On Mon, 20 May 2013 13:58:56 -0700 "Adam Wilson" <flybo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 20 May 2013 13:20:22 -0700, Nick Sabalausky > <seewebsitetocontac...@semitwist.com> wrote: > > > On Mon, 20 May 2013 12:41:08 -0700 > > "Adam Wilson" <flybo...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> markup is extensible, OS widgets are not. > >> > > > > I don't know where you got that idea. > > > > I mean extensible in terms of look or style, sorry for the ambiguity. Ahh, ok, I wasn't actually sure exactly what sort of "extensible" you meant. > OS widgets require tons of custom coding to change the style, I've > done it, and I hated every minute of it. But with WPF I don't even > think twice, I just do it, because I can get the exact style in under > an hour. > Honestly, I'd consider that a major downside: Anything that helps/encourages developers to disregard a user's system settings (style or otherwise) is a very bad thing, IMO. Of course, if the toolkit automatically comes with a guaranteed user-selectable setting, outside of the app's control, to optionally disable any custom styling on a per-app or global basis, then that's the best solution of all: It attracts the "To hell with the user's system settings because *I* deserve to be in control of my user's computer" crowd and then uses that to hand control *back* to the user, where it belongs. I've often thought about developing a system like that.
