Is Windows Forms Dead?

Is Avalon == XAML?

Kris — Tue, 21 Sep 2004 02:44:00 GMT

I am not very familiar with Avalon details but have seen some presentations about it. Does development in Avalon imply working with XAML (using both XML and codebehind file)? Or does Avalon provide an API (like WinForms) that I could just use (all code) without messing with XML tags? I ask this because as a developer I find myself more comfortable with "{ }" than the overused "< >". It's just a personal preference, but I see the relevance of XAML.

Win32 limitations

Bloga de Nathan — Mon, 20 Sep 2004 21:56:00 GMT

re: Is Avalon == XAML

Mike Harsh — Tue, 21 Sep 2004 03:23:00 GMT

Kris, yes, Avalon is the UI technology that XAML describes. Avalon has both a programattic interface and a delcarative one. I comoletely agree with you about being more comfortable writing code than markup. I guess it's just based on what you are used to, but it is cool that Avalon supports both models.

Conviene investire nei Windows Forms?

Corrado's BLogs — Mon, 20 Sep 2004 22:59:00 GMT

re: Is Windows Forms Dead?

Yves Reynhout — Tue, 21 Sep 2004 04:03:00 GMT

"it is cool that Avalon supports both models". Well, it depends, doesn't it? I guess only tool support for the declarative model will be available. If this is the case, I don't see many people going down a path that is not supported by the tool ('VS.NET' that is).

Tool support for code and declarative models

Mike Harsh — Tue, 21 Sep 2004 05:01:00 GMT

I agree that it would be beneficial to have tool support for both the code and markup models of creating Avalon UI. I wouldn't make any assumptions about the level of tool support yet. It is still too far away.

re: Is Windows Forms Dead?

Tony Chow — Tue, 21 Sep 2004 05:59:00 GMT

Mike,

I think comparing WinForms to Avalon is the wrong perspective. WinForms has never been nearly popular as ASP.NET, for reasons that have nothing to do with Avalon:

1) WinForms apps require a 20MB download of the .NET runtime, which most people still don't have. For obvious reasons, this is a HUGE factor for developers. Why didn't Microsoft include the framework with XP SP2?

2) GDI+ is dog slow, so that custom controls are a pain to optimize. Worse, last time I checked, there's no plan to accelerate GDI+. Doesn't this invite doubts about Microsoft's commitment to WinForms?

If you can solve the above two problems, WinForms development will take off like a rocket.

re: Is Windows Forms Dead?

Tom Guintther — Tue, 21 Sep 2004 08:48:00 GMT

A quote from a post over on simplegeek
http://www.simplegeek.com/permalink.aspx/a6be0f9f-2bd5-4a5f-9e39-d2ccc7cc1b09

Joe Says in point 2 of 4 regarding Avalon on XP:
Inability to really tweak User32. In Longhorn builds we had the ability to do "child window redirection". This is a Win32 interop solution where child hWnds get redirected by the system to a bitmap that the Avalon compositor then hosts. This allowed Win32 content to alpha blend and rotate just like any Avalon content. Since we won't be able to change system binaries on older systems, we won't be able to do this redirection on XP and W2k3. We'll have to find a compromise solution to hosting legacy content. You probably won't be able to treat it like regular Avalon content. Eventually we want to be able to support these advanced legacy hosting solutions, but it probably won't work on XP and W2k3.

This makes the WinForms/Avalon integration you describe sound a bit unrealistic. Comments?

re: Avalon / WinForms integration

Mike Harsh — Tue, 21 Sep 2004 09:12:00 GMT

Tom, it means that the interop on XP won't be quite as good as it will be on Longhorn. That translates to Windows Forms controls, on XP only, being limited to opaque rectangles in an Avalon app. You won't be able to blend the WF control with the background of it's Avalon parent. You won't be able to have a Windows Forms control participate in scaling and rotating transforms like Avalon elements.

On the other hand, anything your Windows Forms control could do in Windows Forms will still be possible, there won't be any loss of Win32 functionality.

And of course, these limitations won't exist when running on Longhorn.

re: Is Windows Forms Dead?

Frank Hileman — Tue, 21 Sep 2004 23:04:00 GMT

GDI+ is only dog slow if you don't have an optimized graphics system, like VG.net. It can be quite fast when used properly.

The unanaswered question about avalon on XP: how can it be compatible with windows forms if it uses DirectX? These applications do not mix well with windows forms -- they do not interoperate at all. So if it is not based on DirectX, then it will be another GDI+ type of software rendering, only this time much fatter and slower, because of all the large data structures and overengineering.

Don't tell people to focus on Avalon for XP until they have a stable enough release to do performance testing. The Avalon minimum hardware requirements are very steep.

re: Is Windows Forms Dead?

Dan Appleman — Wed, 22 Sep 2004 00:44:00 GMT

"Any post-Whidbey release is likely to contain only tactical features, bug fixes and other infrastructure to support the next version of VS that will run on Longhorn."
You may be giving up too quickly, Mike. See my detailed response at http://www.danappleman.com/index.php?p=18

Use Windows Forms or wait for Avalon?

Bring It On — Wed, 22 Sep 2004 16:40:00 GMT

The debate goes on...

WindowsForms: Today, Tomorrow, and Beyond

Mohammad.Abdulfatah — Wed, 22 Sep 2004 17:11:00 GMT

In my previous entry—The API Skirmish—I tried to defend the viability of WindowsForms as a development platform. Had I known about Mike Harsh’s short essay on the subject before writing that entry, I would have saved myself a lot of...

When FUD Becomes Journalism, or Avalon Is In Longhorn

Robert McLaws: FunWithCoding.NET - Longhorn Editio — Wed, 22 Sep 2004 17:51:00 GMT

When FUD Becomes Journalism, or Avalon Is In Longhorn

Robert McLaws: FunWithCoding.NET - Longhorn Editio — Wed, 22 Sep 2004 18:18:00 GMT

re: Is Avalon == XAML

Markus Egger — Thu, 23 Sep 2004 00:18:00 GMT

Mike, is that really true though? I do not see XAML as truely Avalon specific even though most of the samples currently shown are for Avalon. But in general, isn't XAML a declarative approach to instantiating objects and setting properties? One could use it to instantiate business objects, no?
Also, when creating Longhorn projects, one uses XAML to create things such as applications and other things.
I'd love to hear your thoughts on this...

Are Windows Froms Dead?

Meandering-Blog.Com — Wed, 22 Sep 2004 19:50:00 GMT

re: Is Windows Forms Dead?

David — Thu, 23 Sep 2004 00:57:00 GMT

I think the idea that you can't really add much value to WinForms anymore is mistaken. True, you might hit many, many problems when you try to introduce "big things". But when you say that introducing more controls and tweaking the exisiting ones doesn't bring much benefit ("Perhaps, but these are just refinements that will only yield small benefits to developers") I think you are missing the real day problems of developers big time.

To me a UI framework is really valuable when ALL the little small details are taken care of. Are all controls data bindable? Is every little detail covered and tested in praxis? No first generation or second generation framework I worked so far with had all the little things worked out, and way too often these little details were the real productivity bummers for my projects. Delphi's VCL is very mature today, after how many releases? Small, incremental improvements, no break through things. Same for MFC, as far as I can say.

I can understand that you guys want to rush on the next big thing, but the true value of any framework comes once it has matured, and that just isn't the case with Whidbey, as far as I can tell... No surprise, because it probably simply takes more release cycles to reach that stage. If you stop that development now with WinForms and start over with Avalon, there won't be anything mature for many more years from Microsoft. Big mistake, I belive.

re: Is Windows Forms Dead?

christopher baus — Thu, 23 Sep 2004 03:30:00 GMT

A colleague of mine recently pointed me to this entry. As a software developer, this whole issue is giving me serious reserverations about Microsoft's UI strategy (and I use that term loosely).

Those of us that have huge C++ code bases have no upgrade path. This is a huge gap. I'm sure your internal customers have the same problem. What story are you giving the Excel team? My guess is they are doing what the rest of us are doing, and ignoring all this non-sense until something comes out of it.

To be honest, if I was to start a large desktop application today (not very likely), I would probably go for QT. At least Trolltech has a vested interested in supporting their framework over the long term.

re: Is Windows Forms Dead?

anon — Thu, 23 Sep 2004 05:29:00 GMT

Interesting article. This page has a few glitches when viewed from Mozilla browsers.

Post-Whidbey Innovation

Mike Harsh's Blog — Wed, 29 Sep 2004 00:23:00 GMT

AddressOf.com — Fri, 01 Oct 2004 00:06:00 GMT

Is Windows Forms technology dead?

AddressOf.com — Fri, 01 Oct 2004 00:17:00 GMT

Is Windows Forms technology dead?

AddressOf.com — Fri, 01 Oct 2004 00:28:00 GMT

Use Windows Forms or wait for Avalon?

Bring It On — Wed, 06 Oct 2004 11:50:00 GMT

The debate goes on...

Winforms, Avalon, XAML ...

developerspot.net — Sat, 27 Nov 2004 17:22:00 GMT

Winforms, Avalon, XAML ...

developerspot.net — Sat, 27 Nov 2004 17:23:00 GMT

Windows Forms and Avalon

A View from Elsewhere — Sun, 28 Nov 2004 00:26:00 GMT

When do I use which?

Software Information » Mike Harsh’s Blog : Is Windows Forms Dead?

Software Information » Mike Harsh’s Blog : Is Windows Forms Dead? — Fri, 25 Jan 2008 19:34:51 GMT

PingBack from http://softwareinformation.247blogging.info/mike-harshs-blog-is-windows-forms-dead/

Is Whidbey already dead? | keyongtech

Is Whidbey already dead? | keyongtech — Thu, 22 Jan 2009 08:04:18 GMT

PingBack from http://www.keyongtech.com/568335-is-whidbey-already-dead

Mike Harsh s Blog Is Windows Forms Dead | Paid Surveys

Mike Harsh s Blog Is Windows Forms Dead | Paid Surveys — Fri, 29 May 2009 19:21:27 GMT

PingBack from http://paidsurveyshub.info/story.php?title=mike-harsh-s-blog-is-windows-forms-dead

Mike Harsh s Blog Is Windows Forms Dead | Outdoor Ceiling Fans

Mike Harsh s Blog Is Windows Forms Dead | Outdoor Ceiling Fans — Sun, 31 May 2009 19:30:57 GMT

PingBack from http://outdoorceilingfansite.info/story.php?id=1042

Mike Harsh s Blog Is Windows Forms Dead | debt solutions

Mike Harsh s Blog Is Windows Forms Dead | debt solutions — Tue, 16 Jun 2009 03:50:01 GMT

PingBack from http://debtsolutionsnow.info/story.php?id=13233

Mike Harsh s Blog Is Windows Forms Dead | work from home

Mike Harsh s Blog Is Windows Forms Dead | work from home — Tue, 16 Jun 2009 14:41:20 GMT

PingBack from http://workfromhomecareer.info/story.php?id=20379

Mike Harsh s Blog Is Windows Forms Dead | patio set

Mike Harsh s Blog Is Windows Forms Dead | patio set — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 05:15:20 GMT

PingBack from http://patiosetsite.info/story.php?id=600