M$ - new API's with no new offering in terms of capability and missed out on rise of smartphones
-
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.
-
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
devvvy wrote:
How much time you wasted moving from Win32>MFC>WinForm>WPF and now Metro?!?
I lerned WinForms along with WinRT XAML, so i can say i have not wasted my time.
devvvy wrote:
How much time you wasted moving from raw socket>asmx>WCF?
Raw sockets are still the king, but if a find a good reason to move to something else probably i would.
devvvy wrote:
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?
No and No, your app doesn't need to look like it runs on a Tablet, nor you need to abandon the .NET Framework if you don't want to, pretty much like your app doen't need a GUI nor you need to learn the .NET Framework if you like to write MS-DOS applications. However, if you want your application to run in the Windows ARM tablets, then you need to learn XAML and keep the .NET Framework, at least the part of it that survived in the WinRT subset.
devvvy wrote:
They keep doing this long enuf even loyal M$ developer will jump boat.
Perhaps, but i believe they will just keep doing whatever they do now, and no bother about new and shiny frameworks or paradigms unless they have to.
CEO at: - Rafaga Systems - Para Facturas - Modern Components for the moment...
-
"I'm no expert" - please stop spouting off as if you were then. The diagram you use clearly shows C#/VB underneath XAML.
-
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
Still doing Win32 and raw sockets. Just completed a VPN routing implementation for the product we added here at Bitdefender (which is a... browser). There is not much interest in Windows 8 except certification and AppStore. WinRT is anyways more civilised than .NET (in C++, at least) but with an available OS APIs on life support, things are not ok. How do you do IPC between a Metro and a Desktop app? ...
Nuclear launch detected
-
Still doing Win32 and raw sockets. Just completed a VPN routing implementation for the product we added here at Bitdefender (which is a... browser). There is not much interest in Windows 8 except certification and AppStore. WinRT is anyways more civilised than .NET (in C++, at least) but with an available OS APIs on life support, things are not ok. How do you do IPC between a Metro and a Desktop app? ...
Nuclear launch detected
in banking sector (trading), we do a lot of IPC via socket/WCF, no interest in WinRT or Windows 8 yet as most apps involve couple Speadsheets like windows which works best with a mouse (not finger). Yes I prefer socket over WCF as really all functionality can be easily coded up myself in short order, I can debug the socket code and not having to remember meanings of WCF config!
dev
-
devvvy wrote:
How much time you wasted moving from Win32>MFC>WinForm>WPF and now Metro?!?
I lerned WinForms along with WinRT XAML, so i can say i have not wasted my time.
devvvy wrote:
How much time you wasted moving from raw socket>asmx>WCF?
Raw sockets are still the king, but if a find a good reason to move to something else probably i would.
devvvy wrote:
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?
No and No, your app doesn't need to look like it runs on a Tablet, nor you need to abandon the .NET Framework if you don't want to, pretty much like your app doen't need a GUI nor you need to learn the .NET Framework if you like to write MS-DOS applications. However, if you want your application to run in the Windows ARM tablets, then you need to learn XAML and keep the .NET Framework, at least the part of it that survived in the WinRT subset.
devvvy wrote:
They keep doing this long enuf even loyal M$ developer will jump boat.
Perhaps, but i believe they will just keep doing whatever they do now, and no bother about new and shiny frameworks or paradigms unless they have to.
CEO at: - Rafaga Systems - Para Facturas - Modern Components for the moment...