I'm interested in making a desktop application which I would want to use as a Desktop Manager. This kind-of goes to Desktop Enhancement Category. My requirements are:
Application has to be visually rich, with panels sliding,fading,wiping,rotating and etc.
It should also support flash playback. (swf, flv)
Animations/Transitions should run smoothly.
Lower CPU Usage.
My question is which is a better option to build this application. Microsoft's "WPF" or Adobe Flex(running in Adobe Air to run on desktop). And also respond as why it is better.
Be suspicious of anyone who will give you an answer like "Definately use xyz" to this question. There are pros and cons to both sides.
First, I think you might be confusing what WPF and Air are... WPF is a presentation layer on top of the .Net framework, where Air is a framework by itself. Apples and Oranges. If you want an analog to what Air is for the .Net stack, you probably want to look at Silverlight Out-Of-Browser, which is a much closer comparison to Air.
What is the difference, then, between WPF and Sliverlight OOB? Again, WPF sits on top of a very large .Net framework where Sliverlight OOB is a very light framework (in comparison) like air. It is the difference between a 200 MB download/install and a 12 MB download/install.
So, that being said, I think you should also ask what platforms this needs to run on. Silverlight OOB runs on Mac and Windows where WPF only runs on Windows. Air runs on Mac, Windows and Linux.
The next thing that I see is that you need to do SWF and FLV playback. This will be easier to achieve with Air, since it is native. You CAN do this with Silverlight OOB but you will find yourself rigging something up where you host an HTML control and run the flash movie inside the HTML control. It is a bit more clunky, but it will work.
Other than that, Air and SLOOB are very similar in features. It then comes down to your team and the expertise, IMO. If they are already familiar with the WPF/Silverlight, then a SLOOB app is well suited with minimal ramp-up. If your designers are more familiar with the Adobe suite of tools, then it might be easier to build a shiny app using Air.
In all, the decision between Air and Silverlight/WPF really comes down to preference. That is, once you get past any particular techincal limitations like the flash playback or OS support.
Hope this helps,
Brian
Related
I am Really confused by reading some articles about Silverlight. Whether I should concentrate on WPF or Silverlight or Both?.
It's like asking Web or Desktop : Which one has upper hand?
Silverlight (Web) and WPF (Desktop) Both are similar. But both have their separate workplaces.
You cannot have a Windows Calculator, Task Manager or MS Word (please don't mention google docs) applications on web like they are on desktop. And same thing applies for web applications.
So, it depends on what platform you want to work on.
I dont think its difference between Web and Desktop. Silverlight is still pretty limited by platform it can run on and still requires some local runing process, even in the sandbox.
I think difference here is features vs availability. WPF can give you features of whole .NET framework, total acess to users's computer and some features that are not available in SL. SL on the other hand allows you to run your app on some different systems (Windows, Mac and there is limited support for Linux-based systems), distribution is much easier thanks to web deployment and whole application can be part of your web ecosystem.
Iam personaly for WPF, but thanks to this whole web and cloud-hype in the last years, SL is getting much more attention from side of MS and developers in general.
Reading these questions and their answers may give you some insight into this:
Definitive source(s) for the difference between Silverlight and WPF
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/1254937/wpf-vs-silverlight
What is the difference between WPF and Silverlight?
I totally agree with decyclone, it depends on which platform you want to work. If you have prior experience Asp.net/We applications Silverlight is the way whereas if you have worked in WinForms/Windows applications then WPF is the way to go.
But yes most of the concepts in both SL and WPF are similar; so once you have good understanding of those concepts, you work in either without much problem.
If we ignore the platform then WPF is having the upper hand as WPF is kind of superset of SL.
Have a look at this SO question too -
Learn Silverlight or WPF first?
Recently I've stumbled over surface. It's incredible and so easy to develop small applications with surface. Surface is build upon WPF, so surface uses XAML. My idea is now to develop applications with surface. I've searched for some information about this topic. There is nothing about that. My question is now, why nobody uses the surface SDK with WPF to build cool applications. Are there any disadvantages?
I don't really understand your question. But here are some answers to what you may be asking:
Why aren't there more surface applications out there?
Most likely because of the price and the availability. It costs $15,000 for a developer unit and you have to be a business to even get to order it.
Why isn't the surface SDK used to build normal desktop apps
Because it doesn't make sense. The surface SDK contains Surface specific, and multi touch specific additions to the plain WPF stack so it is only useful for surface applications running on a real surface device (or simulator, but that isn't feasible for deployment)
Now if you are building a multi touch application for windows 7, there is a surface toolkit which is based upon the surface SDK. It has most of the nice multi touch enhancements but lacks the hard dependency on the surface hardware. It is very useful for general purpose multi touch development on .NET and is as far as I can tell also used quite much for this purpose.
Do you mean building Windows applications in WPF using the Surface toolkit? There is no reason not to do this. There is a 'good, better, best' model when developing multitouch apps, and if you want to create a true multitouch friendly application, then the Surface toolkit is a good way to go.
I have created an application using the surface toolkit but for normal wpf application.
You have just to have a multitouc tactil monitor.
and every thing will be fine.
It works :)
I'm considering switching from MFC to WPF.
My first concern is that there are too many users who don't have .NET with WPF installed yet. Can anybody point to a source containing the WPF penetration numbers?
My second concern is speed.
Any other considerations?
I've been banging away at WPF for a while now. It is brilliant, but it still has (occasional) holes you've to plug yourself. However all indications are .NET 4.0 will be a significant step forward.
I would say start now. The WPF learning curve is REALLY steep, and it'll be a while before you'll be releasing software to users, believe me. Also do yourself a favour and get the WPF Unleashed book. It's superior.
Speed isn't a consideration. The power WPF gives is well worth any drawbacks with speed, which - coming from Windows Forms - I haven't noticed to be honest.
What kind of application are you developing? If it's a wide-distribution desktop app that you want your grandmother to install, your concern about .NET 3.0/3.5 adoption is valid. So far from what I've seen, performance is less of a concern.
WPF penetration
First of all, Windows Vista and Windows 7 both have WPF preinstalled, which accounts for 35% of the market automatically. Windows XP has had it as it had .NET Framework 3.0 as an option in Windows Update for over three years, and many applications ship with it, so it is likely to also be installed on a high percentage of Windows XP machines. StatOwl indicates that about 80% of NET Framework installations are version 3 or above.
If you're shipping on CD it is no big deal to include the latest .NET Framework on the CD and have it install automatically. If users are downloading your application, it can contact Microsoft's web server to download and install the latest .NET Framework. Online ClickOnce deployment also has this capability if you want people to be able to start their application directly from the web browser without installing it.
So the bottom line is, you probably don't need to worry about whether people will have WPF installed on their machines or not unless your target market consists primarily of dial up customers on Windows XP who don't run much third-party software (i.e., they just run Windows and your application).
Speed
Not an issue. I have a 200 MHz Pentium Pro with 384 MB RAM from 1998 that I test my software on, and my WPF applications have comparable performance with equivalent MFC applications. If your WPF application uses lots of fancy graphics and animation it will run slowly on ancient CPUs and graphics cards, but so would an ordinary MFC application with the same features.
Don't even bother trying to use WPF if you are sticking with Visual Studio 2008 for the next year or two. The experience will be way too painful. I'm talking about "my IDE crashed again" type of pain.
If you are going to use VS 2010 in the near future, then WPF is a blast. Download the beta, a couple of themes off CodePlex, are start playing. Once you get past the (freaking huge) learning curve I think you will find it to be quite enjoyable.
IMHO, you should wait for Visual Studio 2010 and WPF 4.0 to make the actual migration. They will close some very annoying gaps in the product.
Meanwhile, you can try it out. In terms of coding/readability -- it's going to be WAAAY better than with MFC =)
As for the performance and platform -- it shouldn't be a problem unless you have any very special circumstances (like if you can't require users to install .NET).
Also see this related question on switching to WPF from Windows Forms.
If you are thinking about a larger, modular, appliation I recommend checking out Prism. It's a bit of a beast itself, but you should be able to tackle it after coming to grips with C#, Dependency Properties and XAML. Plus, learning Prism gave me a much better understanding of WPF/Silverlight, at least from the development/binding side.
Mike Taulty posted an excellent 10 part video series on Prism. It's a great way to get your head around the platform.
I'd also recommend the pages linked to from the Getting Started page on codeplex. After all that, you're probably ready to tackle the Reference Implementation which comes with the download.
A previous answer of mine might also help clear up any remaining confusion around Controllers/Presenters in the framework that you might have (I did).
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.
I'm starting a hobby project in which I would like to have a graphical, touchscreen interface for interacting with a kiosk-like device running on top of Windows XP Embedded. For development of a rich UI experience, I was considering using WPF. However, a number of demonstration videos that I have come across have used Silverlight, while I haven't seen a single WPF demonstration.
It was my understanding that Silverlight was targeted towards website developers, while WPF was more targeted towards desktop development.
So this question has two parts. Firstly, what is the recommended graphical subsystem for development of a rich UI experience on a kiosk-like device hosted on the Windows XP embedded platform? Secondly, if it is Silverlight, which version is suggested (1.0 or 2.0) and why?
It seems that WPF works fine on embedded. See here the second comment.
I think that your choice should be dependent on the type of kyosk you want to build. Some kyosks are just an open browser page. And then you have stuff like Microsoft Surface that can be used like an horizontal kyosk :-)
I would recommend also WPF, have done few kiosk apps using it.
also I would recommend http://fpscomponents.com/Product.aspx?id=8 as a virtual touch screen keyboard software component. it's done in WPF and very flexible and customizable.
User can define custom theme(skin), layout and language of keyboard. guys are working with customers and hear theirs voice so any suggestions might be accepted.