Re: what's the differents between MFC Wnd && .net winform??
Tech Tip: Click here to run a free scan for Windows Errors and optimize PC performance
MFC is based on the Windows SDK and is a for writing native windows
applications.
WinForms is based on .Net framework and is for writing .Net applications.
I use MFC because I am comfortable with MFC (hence I am faster developing
applications using MFC then I would ever be with C#), my application is
performance critical, alot of my customers are running window 98, I can't
require .Net framework to be installed, and most of the tools I use were
written before .Net came out.
AliR.
"Ramon Chen" <Ramon@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:A94529E9-451A-494E-824A-01AF2CE2F4DF@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Seems .net winform can do everything those MFC can does...
So why we still using MFC today?
What's the main differences??
.
Relevant Pages
- Re: Report from MVP Summit
... Win2K being phased out, and WinXP SP2 and Vista the only OS's we have to worry about, assuming things like the .NET Framework 3.0 being installed won't be out of the question, so we are now entering the sweet spot for .NET, much like Windows 3.0 marked the start of the sweet spot of Windows. ... the time to start switching is now (or at least start integrating some parts of the .NET framework into existing apps using C++/CLI). ... MFC is no longer meant to be the best way to develop Windows apps that are not huge. ... I'm guessing a good part of Office 2007 and Vista are still native so I'd guess Microsoft is still in that boat as well. ...
(microsoft.public.vc.mfc) - Re: Managed vs Unmanaged Bare Bones Performance Test
... One of the reasons that things like Virtual PC (which runs Windows on pre-Intel Macintoshes) and Rosetta work so well is that the programs being run spend very little time in the code that needs to be translated. ... If your code only spends 1% or less of its time executing the code you actually wrote, and the rest of its time either waiting on i/o or executing libraries in the operating system, then even if you have a 20X difference in performance, you're only really looking at a 20% cost in the "slower" environment. ... There are a few classes of applications where this sort of difference matters. ... The biggest thing I notice in my applications is start-up time, as the .NET Framework imposes a relatively large burden with respect to application initialization as compared to a straight Windows application. ...
(microsoft.public.dotnet.framework) - Re: Does .net replace win32?
... > ontop of windows for general applications, ... applications, so the Win32 API is built with C programmers in mind. ... This makes the .Net Framework cleaner, nicer, easier to use, etc. ...
(microsoft.public.dotnet.languages.vc) - Re: Visual C# to Visual C++ ??!!
... <Geoff Cox> ... > that using Visual C++ 2005 Express together with the Windows SDK I ... > is installed on a PC the .NET Framework will not be needed ... The link below is typical of the information available on MFC in MSDN. ...
(microsoft.public.dotnet.languages.vc) - Re: Windows 2000 hangs on Internet Explorer using .NET Framework 1.1
... be caused by a third party applications like Kernel level filter drivers, ... Windows NT/2000/2003 Cluster Technologies ... > I ran .NET Framework 1.0 with this and I could happily log on to the ... > internet using my internal modem. ...
(microsoft.public.win2000.advanced_server) |
|
