It's such a mix debate around who wants a WPF app over a WinForms app. Certainly at times I love going back to WinForms to make my test harness, and going back to the days where I draw my controls out through code, sure was fun back then, but now, damn, it feels great to not have to sit down and do some maths on measuring my dimensions and placement for custom controls.
With WPF it's really easy to make rich custom controls, but it also comes with a price, the visual tree sure becomes fat, but so damn easy. At my current work place, maybe all our clients are very superficial or we tend to push it out a lot, but there's one WPF application we rolled out, it sure was a little bitch to get done, but one of our very first kicks into the WPF world as far as large applications are concerned, and it was pretty much similar to an AutoCAD system, you might think, holy crap AutoCAD systems, even the plans have a million lines and shapes whatever it might be, it's a kill to use WPF, should use WinForms and focus on perf. Well that client in particular was very into visuals and animations and really wanted the application to shine. I wouldn't know how you'd have that happen with WinForms, but it will be a bitch to do, to make it so rich. Another project we're currently working on is with a large waste disposal company, and the IT manager is also interested in focus on UI and visuals, at first I thought it might be an over kill, but like many has mentioned humans like looks, and especially with some companies having systems that all users use for 8+hours a day, you'd at least want them to smile when a screen looks nice or things transition so nicely. Think about iPhones, when you take the UI off it, it's actually nothing out of the ordinary, but because the visuals are so nice, transitions are so consistent, it becomes so pleasant just flicking between screens. Furthermore, I think a rich visual experience does help with people who aren't as literate, like they say a picture is worth a thousand words, I think the combinations of layout and visuals can also communicate the use of a system without many words on a screen. I think this thread discussion isn't ever going to end, because there are opinions on both ends, and to date it really is a combination of factors: a) does the developer think it's worth it to use WPF to make pretty UIs, thus resulting a push to recommend to their clients b) when should it really be used, does an app with two screens constitute to using it? On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 11:52 AM, Stephen Price <[email protected]>wrote: > People have come to expect a richer experience. I'm sure if you could > install windows 3.1 onto todays hardware you'd be so impressed with > the speed things run... but would you do it? > > I think of all the times I've installed some tool or app and noticed > an outdated UI and decided that I don't really need it, and > uninstalled. It's standard UI knowledge that the acceptance of an > application (especially in corporate environment) can make or break > it's actual usage. If people don't like it they will do everything in > their power to not use it. The user's perception of an app has little > to do with if it actually does the job or not. (sure it's a component) > Looking and feeling good is a driving force of human nature. It's not > survival of the fittest, its survival of the prettiest!! > > WPF can deliver that desired look. People want round corners and > gradients, and gratuitous animations. People want modern looking > homes. If you go out and find an old house made of brown brick with > floral curtains and carpet and retro decor... well, it may sell but > not for as much. > > Good looking UI/UX gets an emotional reaction from people, which is a > very powerful driving force. Actually bad UI does too but not the > desired emotions. I guess users are shallow, it's all about the looks. > No one wants a Fat app! :) > > On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 6:34 AM, Greg Keogh <[email protected]> wrote: > > Why should anyone write an app in WPF? > > > > > > > > Serious question. If you have to create an app that looks beautiful with > > gradients, shadows, smooth moving parts, menus containing videos, grids > with > > complex template cells ... then WPF is the only choice. Is there any > other > > compelling reason to use WPF to write a desktop app that doesn’t need > such > > beauty? > > > > > > > > Since Framework 3.0 was released I've had a single job offer to write a > UI > > that had to be "beautiful". We did a demo, then the project was canned > and > > they finished up doing it in a browser with Google Web Toolkit (and it > looks > > impressive, in the Google Mail page style, but fancier). Every other > desktop > > app I’ve had to write needed absolutely nothing that WPF provides and it > > would have wasted time and money to use anything other than WinForms. > > > > > > > > WinForms apps might arguably be a bit “dull”, but more importantly, they > > have a standard appearance. I strive to use standard menus, toolbar, > status > > bar, icons, shortcuts, etc, and WinForms encourages me to do the right > > thing. WPF tempts you to write something strange and non-standard, which > is > > fine if that’s what you want, but if not? > > > > > > > > So even though I’m greatly impressed by what you can do with WPF, it > takes > > much longer to write anything with it, and most business apps requested > of > > me don’t gain anything. So why should anyone write an app in WPF if they > > don’t have to? > > > > > > > > Greg > > > > > > > > P.S. Maybe in some future thread I can explain the reasons why I am so > > unproductive in WPF, XAML, type converters and infrastructure. Perhaps > > people will be able to point out ways of overcoming my speed bumps. I’m > not > > unfamiliar with WPF, I’m just slower with it. > > > > > > > > P.S. A few weeks ago I did actually start writing a significant app in > WPF, > > by deliberate choice, even though the app doesn’t technically need any > WPF > > features. We’re converting a VB6 app to .NET in stages. Progress is > slower > > than it would be in WinForms of course, but it will be interesting to see > > what benefits result. There is a risk that we will use fancy visual > effects > > just because we can, and I wonder if other people fall for that trap. > > > > _______________________________________________ > > ozwpf mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://prdlxvm0001.codify.net/mailman/listinfo/ozwpf > > > > > _______________________________________________ > ozwpf mailing list > [email protected] > http://prdlxvm0001.codify.net/mailman/listinfo/ozwpf >
_______________________________________________ ozwpf mailing list [email protected] http://prdlxvm0001.codify.net/mailman/listinfo/ozwpf
