Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

.NET MAUI: .NET Multi-Platform App UI

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 260 posts

Re: .NET MAUI: .NET Multi-Platform App UI

#171

Post by 3dee »

bob1029 wrote: post #37

The amount of energy Microsoft is pouring into these front-end efforts is pretty incredible. A more recent development that has me very excited is Blazor Desktop: https://medium.com/young-coder/blazor-desktop-the-electron-f... > This leads to the second difference — in a Blazor Desktop app hosted in WebWindow, there’s no built-in web server. Instead, it’s pure .NET all the way down. And while we haven’t seen exactly…

While I agree Blazor is great, everytime I use it it feels unfinished.

For example binding select inputs to object is not possible while it has been working in other Javascript frameworks for years. Ofcourse you can use workarounds but it always feels like a step back.

And for some project that use custom auth it can be difficult to auth both Blazor and Controllers if you need some.

But overall it is a great experience. And I think frameworks like Blazor and Liveview are the future.

Re: .NET MAUI: .NET Multi-Platform App UI

#172

Post by dragonwriter »

manigandham wrote: post #101
wokwokwok wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I have been able to implement things in 4 hours that would easily have taken 4 weeks if I had to argue with other developers about the shape of a JSON blob on the wire. I can’t comment on your specific circumstances because I don’t know the details, but this reads like someone who is drinking the blazer coolaid. It’s a technology like any other, with specific trade offs. If you have a front end team who lacks the b…

The fact that you have to interface between different teams/languages is often a big part of the slowdown. The productivity improvements are real. Not having to design and expose an API for the frontend and instead just reuse the same classes and services is a massive shortcut. Running Blazor on the server is even easier because there's no serialization at all and you can directly call database queries in response to…

> The fact that you have to interface between different teams/languages is often a big part of the slowdown

Different teams is a business organization problem, and if you have that problem, you just aren’t going to choose the kind of server-side-code-with-generated-frontend framework that Blazor is (and of which there are several besides Blazor), so it doesn’t solve any problem there.

Different languages without different teams is a much smaller problem.

Re: .NET MAUI: .NET Multi-Platform App UI

#173

Post by andix »

publicola1990 wrote: post #169
Ecstatify wrote: post #168

Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me. Windows phone/Xamarin, Microsoft really doesn’t understand what mobile developers want. What’s the point in investing to learn something when it will be in the hospice next year.

Whats the story with Xamarin now? Does it have a present/future?

There are two sides of Xamarin. It builds native apps and you can use their native UI systems. So you can build a native Android UI and a native iOS UI next to each other. This will give you perfectly native apps with the ability to share as much code as possible.

The other side is Xamarin.Forms and its designated successor MAUI. Here you have the typical Microsoft UI problem. It is quite an unfinished framework. You can build everything with it, but if you do something else than the showcase app, you are going to have a difficult time.

Xamarin is for sure not going to die soon.

Re: .NET MAUI: .NET Multi-Platform App UI

#174

Post by scaladev »

flukus wrote: post #160
bob1029 wrote: post #37

The amount of energy Microsoft is pouring into these front-end efforts is pretty incredible. A more recent development that has me very excited is Blazor Desktop: https://medium.com/young-coder/blazor-desktop-the-electron-f... > This leads to the second difference — in a Blazor Desktop app hosted in WebWindow, there’s no built-in web server. Instead, it’s pure .NET all the way down. And while we haven’t seen exactly…

> The amount of energy Microsoft is pouring into these front-end efforts is pretty incredible. After winforms, silverlight, wpf, webforms and WinUI I don't want energy, I want to see them focus for more than 5 minutes. The only stable UI tech from MS with any long term support has been Win32 that came out 25 years ago. I predict blazor will be quietly dropped (they won't actually admit it for 5 years), just like the…

These blog posts are as relevant as ever.

https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2002/01/06/fire-and-motion/

https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2004/06/13/how-microsoft-lost...

Re: .NET MAUI: .NET Multi-Platform App UI

#175

Post by nor0x »

ab_testing wrote: post #151
bob1029 wrote: post #37

The amount of energy Microsoft is pouring into these front-end efforts is pretty incredible. A more recent development that has me very excited is Blazor Desktop: https://medium.com/young-coder/blazor-desktop-the-electron-f... > This leads to the second difference — in a Blazor Desktop app hosted in WebWindow, there’s no built-in web server. Instead, it’s pure .NET all the way down. And while we haven’t seen exactly…

What is a good way to learn the .NET framework or a guided path to understand the development hierarchy in .NET. It seems expansive with tools for everything from web, app and desktop development. Microsoft provides tutorials but it feels like they are all over the place and not really directed.

i can recommend the .NET 101 series on YouTube. If you want to quickly write .NET code you should try the .NET Interactive extension for VSCode

Re: .NET MAUI: .NET Multi-Platform App UI

#176

Post by pjmlp »

dt3ft wrote: post #157

.NET 6? Hold up, WPF was never really finished. This is demonstrated by existence of companies which sell lacking components that should otherwise have been included with WPF: Telerik, Infragistics, Syncfusion etc. Heck, creating a Report with out-of-the-box WPF is an unforgettable nightmare. I, for one, would prefer that Microsoft, instead of pumping all these half-finished "cool new toys", ships stable, performant,…

Lack of understanding why Telerik, Infragistics, Syncfusion etc. exist.

A library with a rich ecosystem of third party vendors instead of the clunky GNU/Linux offerings.

Re: .NET MAUI: .NET Multi-Platform App UI

#177

Post by alkonaut »

dt3ft wrote: post #157

.NET 6? Hold up, WPF was never really finished. This is demonstrated by existence of companies which sell lacking components that should otherwise have been included with WPF: Telerik, Infragistics, Syncfusion etc. Heck, creating a Report with out-of-the-box WPF is an unforgettable nightmare. I, for one, would prefer that Microsoft, instead of pumping all these half-finished "cool new toys", ships stable, performant,…

The WPF grids are fine and autocompletion is trivial. Which is the proper way to write frameworks: make it easy to make the bits you don't have.

I love that it isn't created like the old RAD frameworks where you are supposed to easily drop a datagrid in, connect to a DB and basically have some Line of Business CRUD on your screen within minutes. The Telerik/Syncfusion et.al. components are massive bloated and geared exactly towards that, and in order to do that they need to make a ton of assumptions about the MVVM/MVP/whetever architecture of the app. There are a few small omissions from WPF but I wouldn't say that the huge suites from Telerik and similar show that it's lacking.

Re: .NET MAUI: .NET Multi-Platform App UI

#178

Post by starik36 »

emodendroket wrote: post #115

Has anyone done much with this? I wouldn't mind moving on from Windows Forms but the stuff that's come after seems like evolutionary dead ends that weren't really worth my time, so far...

Oddly enough, if you don't care about cross platform and pixel perfect placement, Winforms are probably the sanest choice. It's been ported to .NET 5 and they fixed some of the high DPI issues of the past (more coming in .NET 6).

Re: .NET MAUI: .NET Multi-Platform App UI

#179

Post by staticelf »

alskdj21 wrote: post #85
crazypython wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If the "open web platform" stops requiring an entire Chromium engine in the app, I would agree. PWA. FileSystem API is coming. > Or if Google wasn't the sole effective standards body for it. Agreed.

I'm not well versed with PWA topics but as long as Apple doesn't curve around this, we can't expect a wide adaptation of it. Don't get me wrong, PWA can be the future but not without the whole Apple ecosystem missing.

You can use pwabuilder and ship a "native" app to Apple Appstore.

Re: .NET MAUI: .NET Multi-Platform App UI

#180

Post by dt3ft »

alkonaut wrote: post #177
dt3ft wrote: post #157

.NET 6? Hold up, WPF was never really finished. This is demonstrated by existence of companies which sell lacking components that should otherwise have been included with WPF: Telerik, Infragistics, Syncfusion etc. Heck, creating a Report with out-of-the-box WPF is an unforgettable nightmare. I, for one, would prefer that Microsoft, instead of pumping all these half-finished "cool new toys", ships stable, performant,…

The WPF grids are fine and autocompletion is trivial. Which is the proper way to write frameworks: make it easy to make the bits you don't have. I love that it isn't created like the old RAD frameworks where you are supposed to easily drop a datagrid in, connect to a DB and basically have some Line of Business CRUD on your screen within minutes. The Telerik/Syncfusion et.al. components are massive bloated and geared…

So when purchasing Visual Studio subscription in order to write software for windows, you expect nothing to work out of the box? I'd love to see you tackle a WPF monolith within a regulated environment where no 3rd party libs are allowed.

It's 2021, we're expected to deliver amazing, feature rich software in very little time, without buying 3rd party libraries.

Meanwhile, there's Microsoft, using the funds from our subscriptions and building stuff like Xamarin Forms and abandoning it half-way through. I wish they'd spend less time fooling around, and more time improving the tools that have become bread and butter.

Post reply on HN