Mono. And no, asmx did not replace the raw socket.
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: if you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
WinForms is still available, and with all the software that people wrote, I imagine Microsoft supporting it for quite some time to come.
I agree with you there I dont see WinForms dying yet. Just that new technologies like WPF & ASP.NET have more scope to evolve quicker.
Lobster Thermidor aux crevettes with a Mornay sauce, served in a Provençale manner with shallots and aubergines, garnished with truffle pate, brandy and a fried egg on top and Spam - Monty Python Spam Sketch
-
Marc, I remember MyXaml from days before WPF was conceived! Someone from M$ "borrowed" from your idea obviously! WPF primary failure is that (a) it was born after Winform, and (b) her learning curve (example, data binding syntax)
dev
devvvy wrote:
Someone from M$ "borrowed" from your idea obviously!
Actually, it was the other way around - I saw an example of XAML and realized, duh, that's so obvious it's ridiculous. Of course, WPF is "borrowed" from, I believe, SVG or other related vector packages. Making it declarative was just something that falls in place with .NET's deserialization and reflection features. Making it performant though, that's a whole other matter. :) Marc
Reverse Engineering Legacy Applications
How To Think Like a Functional Programmer
My Blog
Computational Types in C# and F# -
I heard multiple ways of doing something is not really a bad thing. /sarcasm Although I haven't had much variety, just a couple of days ago, wanting to replace a file in my code, I have a choice of
MoveFile(),MoveFileEx(),ReplaceFile(), all three of which will support replacing files with only one function (I could even useCopyFile()andDeleteFile()if I was some sort of sadist). I can't see anything wrong with offering a new way of doing something while retaining the old; it's forcing a switch that would be a pain in the rear end. -
How much time you wasted moving from Win32>MFC>WinForm>WPF and now Metro?!? How much time you wasted moving from raw socket>asmx>WCF? And now[^], because our apps needs to look like it runs on a tablet we need to abandon .NET and rewrite on top of WinRT? Way I see it, vendors like Infragistics/DevExpress produces values - we pay for it. M$ has fallen in love with year-on-year API overhaul which leads to nothing. They keep doing this long enuf even loyal M$ developer will jump boat. Who the hell is actually steering M$ development effort and product offering these days?!
dev
I'm bemused. Why do you need to abandon .NET exactly? I've just written my first Metro app in C#, .NET is definitely useful for app development. The only difference is you can now use C++ and Javascript as well. Try actually reading the overviews from MSDN before ranting next time.
-
I'm no expert but check this out[^] "Desktop Apps" should still run on Windows 8 "Metro Apps" are for those who want to develop tablet like/touched enabled apps (Adult games for instance!)
dev
"I'm no expert" - please stop spouting off as if you were then. The diagram you use clearly shows C#/VB underneath XAML.
-
I'm bemused. Why do you need to abandon .NET exactly? I've just written my first Metro app in C#, .NET is definitely useful for app development. The only difference is you can now use C++ and Javascript as well. Try actually reading the overviews from MSDN before ranting next time.
-
How much time you wasted moving from Win32>MFC>WinForm>WPF and now Metro?!? How much time you wasted moving from raw socket>asmx>WCF? And now[^], because our apps needs to look like it runs on a tablet we need to abandon .NET and rewrite on top of WinRT? Way I see it, vendors like Infragistics/DevExpress produces values - we pay for it. M$ has fallen in love with year-on-year API overhaul which leads to nothing. They keep doing this long enuf even loyal M$ developer will jump boat. Who the hell is actually steering M$ development effort and product offering these days?!
dev
> How much time you wasted moving from Win32>MFC>WinForm>WPF and now Metro?!? Well, it's not so bad, since with every technology you get better and better opportunity. But there must be reasonable point to stop. For me I selected WPF and won't move until MS will pay me triple salary to study their "new" tricks. > How much time you wasted moving from raw socket>asmx>WCF? Not even once. Opposite to million mediocres, I still stay with sockets, having all their benefits. I even don't use async mode! Sync mode + threads is more than enough for all your needs.
-
Perhaps Android development - use M$ and .NET only for server side screw WinRT, they came too late as market participant
dev
-
No, I simply questioned the accuracy of your assertions - because they are inaccurate.