I've been developing a windows store application for a windows 8 tablet (Microsoft surface). So far the application has been designed using XAML-RT/C# using a SQLite database. The application won't be released via the store, it'll be just used internally by my company.
I am however finding numerous problems with the platform. i.e. speed of the surface device, releasing versions and renewing the developer licences.
As the application is still in the development stage and no decision has been made on the final tablet I'm thinking about re-writing the application using WPF and using a full windows 8 tablet (not a RT/ARM version). This way I can use full SQL and have much more control over releasing the software.
So, my question is...
What is generally the best development platform for a full windows 8 tablet? Is it best to go with WPF or stick with the Xaml for RT?
Thanks
WPF
less sandbox limitations (can call any APIs)
is currently somewhat easier to do enterprise deployment with
has more features
is more mature overall
can benefit from Surface SDK 2.0 controls for great touch support on big screens
WinRT/XAML
works on ARM devices
is lighter and faster
has built-in modern touch-enabled controls targeted for tablet use
might be better suited for use on tablets overall
Overall the main benefit of WinRT is that you can use it on ARM tablets which are cheaper, lighter and more usable as tablets. WPF requires heavier devices and might be slower, but you gain the ability to access all legacy APIs.
If you intend it to be fully touch screen ready then you'll have to do some extra work in WPF to get the level of UI interactivity that you get from the "metro" apps.
That being said, if you're writing a complex application that requires lots of API calls/web services and file handling then you're going to have a much easier time with WPF.
Related
Today, while I'm running a Silverlight project in the Internet Explorer by pressing F5 in Visual Studio 2012 in my Windows 8 machine, I found that McAfee started to block Silverlight XAPs (Which is loaded by Prism).
This leads me to think again about the future of Silverlight. I'm at the beginning of my LOB Application. Should I stop what I like to work in Silverlight and return back to WPF. I which that I can continue to develop in Silverlight until Windows 8 becomes rich like Silverlight. That is why I limit the Model and MVVM to PCL to be easier to be ported to WinRT in the future. Using await async and so...
Please advise me which is better for a LOB application that will run in three countries throw the Internet. Should I continue in Silverlight for zero deployment, or work in WPF or even Windows Forms and use clickonce?
The fact that McAffee blocked something has NOTHING to do with it's long term future. McAfee is nobody, they don't determine whether or not a specific technology can be used or not, or will be used in the future.
Silverlight seems to have reached a dead end, due to Microsoft realizing that if they create a multi-platform application environment, people might just stop using Windows.
WPF also seems to have been abandoned in favor or WinRT XAML, but of course WinRT XAML is not an option for us developers at the moment, simply because it is Windows 8-only, and our customers don't have Windows 8 or greater.
Besides, technically, WinRT-XAML seems to be really inferior to WPF XAML, and lacks many important features.
Of course winforms is completely useless and is not an option, unless you need to run your applications in my grandma's 80386 computer with an Hercules monochrome monitor
(exaggeration).
Seriously, that dead technology is not the answer to any of today's challenges. Things that you can do easily in any of the XAML-based technologies are either impossible or require a bunch of horrible hacks in winforms.
I suppose the definitive answer depends a lot on the usage scenario, for example:
Silverlight makes more sense if you have to publish your application in a web site and have anyone download it and use it.
WinRT XAML makes sense only if you target Windows 8, or want to create 'metro style' apps.
WPF makes sense if you want to create Windows Desktop applications, and have them deployed via ClickOnce or Windows Installer to a more limited and controlled set of users (because it needs installation of the .Net Framework, which Click-Once can deal with anyways).
winforms makes no sense whatsoever because it's a completely useless dinosaur technology that doesn't support anything.
Thank you very much for your answer and sharing your experience with me. I always try keeping WinRT as a strategy planning for each line of code I write. As I wish to migrate my code easily to WinRT in the future. The future is translated to me as may be within two years I may find myself in a situation that we will be targeted to migrate to something like Windows 9.
The best successful migration scenario - as I wish, it could be by increasing the usage of PCL at the client side as much as possible and test in a small piece of WinRT module.
We hope that Microsoft succeed in Windows 9.
I am sadly decided to shift to WPF instead of Silverlight in case that Silverlight depends on browsers that may not be supported in the future. As we here that Chrome, Safari and others are stopping supporting Silverlight. Why should I insist in relaying with such great technology that is dead before it finishes.
The main difficulties I could face in the future migration could be tied to two patterns:
- Prism.Regions: Windows Store has better than that.
- Prism.Modularity: Windows Store has no migration strategy to that.
At least at the moment I'm writing my thoughts Prism for Windows Store are far from implementing Regions and Modularity.
This is not a final answer but a clue of my what I should and should not to do.
I have been using WPF for a while, and I keep on realizing again and again that Microsoft invests its efforst in Silverlight, not in WPF (RIA Services, default theme, controls and more).
I thought it might be a good idea to migrate to Silverlight (i.e. creating standalone desktop apps with Silverlight 4.0), the question is whether this is possible or not.
BTW, I think LightSwitch applications are generated with Silverlight as standalone desktop apps.
From MSDN:
Silverlight 3 applications are no longer restricted to running in a browser. They can be run in a browser or it they can be detached from the browser and run from the desktop. These out-of-browser applications allow you to bring the richness of Silverlight 3 applications directly to the desktop without the restriction of running within a browser.
Link: Building An Out-of-Browser Client With Silverlight 3
It is possible to create standalone desktop apps(Out of browser apps) with silverlight version 3.0 or higher and it works great. Now it is also possible to install the out of browser app even without opening a browser as shown at this blog post .Silverlight is awesome and silverlight apps even run on MACs and Linux(limited support)
However, it is not true that Microsoft is only investing in silverlight. Microsoft is investing in WPF too. Though it is possible to create out of browser applications with silverlight, they have lot of limitations when compared to a full blown WPF applications.Dont forget that silverlight is just a subset of WPF, for example, silverlight doesnt have ADO.NET, Hardware device access etc. So if your application is merely a business application and you dont have to access hardware devices or database directly then silverlight might be an option, however if your application accessing client machines hardware resources directly then you are better off with WPF.
My suggestion is, If you know before hand that it is going to be a desktop application then go with WPF(or may be even XBAP). In my experience, useful applications grow with time, new features are always requested time to time. If in future,a feature is requested that cannot be accomplished with silverlight and can only be accomplished with WPF, then you will be in a big trouble because you need to rewrite your app in WPF and it will be hard for you to convince your CFO to allocate more fund just to implement one feature. Silverlight is not designed to develop desktop applications, its main goal is multi-platform support.
Silverlight 3 supports Out-of-Browser functionality.
Quote from Wikipedia silverlight page :
Silverlight 3 supports Out-of-Browser experiences, i.e., Silverlight applications can be installed to the system for offline access (provided the application manifest is designed to allow local installation) where they run outside the browser.
Also here is a quick howto
Out of browser applications have the same security restrictions as in browser applications.
With Silverlight 4 you can create full trust applications which have full access to the computer.
More on Network Security Access Restrictions in Silverlight
If you mean Out of Browser apps, certainly. The Seesmic Desktop 2 app is an excellent example of one of these apps, with it's own updating mechanism. Seems a no brainer to use the XAP/MEF plug-in Model and Silverlight in this manner.
Seesmic Desktop 2
We're developing an OOB app along the same lines, one internet download and you're done. You're not going to get exactly the same APIs as you get in WPF, though.
As others have pointed out, Silverlight apps can be installed to run 'out-of-browser', but even with elevated trust they still have significant restrictions on what they can do and certainly don't have "full access to the computer".
Creating an app from scratch, you may want to consider parallel Silverlight & WPF builds. The code can more-or-less be shared by adding the .cs files from one project (e.g. WPF) to the other (Silverlight) using "Add As Link". The XAML files cannot be linked this way and need to be duplicated, but that may not involve much more than copying & pasting, depending on your structure. There're good examples of this on the web.
Developing both types in parallel would likely involve a lot less effort than having to abruptly switch types at some point and discovering incompatibilities/limitations too late.
So Windows Embedded Compact 7 (another classic from the naming department) supports Silverlight for Windows Embedded.
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsembedded/en-us/products/windowsce/compact7.mspx
But this is a C++ only stripped down version of Silverlight 2 XAML.
Does anybody know if Windows Embedded Compact 7 will support real Silverlight? This seems to be out of step with Windows Phone (which I think is based on Windows CE 6) and the fact that Windows Embedded Compact 7 supports Flash 10.1.
Not in the first release, no, it will not support managed Silverlight (or, IMO, what the entire world considers to be "Silverlight").
They may, at some point, move the work done by the Phone team to create a managed SL implementation, but they've made no announcements as to if or when that might ever occur.
You'll see "Developers,Developers" Balmer come out later like he has done before and admit they made a mistake with this. Its the developers that produce the apps and if you make all the microsoft technologies linq, wpf, ria and patterns such as MVVM unuasable developers won't trust you and move to another platform. They dropped the ball on the Phone OS by not having a great consumer oriented phone. Now they will focus on consumers stick it to the business developers that they had built up on Windows Mobile. They did a great job with the silverlight 4 so I don't understand how they can drop the ball this badly on Compact 7.
I agree about the non-uniform development environment, but you should also consider that the processor that are currently powering WP7 devices are not still available on the general embedded market where 1GHz processors are a small minority and 5-600MHz processors are used only for hi-end devices.
Trying to run both the XAML and the .NET runtime could lead to weak performances and disappointing results.
If you need RAD, use the Compact Framework.
If you need cool UI, use Silverlight for Windows Embedded.
You can't have both right now, as you can on the phone...
Silverlight Out of Browser technology and WPF ClickOnce on the surface have similarities. Easy and simple deployment, the ability to specify the level of trust access to the underlying host, etc.
What are the key issues I need to consider when choosing one over the other?
To put a finer point on it, I'll be deploying LOB apps on a corporate network running only windows computers.
The big one is cross platform compatibility. If you need you app to run on a mac as well as windows (not sure if Silverlight is supported in Linux yet) then use Silverligt. If you want to make an assumption that all your users will be in a windows machine then go WPF.
Obviously WPF has a much richer toolkit than silverlight so it may well be that silverlight just isn't an option. If I was just building for windows though I know my job would be easier in WPF.
Given that you are targetting a private infrastructure running Windows, two points worth thinking about
Wpf has a richer control tree, whereas Silverlight is a reduced set for compact size
Wpf requires .Net framework installed locally, whereas Silverlight has its own platform independent browser-based runtime
While your target platform will likely have the latest .Net framework installed, rendering this last point moot, keep in mind any updates to the framework [ie .Net4.0 and any future updates] may require a restart of the machine - which is a major pain point for businesses that demand constant-on stateful desktops [ie anything in finance, like banks and trading].
As with all problems, your requirements, not the technology, should inform your solution. :)
You mentioned trust access to the host which I think rules out Silverlight unless you want to run SL4 (beta).
We recently went through a lot of discussion about file system access. Silverlight 3 runs in a partial trust sandbox more or less. You can't maintain a pointer to files in the files system outside of your application's isolated storage. This was an issue for us as we wanted the user to be able to use the application to reference odds and ends on your file system. That said you can allow the users to load and save files from anywhere on the system but you just get/or push the file stream and (to the best of my knowledge) don't have access to the folder or file path information.
Silverlight 4 (in beta) has support for your application running in full trust mode. I haven't played with this yet however and can't speak to how well it works.
In talking with a lot of people who work with both Silverlight and WPF, even those who are excited about Silverlight and push for it strongly, I hear a lot of the say fairly emphatically that if you are going to be developing exclusively for a full-trust Windows environment, WPF is hands-down the obvious choice.
That's not to say that Silverlight is an inferior product or that there aren't times will Silverlight will be the clear winner. But when you say "I'll be deploying LOB apps on a corporate network running only windows computers," it sounds like WPF is the clear winnder.
You could decide to go down the Silverlight route in anticipation of all of the great new OOB feature os SL4. I've even heard rumors that SL and WPF will eventually merge, so it may not even really matter, right? Well, I think what you'll find if you go with Silverlight is that some of the advanced features that you thought were there weren't there in the way you expected. For example, SL4 will be able to run in "Elevated Trust" (not full trust) and you might find this limiting at a frustrating point in the project where a lot of your code base is already in Silverlight.
Certainly keep your eyes on Silverlight, but for your current business case, WPF will likely be the best fit.
Silverlight 3.0 beta has just been announced at Microsofts Mix Conference in Las Vegas.
Two features of the new beta are 3D-graphics and the ability to run applications outside of the browser, which to me seemed to be two of the major features that WPF (Windows Presentation Foundation) previously offered over silverlight.
I am currently evaluating WPF and Silverlight for possible use in our companies future development activity, and this announcement has left me confused as to the intended direction of these two UI technologies and why I would choose one over the other.
Has anyone implemented a new application using WPF recently, and if so, what drove you to that decision? Given the announced changes to silverlight, Would your decision have changed had you made it now, and if not, why?
Any advice would be appreciated.
The biggest difference I find is the asynchronous model you have to adopt
in your Silverlight application.
It does seems like an advantage (and it can be), but it does make
life very difficult sometimes.
There are also some limitations that can be a real challenge like the absence
of print support.
I would recommend Silverlight over WPF when:
- There is no need for best possible performance (graphics included)
- Can get around the absence of print support (it will come, we just don't know when)
- Camera/Microphone support is not needed
- Can tolerate the assync app/development model
- Can tolerate limitations on WCF (no support for WS-Security at this point)
- There is no need to store huge amount of data on the client.
- There is no need to direct integration with client side applications like Office.
- Has a server to host your application
I would say the main difference is that WPF requires the client to have the .Net 3.0+ framework. Silverlight only requires the runtime. Now that being said, WPF is geared more for controlled environments such as an intranet. Silverlight is meant for the public web. Another difference is that Silverlight is cross platform (Windows, Mac, Linux in the future & Cross browser). WPF is meant for Windows only.
The .Net framework can be a huge download for some users. Silverlight is only 4-5MBs. This is a big difference to run your app on the web, but not a big issue if its an internal application at your company.
Silverlight is Sandboxed which is meant for web use. So if your app requires more permissions you will need WPF.
There are also some differences between Silverlight code and WPF. But from what I've heard, the ultimate goal is to get a Silverlight to run inside of WPF with minimal code changes. But they aren't there just yet.
I have just worked on a WPF project that in hindsight we feel we might have chosen SilverLight for. It is probably more important to know the differences and select the one that is most appropriate for what you're doing.
Here's my starter for ten on some of the important differences - there were originally some differences in the available controls, but that has largely been smoothed out now.
Silverlight
Runs entirely on the client with AJAX
calls to the server for data
Can run on any server, including Windows and Linux / Apache
Uses COMPACT .NET framework
WPF
Runs on the client... usually calls services for data
Runs on Windows XP / Vista with .NET 3.5
Utilises the entire .NET framework
Silverlight is basically a stripped down version of WPF in order to make the runtime libary download as small as possible.
As a result, WPF simply has a lot more functionality available in it and tasks that are simple in WPF often become not so simple in Silverlight.
If running as a web app is not a requirement then the decision is a no-brainer - WPF all the way.
Has anyone implemented a new application using WPF recently, and if so, what drove you to that decision: Well since WPF was desktop only (or browser based using XBAPS - but that was more a deployment system than a real system) that was a good reason to it.
"Would your decision have changed had you made it now, and if not, why?" - No Silverlight, even on the desktop in v3, is still highly sandboxed and so certain functions are going to be hard/impossible to do due to the sandbox. Also the ability to use DirectX parts in WPF will still give another optimisation area which Silverlight and it's 3d won't be able to use.
It's worth noting that Silverlight's 3D is not the full 3D support of WPF, but only projection of 2D into 3D - i.e. take the 2D plane and allow rotation in X, Y & Z directions. WPF has full 3D modelling with materials, view ports, lighting and camera positional support etc.
I'm well along in the development of our first WPF app for release. Silverlight 3 looks great, but for this application I would still have chosen WPF. The application centers around presenting and manipulating very large sets of images hosted on a central server on our clients' networks. Additionally, the software update/change rate will be minimal. Mass import of new images from a local drive, no Internet connectivity requirements, performance concerns, etc. make this a project well suited for WPF.
One of our upcoming projects, however, will require many remote users to access a single data store on our network. The data they work with requires significant validation and error handling, so running that code locally is ideal. They will need the ability to work both on and offline and remain in synch (probably with SQL Data Services). SLOOB (Silverlight Out Of the Browser) will most likely be our choice for that one so they can have all the Silverlight advantages but use it like a regularly installed application, even without an Internet connection.
Both formats have their place: the trick will be to avoid using Silverlight for everything - we have more tools than just 1 hammer. :-)
Another difference is that with SL you only have one 'window', you can't have dialogs (they can be simulated but their size is limited to the main window) and you can't add multi monitor support.
If you have to interact with existing business applications (e.g. open a document in the archive viewer) you need to use WPF.
I recently have built several internal tool using wpf, and I chose it simply because It was easier for me coming from win32 work. I don't really think that the differences are major, and really... everything i have seen/heard indicates that porting between wpf and silverlight is quite easy.
Storage: You only have 25MB of isolated storage out-of-browser. If I remember correctly from some mix09 video, this limit is lower if your app is in-browser.
http://bliny.net/blog/post/Out-of-Browser-with-Silverlight-3.aspx
No FlowDocument: So there are limitations there too.