What do people think of UWP?
-
jeffery c wrote:
VB.NET forum is going very well because their are still dot net developers on windows 10.
VB and Windows 10!!! Please say it 'ant so. OK, you can dev for uwp with vs, but unless that app can natively move to phone, xbox, surface how does the "U" still stand. I can put a hi-res mountain photo background on my pc but that doesn't make it a mac. So why make apps look lie uwp if they're not? That's not lipstick on a pig, rather that's pig-shit on a horse.
Sin tack the any key okay
Their is c/c++ programming forums too. That was a typo. But your a skeptic so try out UWP for yourself. Just remember about what happened to assembly language. All the years wasted to only be replaced with c/c++. However, I prefer vb.net for most apps because their is not a lot of difference to c# with the exception of games/hardcore apps which I prefer to go to c/c++. I found out with a little help on vb.net forums about how to call do p-invokes on device drivers. Only can be coded in c#? No. For the most part, you can code in native c/c++ for apps.
jeffery
-
If I post some code here and articles would people be interested in UWP? I have some file API's and sample code that could help people. To be honest, I like UWP file operations but they are slightly weird. At the same time have great ways to do chain folder/file creation operations which I like and you can create the simple Append to end of sub/function like before but its a little different then before. Note: 1. I understand peoples problems with windows 10 updates but I have not had any problems with my updates with the exception of office 2010 because its so old windows will not install them properly the first time. 2.If you install visual studio at all, remember to install the Hypervisor for windows first because it uses that to test windows phone apps and needs time to run before you install studio.
jeffery
I would like to answer your title in a simple sentence: UWP is, in no way, better than WPF. Period. Then, as for your for articles, come on man! Keep them coming. :) The thing is, that entire of the Windows Runtime was developed on top of async/await pattern, now that pattern requires a lot of configuration, the configuration of the way we think, we develop, we debug, and we release the application. Not the configuration of software etc. There is nothing different, or confusing. If you want to be a better developer at Windows Runtime, I recommend be a hardcore async/await developer. I mean it. 1) Didn't they have problems with Windows 8, Windows 8.1? How about Aero effects? How about the other versions. People don't like change. And developers, they hate change. Because, at least for me, we have to change or upgrade, or migrate or sometimes rebuild everything just because SDK changed. 2) I don't have Hypervisor as I don't like it. I personally prefer VirtualBox, and as for testing, I consider writing good code, instead of breaking a live or virtual app. :-)
The shit I complain about It's like there ain't a cloud in the sky and it's raining out - Eminem ~! Firewall !~
-
I would like to answer your title in a simple sentence: UWP is, in no way, better than WPF. Period. Then, as for your for articles, come on man! Keep them coming. :) The thing is, that entire of the Windows Runtime was developed on top of async/await pattern, now that pattern requires a lot of configuration, the configuration of the way we think, we develop, we debug, and we release the application. Not the configuration of software etc. There is nothing different, or confusing. If you want to be a better developer at Windows Runtime, I recommend be a hardcore async/await developer. I mean it. 1) Didn't they have problems with Windows 8, Windows 8.1? How about Aero effects? How about the other versions. People don't like change. And developers, they hate change. Because, at least for me, we have to change or upgrade, or migrate or sometimes rebuild everything just because SDK changed. 2) I don't have Hypervisor as I don't like it. I personally prefer VirtualBox, and as for testing, I consider writing good code, instead of breaking a live or virtual app. :-)
The shit I complain about It's like there ain't a cloud in the sky and it's raining out - Eminem ~! Firewall !~
I've heard of people using virtual box with the windows phone image is their a converter app out their that does that? Well, I mean linking it to the xde app (somebody in the article I read awhile back was doing registry hacks though). Personally, I like getting msdnaa software for free. I plan on going back to school and learning more about computer science as I get older.
jeffery
-
I would like to answer your title in a simple sentence: UWP is, in no way, better than WPF. Period. Then, as for your for articles, come on man! Keep them coming. :) The thing is, that entire of the Windows Runtime was developed on top of async/await pattern, now that pattern requires a lot of configuration, the configuration of the way we think, we develop, we debug, and we release the application. Not the configuration of software etc. There is nothing different, or confusing. If you want to be a better developer at Windows Runtime, I recommend be a hardcore async/await developer. I mean it. 1) Didn't they have problems with Windows 8, Windows 8.1? How about Aero effects? How about the other versions. People don't like change. And developers, they hate change. Because, at least for me, we have to change or upgrade, or migrate or sometimes rebuild everything just because SDK changed. 2) I don't have Hypervisor as I don't like it. I personally prefer VirtualBox, and as for testing, I consider writing good code, instead of breaking a live or virtual app. :-)
The shit I complain about It's like there ain't a cloud in the sky and it's raining out - Eminem ~! Firewall !~
Afzaal Ahmad Zeeshan wrote:
The thing is, that entire of the Windows Runtime was developed on top of async/await pattern
I thought that was a fantastic improvement, but the fact that it only runs on W10 (I finally have a laptop that uses W10 that I purchased a couple months ago) was a total showstopper for me in bothering to even learn more about it. Marc
Latest Article - Merkle Trees Learning to code with python is like learning to swim with those little arm floaties. It gives you undeserved confidence and will eventually drown you. - DangerBunny Artificial intelligence is the only remedy for natural stupidity. - CDP1802
-
I've heard of people using virtual box with the windows phone image is their a converter app out their that does that? Well, I mean linking it to the xde app (somebody in the article I read awhile back was doing registry hacks though). Personally, I like getting msdnaa software for free. I plan on going back to school and learning more about computer science as I get older.
jeffery
jeffery c wrote:
using virtual box with the windows phone image
That would be worst thing to do. Don't do it. :laugh: 1) It would be extremely slow. 2) Even if you could get something like x86 around with that, there would be a lot of consequences. 3) Those who do it, are IT guys. They don't know anything of programming. All they care about is that blue logo of Windows. In case if you really have to, consider Hyper-V, as that is the platform they require you to use, and there is a method where you can setup booting where you can (when working) boot with Hyper-V enabled, and (when at home, or not working) boot with Hyper-V inactive. Otherwise, consider an online solution.
The shit I complain about It's like there ain't a cloud in the sky and it's raining out - Eminem ~! Firewall !~
-
Afzaal Ahmad Zeeshan wrote:
The thing is, that entire of the Windows Runtime was developed on top of async/await pattern
I thought that was a fantastic improvement, but the fact that it only runs on W10 (I finally have a laptop that uses W10 that I purchased a couple months ago) was a total showstopper for me in bothering to even learn more about it. Marc
Latest Article - Merkle Trees Learning to code with python is like learning to swim with those little arm floaties. It gives you undeserved confidence and will eventually drown you. - DangerBunny Artificial intelligence is the only remedy for natural stupidity. - CDP1802
Marc Clifton wrote:
bothering to even learn more about it.
Let me tell you what I learnt in my past 6 months, or literally-hair-pulling-ly-rough-experience, it works fine and in 2 different ways. 1. You don't use async/await at all. You perform all the operations synchronously. 2. You write every function call, with an await operator. That way, most of the errors (such as Illegal operation, Invalid state) etc would go away. I would go with the second one, but like you said, it still requires us to learn more about it. I built one of my application, 1.5 years ago, which had 0 async await applied, because I did not know anything. But, I was working on another application a few weeks back, and since I knew async/await, I mistakenly added a few function calls as awaited. After that, it forced me to make sure every call in the stack was awaited, otherwise, 1. Illegal state 2. Invalid operation 3. Infinite loop Were only a few of the problems to tackle and work on. I think, in the next update Microsoft should work on these things, to make sure asynchrony is managed by OS itself and even being a feature of language, stays as a pain of the kernel only.
The shit I complain about It's like there ain't a cloud in the sky and it's raining out - Eminem ~! Firewall !~
-
Quote:
The whole ms uwp concept is a huge waste of a lot of people's time. Like everything else they've produced over the last few years, they came up with it without even thinking about keeping their feet grounded in reality, and all they've done is take phenomenally uncreative steps (which they probably think are highly creative) in a direction that cannot possibly be the way to the future. What is currently being done by weChat and facebook is one of the potential roads to "universal" computer products. That much is obvious, because many of the roads in that direction are patently obvious -- it's just a matter of waiting to see who will get it all to come together. But that won't be ms. Their idea of "universal" is crippled by their new-found lack of vision and creativity. It's a joke, which will be swept under the carpet, within a couple of years (joining all the other dustballs they've previously hailed as the next great thing), and the people who suffer most because of this will be developers who invest their time, skills, and effort into it. Seriously, you'll do your career better by studying COBOL.
I think I will be fine. COBOL is fine until the government upgrades their mainframes then your out of those jobs and so goes windows XP out the window as well. If you watch ZDNet newsletters or MSN news closely, the mainframes for the nuclear launch systems are being replaced so COBOL will not be used as much anymore. On another note, this is the same talk as windows ME/2000 to XP (i.e. it sucks, too ugly, etc.) which was general Banta fodder and does not talk about the nice improvements at all (i.e. Task Scheduler was great but windows 7 was the best, minimal install footprint for what we were offered, etc.). Anyways, would anyone want me to post articles on it? I am thinking posting an article despite codeplex shutting down. A lot of it is easy and I have a custom folder path/file based on date created in my current app (i.e. April 24 translates to this file path ..\archives\April\24\{name of item searched for}.csv or whatever extension you want). So, I plan on helping out anyone wanting to take the path of UWP. I am trying to pass Iprogress status in a UWP class library or dll to my main which I do everything out of and so far I cannot seem to get it to work. P.S. if your wanting to avoid UWP I believe they are still having the developer program for publishing non-UWP apps to the windows store (aka windows only apps). If your a
The nuclear bomb launch systems AREN'T written in COBOL. The bomb simulation routines were written in JOVIAL, a variant of Algol. Most programs connected with the nuclear industry were written in Fortran. One just needs to look at the infrequent ads from Los Alamos National Laboratories and Livermore Labs to figure this out. COBOL figures prominently in systems for banks, stock trading, and large bureaucracies such as the IRS and the Social Security Administration. By the way, ADA was used when the government replaced the creaky Air Traffic Control system serving the USA. The IBM processors used for Air Traffic Control had not been manufactured for a decade or more (no, they were not the 360/370/390 processors) but I think the room-sized processors could have been replaced with small CMOS processors with the identical instruction set. Reading the ads in Washington Post (during the glory days of the Cold War), one could see that the ELINT (electronic intelligence gathering) systems and COM3 (Command, Control and Communication) systems were also written in assembly language for the unique processors produced by IBM. Just FYI.
-
Marc Clifton wrote:
bothering to even learn more about it.
Let me tell you what I learnt in my past 6 months, or literally-hair-pulling-ly-rough-experience, it works fine and in 2 different ways. 1. You don't use async/await at all. You perform all the operations synchronously. 2. You write every function call, with an await operator. That way, most of the errors (such as Illegal operation, Invalid state) etc would go away. I would go with the second one, but like you said, it still requires us to learn more about it. I built one of my application, 1.5 years ago, which had 0 async await applied, because I did not know anything. But, I was working on another application a few weeks back, and since I knew async/await, I mistakenly added a few function calls as awaited. After that, it forced me to make sure every call in the stack was awaited, otherwise, 1. Illegal state 2. Invalid operation 3. Infinite loop Were only a few of the problems to tackle and work on. I think, in the next update Microsoft should work on these things, to make sure asynchrony is managed by OS itself and even being a feature of language, stays as a pain of the kernel only.
The shit I complain about It's like there ain't a cloud in the sky and it's raining out - Eminem ~! Firewall !~
Afzaal Ahmad Zeeshan wrote:
I think, in the next update Microsoft should work on these things, to make sure asynchrony is managed by OS itself and even being a feature of language, stays as a pain of the kernel only.
I'm not convinced this is reasonably possible. I assume when you say "asynchrony is managed by OS itself" you are saying the OS should re-use a blocking thread's time-slice? How would you maintain state then for the blocking code? If you save the stacks, registers, etc before loading the new code then you're still basically performing a context-switch with even more overhead. The OS/hardware is already both asynchronous and multi-threaded from its standpoint. The hardware has a specific number of cores ("threads") and the OS switches out kernel threads ("tasks") to make best use of them including suspending blocking kernel threads. Abstracting out these kernel threads into another thread/task pattern is of no concern to the OS and rightfully so. The language being asynchronous would be possible but I'm not convinced it would be a benefit. Multi-threaded applications might rely on the main thread being synchronous which would no longer be a guarantee. Just enabling asynchrony by default might be an alright idea. You could just wrap the return in a
Taskunder the covers. If the function doesn't useawaitthen it'll just run synchronously.public class Whatever
{
public async Task ReturnTwoSynchronously() => 2; //Synchronous currently, access to await if you want
public int ReturnTwoSynchronously2() => 2; //Make the above represented by this standard pattern. As long as await is not used to create asynchronous behavior it will run synchronously.
}At the end of the day though, is it worth the effort? My opinion - probably not.
-
The whole ms uwp concept is a huge waste of a lot of people's time. Like everything else they've produced over the last few years, they came up with it without even thinking about keeping their feet grounded in reality, and all they've done is take phenomenally uncreative steps (which they probably think are highly creative) in a direction that cannot possibly be the way to the future. What is currently being done by weChat and facebook is one of the potential roads to "universal" computer products. That much is obvious, because many of the roads in that direction are patently obvious -- it's just a matter of waiting to see who will get it all to come together. But that won't be ms. Their idea of "universal" is crippled by their new-found lack of vision and creativity. It's a joke, which will be swept under the carpet, within a couple of years (joining all the other dustballs they've previously hailed as the next great thing), and the people who suffer most because of this will be developers who invest their time, skills, and effort into it. Seriously, you'll do your career better by studying COBOL.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
Speaking of COBOL, if you know who Grace Hopper is, I was actually in her office in the basement of the Pentagon once. The fundamental design of COBOL is good; it was intended to be understood by non-programmers. Most other languages, like C/C++ and PHP, are too cryptic and peculiar.
-
If I post some code here and articles would people be interested in UWP? I have some file API's and sample code that could help people. To be honest, I like UWP file operations but they are slightly weird. At the same time have great ways to do chain folder/file creation operations which I like and you can create the simple Append to end of sub/function like before but its a little different then before. Note: 1. I understand peoples problems with windows 10 updates but I have not had any problems with my updates with the exception of office 2010 because its so old windows will not install them properly the first time. 2.If you install visual studio at all, remember to install the Hypervisor for windows first because it uses that to test windows phone apps and needs time to run before you install studio.
jeffery
To answer the question of what I think about UWP, I think that it is built upon legacy technology. It is my understanding that the async/await mess is partially the result of the limitations of the message loop. If someone can explain async/await in a manner that makes clear when we need to use it then that will be popular. For example the clipboard in UWP requires async/await in many places but everywhere else the clipboard does not require threads or waiting (except waiting on the user). I don't understand why UWP needs async/await so much except (1) the message loop for some reason and (2) it is in a separate environment that requires additional security beyond the classical Windows process. I think Java also has async/await; does it? Is it as confusing as UWP is as far as async/await? The requirements for UWP probably go beyond the current design of Windows. Probably Microsoft needs to write another operating system to support the requirements. IBM has developed many operating systems but Microsoft has designed, at most, two operating systems. IBM had an operating system they called the Event Driven Executive; it is probably not relevant here except that the concept of being event-driven is not new. In many ways, Microsoft's technology is behind that of half a century ago and UWP is weighed down by that.
-
To answer the question of what I think about UWP, I think that it is built upon legacy technology. It is my understanding that the async/await mess is partially the result of the limitations of the message loop. If someone can explain async/await in a manner that makes clear when we need to use it then that will be popular. For example the clipboard in UWP requires async/await in many places but everywhere else the clipboard does not require threads or waiting (except waiting on the user). I don't understand why UWP needs async/await so much except (1) the message loop for some reason and (2) it is in a separate environment that requires additional security beyond the classical Windows process. I think Java also has async/await; does it? Is it as confusing as UWP is as far as async/await? The requirements for UWP probably go beyond the current design of Windows. Probably Microsoft needs to write another operating system to support the requirements. IBM has developed many operating systems but Microsoft has designed, at most, two operating systems. IBM had an operating system they called the Event Driven Executive; it is probably not relevant here except that the concept of being event-driven is not new. In many ways, Microsoft's technology is behind that of half a century ago and UWP is weighed down by that.
Sam Hobbs wrote:
In many ways, Microsoft's technology is behind that of half a century ago and UWP is weighed down by that
LOL, reminds me back in my younger days [as an employee] was often required to attend microsoft presentations. I recall one in particular when they introduced "multithreading" (demo: one window set to crash, the other carries on.) (This demo of "brand new tech" was about 10 minutes into an after lunch presentation - at that point I shook my head and left - not back to the office but went home) It was something I knew was already 25+ years old (FFS I had a 'nix running on my own home pc). What sticks in my mind though is the room full of people oohed and aahed over that demo, and were still talking about it the next day back at work. so while true that ms never bring anything new, where they usually [too often] excel is in bringing these things to the market. usually excel as in: there are items even in android/iphone that ms did earlier (not first), .... but they lost the phone battle. (OT - rant: it was 100% their sucky interface that looked just like the same sucky interface on windows 8 (was that uwp 1.0?) that failed their phone. Today it's the win 10 uwp (2.0beta?) that is mostly responsible for hobbling win 10 adoption and killing pc sales; it will also [if not -has already-] wreck their next attempt at a phone. Yes some people like the look, but then again some people drive pink cars. nad's biggest fail is and always will be this insistence on keeping this fugly uwp.
Sin tack the any key okay
-
If I post some code here and articles would people be interested in UWP? I have some file API's and sample code that could help people. To be honest, I like UWP file operations but they are slightly weird. At the same time have great ways to do chain folder/file creation operations which I like and you can create the simple Append to end of sub/function like before but its a little different then before. Note: 1. I understand peoples problems with windows 10 updates but I have not had any problems with my updates with the exception of office 2010 because its so old windows will not install them properly the first time. 2.If you install visual studio at all, remember to install the Hypervisor for windows first because it uses that to test windows phone apps and needs time to run before you install studio.
jeffery
I am sure many people here would read your articles, and learn from your experiences ! The questions always on my mind are: 1. what does it offer me now, and in the future ? 2. what does it cost in terms of "learning curve," set-up, deployment ? 3. what resources are available to get oriented, and start developing ? 4. to what extent can current skills be re-used ? cheers, Bill
«When I consider my brief span of life, swallowed up in an eternity before and after, the little space I fill, and even can see, engulfed in the infinite immensity of spaces of which I am ignorant, and which know me not, I am frightened, and am astonished at being here rather than there; for there is no reason why here rather than there, now rather than then.» Blaise Pascal
-
Their is c/c++ programming forums too. That was a typo. But your a skeptic so try out UWP for yourself. Just remember about what happened to assembly language. All the years wasted to only be replaced with c/c++. However, I prefer vb.net for most apps because their is not a lot of difference to c# with the exception of games/hardcore apps which I prefer to go to c/c++. I found out with a little help on vb.net forums about how to call do p-invokes on device drivers. Only can be coded in c#? No. For the most part, you can code in native c/c++ for apps.
jeffery
jeffery c wrote:
Just remember about what happened to assembly language. All the years wasted to only be replaced with c/c++
OK, I'm voting for that as daftest question of the month. Maybe the year, but it's only April. What I can't tell is if you're: 0. A newbie, who's only seen a few shinies, so far, and doesn't know about the far-shiniers that are also available. 1. Just another ms wu-mao. Note: I don't need you to tell me; I'll see for myself.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
-
Speaking of COBOL, if you know who Grace Hopper is, I was actually in her office in the basement of the Pentagon once. The fundamental design of COBOL is good; it was intended to be understood by non-programmers. Most other languages, like C/C++ and PHP, are too cryptic and peculiar.
Sam Hobbs wrote:
I was actually in her office in the basement of the Pentagon once.
That's an experience I'd swap for a lot. The best thing about COBOL is that it was optimised specifically for handling financial data, so it's blistering fast, when used in that field. The only language that can even come near to keeping up with it is C (with no plusses, sharps, etc.)
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
-
The nuclear bomb launch systems AREN'T written in COBOL. The bomb simulation routines were written in JOVIAL, a variant of Algol. Most programs connected with the nuclear industry were written in Fortran. One just needs to look at the infrequent ads from Los Alamos National Laboratories and Livermore Labs to figure this out. COBOL figures prominently in systems for banks, stock trading, and large bureaucracies such as the IRS and the Social Security Administration. By the way, ADA was used when the government replaced the creaky Air Traffic Control system serving the USA. The IBM processors used for Air Traffic Control had not been manufactured for a decade or more (no, they were not the 360/370/390 processors) but I think the room-sized processors could have been replaced with small CMOS processors with the identical instruction set. Reading the ads in Washington Post (during the glory days of the Cold War), one could see that the ELINT (electronic intelligence gathering) systems and COM3 (Command, Control and Communication) systems were also written in assembly language for the unique processors produced by IBM. Just FYI.
-
I am sure many people here would read your articles, and learn from your experiences ! The questions always on my mind are: 1. what does it offer me now, and in the future ? 2. what does it cost in terms of "learning curve," set-up, deployment ? 3. what resources are available to get oriented, and start developing ? 4. to what extent can current skills be re-used ? cheers, Bill
«When I consider my brief span of life, swallowed up in an eternity before and after, the little space I fill, and even can see, engulfed in the infinite immensity of spaces of which I am ignorant, and which know me not, I am frightened, and am astonished at being here rather than there; for there is no reason why here rather than there, now rather than then.» Blaise Pascal
-
Afzaal Ahmad Zeeshan wrote:
I think, in the next update Microsoft should work on these things, to make sure asynchrony is managed by OS itself and even being a feature of language, stays as a pain of the kernel only.
I'm not convinced this is reasonably possible. I assume when you say "asynchrony is managed by OS itself" you are saying the OS should re-use a blocking thread's time-slice? How would you maintain state then for the blocking code? If you save the stacks, registers, etc before loading the new code then you're still basically performing a context-switch with even more overhead. The OS/hardware is already both asynchronous and multi-threaded from its standpoint. The hardware has a specific number of cores ("threads") and the OS switches out kernel threads ("tasks") to make best use of them including suspending blocking kernel threads. Abstracting out these kernel threads into another thread/task pattern is of no concern to the OS and rightfully so. The language being asynchronous would be possible but I'm not convinced it would be a benefit. Multi-threaded applications might rely on the main thread being synchronous which would no longer be a guarantee. Just enabling asynchrony by default might be an alright idea. You could just wrap the return in a
Taskunder the covers. If the function doesn't useawaitthen it'll just run synchronously.public class Whatever
{
public async Task ReturnTwoSynchronously() => 2; //Synchronous currently, access to await if you want
public int ReturnTwoSynchronously2() => 2; //Make the above represented by this standard pattern. As long as await is not used to create asynchronous behavior it will run synchronously.
}At the end of the day though, is it worth the effort? My opinion - probably not.
Oh, some good points. :thumbsup:
The shit I complain about It's like there ain't a cloud in the sky and it's raining out - Eminem ~! Firewall !~
-
Sorry bill about the mess (flips his coin like Han solo in the cantana to bill), I will make up for up for it with an article here soon. Some people here must be older programmers to know what the nuclear systems are written in.
jeffery
NASA had to re-purpose its existing computers whenever a new satellite was launched. I know for a fact that these were programmed in assembler as that is the fastest language to execute programs in. The programs that processed the data streamed by the satellites were themselves written in assembler. In addition, real-time operating systems were written for machines that you could swear couldn't support such OS for lack of even minimal hardware support. All of this in the 1970s. Been there, done that.
-
Their is c/c++ programming forums too. That was a typo. But your a skeptic so try out UWP for yourself. Just remember about what happened to assembly language. All the years wasted to only be replaced with c/c++. However, I prefer vb.net for most apps because their is not a lot of difference to c# with the exception of games/hardcore apps which I prefer to go to c/c++. I found out with a little help on vb.net forums about how to call do p-invokes on device drivers. Only can be coded in c#? No. For the most part, you can code in native c/c++ for apps.
jeffery
jeffery c wrote:
Just remember about what happened to assembly language. All the years wasted to only be replaced with c/c++.
Could you elaborate on this? Or are you just using it in a poor attempt at reductio ad absurdum?
-
If I post some code here and articles would people be interested in UWP? I have some file API's and sample code that could help people. To be honest, I like UWP file operations but they are slightly weird. At the same time have great ways to do chain folder/file creation operations which I like and you can create the simple Append to end of sub/function like before but its a little different then before. Note: 1. I understand peoples problems with windows 10 updates but I have not had any problems with my updates with the exception of office 2010 because its so old windows will not install them properly the first time. 2.If you install visual studio at all, remember to install the Hypervisor for windows first because it uses that to test windows phone apps and needs time to run before you install studio.
jeffery
jeffery c wrote:
If I post some code here and articles would people be interested in UWP?
Yep, definitely. I've got an existing Xamarin app that runs on iOS and Droid, but I've been toying with the idea of creating a UWP app with it as well (for desktop/laptop machines). I don't know much about UWP (been a bit busy with porting my ASP.NET app over to .NET Core and coding the Xamarin apps) so it'll be interesting to see what it can do and whether it's suitable for my needs. :thumbsup:
Now is it bad enough that you let somebody else kick your butts without you trying to do it to each other? Now if we're all talking about the same man, and I think we are... it appears he's got a rather growing collection of our bikes.