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

Is WPF dead: the present and future of WPF

pragmateek.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 85 posts

Re: Is WPF dead: the present and future of WPF

#41

Post by rwallace »

If I was writing line of business software these days, I'd either go the web route and use JavaScript and HTML 5, or if it was something that preferred to live on the desktop, I'd use Qt.

Now, if you've only heard a little bit about Qt, you might be tempted to think you only need it if you need cross-platform, but in my experience it's actually better than any of the Microsoft frameworks even purely on Windows. (A simple test: write a Hello World program in Winforms, WPF and Qt, then try doing some simple drag operations with the mouse, moving the window around, resizing it. Last I tried, Qt was the only one that updated the window correctly, without flicker. This remained true even after I tried the recommended solutions in Winforms and WPF to reduce flicker.)

The fact that Qt gives you the option of going cross-platform if you ever need it in the future is just a nice bonus.

Re: Is WPF dead: the present and future of WPF

#42

Post by ternaryoperator »

joseacta wrote: post #35

We make a software for licensing WPF applications, http://www.licensespot.com , and it's been growing pretty steady in the last few months so I guess there are still a lot of people developing and selling apps in WPF. It just works. Some niche markets still prefer to use desktop applications.

Not even so niche. Businesses are still primarily PC/desktop oriented.

Re: Is WPF dead: the present and future of WPF

#43

Post by mwcampbell »

I think the best thing that Microsoft could do for developers right now is to backport a reasonable subset of WinRT to Windows 7 and provide it as a redistributable, even if we have to pay for it. I'd suggest backporting the XAML-based UII toolkit and at least some of the other APIs, but not the app container or store-based distribution.

Re: Is WPF dead: the present and future of WPF

#44

Post by grokys »

mwcampbell wrote: post #39
grokys wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> all the features that is needed to create rich applications, while having a nice developer experience I wouldn't say that is true. For example even renaming a Window/UserControl in Visual Studio doesn't work correctly. There are a ton of things that could be improved about WPF, not least (off the top of my head): * Use Direct2D instead of DirectX9. The renderer used by WPF has been shown to be very inefficient comp…

> Use Direct2D instead of DirectX9. The renderer used by WPF has been shown to be very inefficient compared to Direct2D. Is that why the capability of a user's video card had an appreciable impact on the performance of a WPF-based app that's little more than a text viewer and editor, at least as of 2009 (see http://community.logos.com/forums/t/6200.aspx )? Is the WPF renderer still suboptimal on today's graphics hard…

You can find a study of how WPF and Direct2D's renderers compare here: http://jeremiahmorrill.wordpress.com/2011/02/14/a-critical-d...

Re: Is WPF dead: the present and future of WPF

#45

Post by maxxxxx »

Scuds wrote: post #20
maxxxxx wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I had to start a new desktop app now I would also go for Qt. I am tired of MS rolling out new frameworks and abandoning them a few years later.

In Visual Studio 14 CTP4 you can still File -> New VB / C# Project -> Windows Forms in same as you could ten years ago, but with the next generation CLR in the new IDE. It's still _supported_ and there are a ton of vendors still shipping components. Abandoned/EOL/Discontinued is something like FoxPro or Apple's Rosetta emulator. It's not even deprecated.

Sure you can. But you are locked into a framework that reached its peak a few years ago. It's like writing HTML that's compatible with IE6. You can do this and it works but you are stuck in the past.

Re: Is WPF dead: the present and future of WPF

#46

Post by dvere »

mpthrapp wrote: post #38
amaks wrote: post #17

WPF is another victim in ever changing technological landscape in Microsoft. Who uses or even remembers these days ATL/WTL, MFC, OLE DB, ADO, DAO, ODBC etc. etc.?

I still use ADO and ODBC (oh, and the BDE, remember that one?) on a regular basis. I wish I didn't, but I do.

Raises hand, still have a VM with Delphi 7 that is opened once a week or so....

Re: Is WPF dead: the present and future of WPF

#47

Post by bdavisx »

codereflection wrote: post #16

It will be interesting to see if the editor in Visual Studio is re-written again (it has been WPF based since VS 2012). If a hint of that comes out, then I think we can safely declare WPF as dead.

I think it was WPF based starting with VS 2010 actually.

Re: Is WPF dead: the present and future of WPF

#48

Post by andwaal »

grokys wrote: post #24
andwaal wrote: post #21

What is never really can grasp is the conclusion that no new versions equals a dead platform. In the case with WPF(and Silverlight to some degree) the platform is so mature, that one got all the features that is needed to create rich applications, while having a nice developer experience. It`s just done, no need for future versions and fixes, so one can start build things with it instead. I have(as many others) made…

> all the features that is needed to create rich applications, while having a nice developer experience I wouldn't say that is true. For example even renaming a Window/UserControl in Visual Studio doesn't work correctly. There are a ton of things that could be improved about WPF, not least (off the top of my head): * Use Direct2D instead of DirectX9. The renderer used by WPF has been shown to be very inefficient comp…

The form renaming im absolutely with you on, horribel. Once you tried it you learn to stick with your original name.

Direct2D vs DX9 is probably a valid point, I have never faced any issue with this.

The rest of them I don`t think I follow you on. Two trivial image tasks, one ugly syntax and two issue I can`t seem to have encountered.

It should be noted that I always have used telerik`s awesome UI components together with WPF. Which both features and documentation are top notch.

Re: Is WPF dead: the present and future of WPF

#49

Post by peetle »

andwaal wrote: post #21

What is never really can grasp is the conclusion that no new versions equals a dead platform. In the case with WPF(and Silverlight to some degree) the platform is so mature, that one got all the features that is needed to create rich applications, while having a nice developer experience. It`s just done, no need for future versions and fixes, so one can start build things with it instead. I have(as many others) made…

I don't disagree that WPF is a good framework for making Windows/Windows Phone applications. Nor do I disagree that the JavaScript/Web community has reinvented many of the same ideas. It's hard to explain to an AngularJS fan that WPF had many of the same ideas long ago. But let's be honest, these ideas (bindings, uni-directional data from from the model layer) aren't really that amazing.

Now, WPF may be ahead of the HTML/JS from a technical point of view right now. But the community is a completely different thing. That's what differentiates things today (not to mention the bag of cash Google is pushing into web standards) and really is the only thing that matters when it comes to the success/failure of a technology.

I think you're right that WPF will last a good deal longer. There's too much software already written for Windows/.NET, but "many, many" years is a stretch.

Re: Is WPF dead: the present and future of WPF

#50

Post by grokys »

andwaal wrote: post #48
grokys wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> all the features that is needed to create rich applications, while having a nice developer experience I wouldn't say that is true. For example even renaming a Window/UserControl in Visual Studio doesn't work correctly. There are a ton of things that could be improved about WPF, not least (off the top of my head): * Use Direct2D instead of DirectX9. The renderer used by WPF has been shown to be very inefficient comp…

The form renaming im absolutely with you on, horribel. Once you tried it you learn to stick with your original name. Direct2D vs DX9 is probably a valid point, I have never faced any issue with this. The rest of them I don`t think I follow you on. Two trivial image tasks, one ugly syntax and two issue I can`t seem to have encountered. It should be noted that I always have used telerik`s awesome UI components together…

Yes, I'll accept that some of them may be issues that aren't encountered too often, but they are things that I'm battling with right now so are on my mind ;) But for saving images, why isn't there a Save method to BitmapSource! This to me seems endemic to WPF where the API isn't optimized for common tasks.
Post reply on HN