Re: WPF vs WinForms

I agree. Data binding isn't what it is in WinForms, and there's nothing equal to the DataGridView, which while it can be a pain in the a**, is very flexible.

RobinS.

"Robert" <Robert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:C27DBA0D-A2B0-4F1A-9923-936044D67CE0@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Robin

Yes that is pretty cool. But it's not a desktop application which is what
thte orginal question was that started this thread. Yes you can do some
pretty cool things with WPF right now, but all the examples I've seen there
all graphical. Right now I think that is where the strengths are in WPF.
Developers should probably design in winforms and use WPF in them where
needed. If they do that it won't be such a hard transition when there is
enough tools to do a proper business application.

Robert

"RobinS" wrote:


"Robert" <Robert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:63003F87-F030-4954-A906-42819EF437A0@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
> "Keith P" wrote:
>
>> I'm a huge fan of WPF, so I'll throw out my impressions of it:
>> The primary advantage to it is that it doesn't sit on GDI like >> WinForms,
>> so
>> you've got a vector-based UI that supports virtually any resolution, >> is
>> accelerated by the 3D card (GDI is accelerated but not to the extent >> that
>> vector-based systems can). It's a very declarative tech where most of >> the
>> UI
>> eye candy is written on the page by the designer independent of the
>> coder.
>> Also, the databinding is done in such a way that if you connect the
>> property
>> of one control with another via an event handler (i.e. declare that >> the
>> color
>> of a control's background is Blue if myButton.IsPressed, your >> control's
>> background will change to blue when pressed (and back to its original
>> color
>> once the condition is false)...all the magic of DependencyProperty. >> This
>> means a TON of stuff that would have traditionally required writing >> event
>> handlers and having several code paths for buttons, etc., is all done
>> inside
>> the WPF code automatically. This is also true for asynchronous
>> databinding.
>> In a nutshell, if you say "IsAsynchronous=true" for your datasource
>> declaration, the dependency property it's bound to listens for the
>> OnDataBindComplete(or something like that...can't recall it right >> now),
>> and
>> automatically updates from the proper thread while maintaining
>> responsiveness.
>> And from a flexibility standpoint, its styling facilities are a >> radical
>> departure from WinForms. WPF apps have a logical tree (of buttons, >> grids,
>> etc) that have no inherent look to them; they just have functionality >> (a
>> button can be pressed, grid can hold stuff, a textbox has a Text
>> property).
>> But they can look like whatever you want to define their template as. >> So
>> for
>> example, if you want to draw a tab control, you could implement it as >> a
>> radio
>> button group where each tab is a radiobutton because a tab control
>> logically
>> functions like a radio button group.
>>
>
>
> I really wish the WPF cheerleaders would shut up until they have > produced
> a
> serious application. Yes we know it does really great things with 3D > and
> pictures and you can spin stuff around and make a time line animation, > but
> as
> far as a serious business application goes, that stuff means nothing. > If
> Microsoft wants to help give us a DataGrid (not the grid that it comes
> with)
> one that actually holds data. I don't think they have any intention of
> building one! Give us a toolbar that easy to use instead of the crap > thats
> in
> it. Give us a Menu that you don't have to edit in Xaml. In my opinion
> WPF
> will not be ready for prime time until you able to build an application
> without touching xaml. PLEASE DON'T TELL ME HOW MUCH YOU LIKE XAML > AND
> HOW
> ITS THE BEST THING SINCE SLICED WHITE BREAD. The truth is the > community
> is
> going to be split up into two categories. Developers and Designers.
> Developers will be able to handle the xaml and probably create some > pretty
> ugly apps along the way. But the designers will be people adopted from
> the
> adobe world and are not used to typing anything to create any graphic
> look.
> I'm just telling you the way it is. I hope Microsoft is listening > because
> you damn sure can't talk to any of them in person.

I saw a demo of an application at MacWorld called Jing. The Windows version
is written in WPF with a WCF backend. The application is very attractive. It
lets you take screenshots and send them up to a server (or save as a file,
or ftp) or record video and send or save.

It is written by TechSmith (the people who wrote Camtasia and Snagit), and
it's called Jing. Check it out: http://www.jingproject.com
I thought it was pretty impressive. It's not a heavyweight application in
terms of business, but I thought the design was very well done.

RobinS.
GoldMail, Inc.



.