Live data from Hacker News

Microsoft Confirms UWP Is Not the Future of Windows Apps

thurrott.com

71–80 of 81 posts

Re: Microsoft Confirms UWP Is Not the Future of Windows Apps

#71
Another thing that I think related to this is:

I respect JavaScript, but what I would add is this: We can not stop on JavaScript. JS is cool, brought dynamic new features that helped to reshape the other languages, but we need to also allow the other languages to run on the Web, since they got isolated when the Web expanded.

So if this new XAML initiative runs on the Web, it would be awesome!

Re: Microsoft Confirms UWP Is Not the Future of Windows Apps

#72
post #60

The future of windows is JavaScript. And no, I’m not kidding. Anyone who has used Office 365 in their browser can see that for many desktop things, you no longer need a framework. For everything else, it’s probably a custom library on top of DirectX anyway. And I’m not saying I agree with this, but MSFT opened that door and others will follow whether they want them to or not.

lol am sorry JS is like a weed which can not grow much taller than the browser platform.

Re: Microsoft Confirms UWP Is Not the Future of Windows Apps

#73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I concur, It has been a very easy and fast platform for me, and it seems like not a lot of developers have caught on to the fact that UWP is great for the end consumer, its snappy and can be updated without having to load the application or an update application first. But hey, developers don't like it so I guess thats forced Microsoft's hand.

> UWP is great for the end consumer It it? I've never developed windows GUI apps, so can't comment on a technical level. But from a consumer perspective all the UWP apps I've tried, including those shipped by Microsoft with Windows 10, are awful. I think Windows 10 Mail could be the worst GUI application ever written. I used Windows 10 for most of the last year, and it got to the point where the Windows Store became…

> I think Windows 10 Mail could be the worst GUI application ever written

What makes you say this? I'm a heavy desktop user and find Windows 10 Mail to be the fastest and simplest way to interact with mail. It works perfectly with attachments, and calendar invitations, etc

Re: Microsoft Confirms UWP Is Not the Future of Windows Apps

#74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> UWP is great for the end consumer It it? I've never developed windows GUI apps, so can't comment on a technical level. But from a consumer perspective all the UWP apps I've tried, including those shipped by Microsoft with Windows 10, are awful. I think Windows 10 Mail could be the worst GUI application ever written. I used Windows 10 for most of the last year, and it got to the point where the Windows Store became…

> I think Windows 10 Mail could be the worst GUI application ever written What makes you say this? I'm a heavy desktop user and find Windows 10 Mail to be the fastest and simplest way to interact with mail. It works perfectly with attachments, and calendar invitations, etc

It's a year or so since I used it, so I don't remember all the details. But off the top of my head: crashy, terrible IMAP implementation, mails often stuck in outbox, very incomplete keyboard shortcuts, links opened in Edge rather than default browser. I'm sure there was as lot more, but anyway I found it unusable.

Re: Microsoft Confirms UWP Is Not the Future of Windows Apps

#75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're adding to my list of cross-platform apps. I agree that most of the important ones are fine under Linux, but I still haven't seen many (any?) great linux-specific ones. There are obviously reasons to use Linux (I do), I just don't think unique (end-user, GUI) app availability is amongst them.

I guess it depends on what distro you're using.

Perhaps I misunderstood you. If you meant that lack of software isn't the Linux deal-breaker it used to be, for many types of use I'd agree. It has all the main generic apps I need except for a proper Google drive client.

What it doesn't seem to have is any linux-specific apps compelling enough to drive one to use it. This used to be one of OS X's big strengths, diminishing in recent years I think.

Re: Microsoft Confirms UWP Is Not the Future of Windows Apps

#76

I hope they keep chipping away at the Store. It's a nice additional stream of apps that while lacking in curation provides an easy route for novice users to get something or even just browse. They need either a higher bar for quality or much more vast curated content for users to explore. Same with UWP, I hope they don't kill it off. It's a good entry point for some- though I'm sure more adept programmers would have…

They just need to allow non-UWP apps. I have some interest in the Microsoft Store succeeding. As a technician, I worked with tons of people who hadn't updated their programs in years and there was never an acceptable solution. Personally, I use choco to ensure all my programs are up-to-date without manually checking every single one, but it's not something I could've deployed for private customers. The Store could've been the solution, but UWP apps are far too limited and UI-wise a disaster (I recently tried VLC from the store, it's terrible). There's just too much good software that isn't UWP and I don't understand why they copied the store idea from Apple while throwing out one of its biggest benefits (access to any "full" MacOS program you could need, instead of splitting the user base).

Re: Microsoft Confirms UWP Is Not the Future of Windows Apps

#77

I believe that with the new XAML Desktop initiative, we finally will get access to a broader Universal XAML dialect wich probably will be very based on the UWP XAML, but will be able to run outside the UWP AppModel and restrictions. If you see that along with the new .NET 5 perspective that will include even WebAssembly, maybe even SVG GUI on the Browser, we have a chance to finally have a decent cross-platform GUI a…

used to be mainly mfc programmer doing large client/server lob app suites; after dotnet, worked around five years with c# and like it (reminded me borland delphi from the college) but local .net projects keep under-delivering and growing more expensive than previous tech; so i keep being called instead to update or support mfc projects... using atl/wtl (and later powerbasic instead of vb6 to host activex).

The last few years sometimes for dynamic/customized/personalized corner case uis have been using fast AXML provided by codejock label or using css+html by terra informatica HTMLayOut/Sciter

Microsoft lost a lots of local enterprise lob custom apps with the always evolving dotnet platform and heavy resource requirements, lighter alternatives won their market

Re: Microsoft Confirms UWP Is Not the Future of Windows Apps

#78
post #33

What is the current recommended API if you want to build a big new desktop GUI application for Windows today? Something demanding like a CAD application, perhaps. Something you'd have built using MFC or pure Window API in the past.

I would probably do qt or WPF. For CAD probably a large part in Directx or Win32. But in general the picture for windows desktop apps is very murky. There is no option that really stands out. If I had to do a windows app I would seriously consider electron. Which is very sad...

my current option is gambas in linux (or vala before that) but in windows, for small apps i prefer powerbasic forms to generate easily win32 dialog based programs... for larger better looking programs atl/wtl + codejock toolkit. I should try Lazarus (qt + free pascal) but have never reserved the time to reacquire the ability i had with borland delphi in college

Re: Microsoft Confirms UWP Is Not the Future of Windows Apps

#79

Another issue is the lack of documentation. For example, the VPN API has zero documentation (it has the functions but not what they do or any sort of app notes) and you have to apply to MS for permission to use it. So most apps still use the massive, outdated WinTAP adapter.

or use something else with proper support... my choice is devp2p from weonlydo for linux/windows vpn app integrated networking (for not-integrated self-hosted vpn i prefer to use SoftEther, and ZeroTier for not-hosted cases)

Re: Microsoft Confirms UWP Is Not the Future of Windows Apps

#80
post #64

I think from a developer perspective this is pretty misleading because all the "new" stuff in Windows development is just repackagings of UWP subsystems to work with Win32 apps. WinUI is the UWP UI stack, MSIX is the UWP package format, etc. So even if they aren't really pushing the UWP "brand" anymore, if you have a UWP app you are already using all of the "new" stuff.

That wasn't the impressions I got from the article: > And the way we know that’s true is that Win32, WPF, and WinForms have all been “elevated to full status”—Gallo’s words—in Windows 10 all these years later. It sounds like they're promoting Win32 as a long term option. I wouldn't expect them to say "UWP is dead", MS has a history of playing "it's not dead it's just resting" with UI frameworks, WPF was one of those.…

My comment isn't based on the article, it's based on observing what's actually happening, both from the conference sessions and activity in the various open source projects that it's about. The article is based on public info, so you can observe for yourself.

The truth as of now is that WinUI (the UI stack from UWP) is the only one of these frameworks actually getting significant new feature development. The main reason for this is that unlike winforms or WPF, it doesn't have a dependency on .NET, so it can be used by projects like Windows and Office that for the most part never adopted .NET and managed code.

Like if you watch this session from the conference -> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hKMzFjGfoy0 , it's billed as a talk on the Windows presentation platform as a whole, but they spend basically all their time talking about WinUI. The new React Native implementation for Windows is also being built on top of WinUI.

Post reply on HN