Full-Time WPF Development - wpf

I am fortunate to be working for a company in which all of our new development efforts are all in WPF. Are there a lot of other developers out there in this situation? Are companies quickly adopting this as their primary UI platform? As developers we all see the value in it, but are companies buying into it?

I am doing WPF development at a major semi-conductor company. So far it has been a hit and miss experience. I was given pretty free reign to decide what development platform I used as long as we could support Windows Vista and later. Given that I had a pretty short development timeline for a rather large application and just two GUI developers to work on it, WPF seemed the right choice. HOwever as I got further along, some more warts of WPF manifested themselves... JUst look into "airspace" issues when integrating DirectX with .NET 3.0 implementation of WPF. Or look at the sorry state of the designer tools in Visual studio 2008. Still with these problems, they are relatively minor when compared to the development cost of creating a fully skinnable UI that supports RTL languages and animation. At one point someone (who worked at Microsoft no less) suggested that I look at SDL as an alternative to WPF. Yeah right.
Another problem that I have is that designers are still not doing uptake on the whole WPF/Blend tools. Most designers I know scoff at running anything other than Adobe tools on a Mac. It is up to us developers to translate their designs into workable code. I hate those turtlenecked d***ks.
Anyway, my company leaves the technology decisions to the people that are using it. So WPF was a natural choice given my requirements. I don't regret it but I wish it had been a bit more mature before they released it with Vista. There are some critical fixes that were put in .NET 3.5 that I need. HOwever, I don't want to force my users to download .NET 3.5 when .NET 3.0 is on their Vista system.

I think the major problem for the companies to adapt this new technology are
learning curve on XAML and new UI concepts
Developers have to forget all the knowledge they got on Winforms(or equivalent UI) technologies, most people are reluctant to give up their expertise.
The need for the new skill called "UX Integrators" who should be able to work with the new RIA tool called Expression Blend to style/integrate the design with the code.
The need for new Framework requirement(.NET3.5) and the new set of tools make companies or clients think twice before they take this route. They usually think that this may be a 'risky' path.
My company is concentrating mainly on the Microsoft RIA technologies like WPF and Silverlight. And we are helping other companies to bootstrap their WPF development efforts by creating Proof of concept/Prototype applications to show the power/easiness of WPF.

Our company is also doing most new development in WPF. It is working fairly well for us. However, it took 2-3 months for the organization to overcome the learning curve and to begin the "WPF Way of Thinking."
Similar to Louis' point, I think one of the reasons it is slow to take hold of the industry is that designers are hesitant to learn the Expression suite. Once there are an adequate number of Expression designers out there, I think companies will see more immediate benefit of using WPF.
One of the key benefits to WPF is the vector graphics. Because we develop apps that could be used on small laptops and rugged PCs, the ability of the UI to scale to different sizes of monitors is very beneficial.

Related

Is there a path of least resistance that a newcomer to graphics-technology-adoption can take at this point in the .NET graphics world?

For the past 5 months or so, I've spent time learning C# using Andrew Troelsen's book and getting familiar with stuff in the .NET 4 stack... bits of ADO.NET, EF4 and a pinch of WCF to taste.
I'm really interested in graphics development (not for games though), which is why I chose to go the .NET route when I decided choose from either Java or .NET to learn... since I heard about WPF and saw some sexy screenshots and all. I'm even almost done with the 4 WPF chapters in Troelsen's book.
Now, all of a sudden I saw some post on a forum about how "WPF was dead" in the face of something called Silverlight. I searched more and saw all the confusion going on at present... even stuff like "Silverlight is dead too!" wrt HTML5.
From what I gather, we are in a delicate period of time that will eventually decide which technology will stabilize, right?
Even so, as someone new moving into UI & graphics development via .NET, I wish I could get some guidance from people more experienced people. Maybe I'm reading too much? Maybe I have missed some pieces of information? Maybe a path exists that minimizes tears of blood?
In any case, here is a sample vomiting of my thoughts on which I'd appreciate some clarification or assurance or spanking:
My present interest lies in desktop development. But on graduating from college, I wish to market myself as a .NET developer. The industry seems to be drooling for web stuff. Can Silverlight do both equally well? (I see on searches that SL works "out of browser").
I have two fair-sized hobby projects planned that will have hawt UIs with lots of drag n drop, sliding animations etc. These are intended to be desktop apps that will use reflection, database stuff using EF4, networking over LAN, reading-writing of files... does this affect which graphics technology can be used?
At some later point, if I become interested in doing a bit of 3D stuff in .NET, will that affect which technologies can be used?
Or what if I look up to the heavens, stick out my middle finger, and do something crazy like go learn HTML5 even though my knowledge of it can be encapsulated in 2 sentences?
Sorry I seem confused so much, I just want to know if there's a path of least resistance that a newcomer to graphics-technology-adoption can take at this point in the graphics world.
I understand your confusion (having been there myself), but first let me start by saying Silverlight and WPF are not dead yet! And you would not be wasting your time in learning either!
There are quite a few (terrifying) posts to the contrary, but if you keep searching you'll also find those that support WPF/Silverlights extended life in development, one for example is http://www.wpfblogger.com/post/Silverlight-is-not-dead-clarifies-Bob-Muglia.aspx (this is a nice summary of what Bob Muglia said - there's a link to his full statement). Another assurance is that Microsoft has invested quite a bit in WPF themselves in designing VS2010 in it, so its not likely that they're about to give it the boot.
As for your hobbies and projects, if you intend on sticking to desktop clients I recommend WPF of which Silverlight is a subset, so you'll find that the transition isn't anything major on the face of it (there's a few more controls and such in WPF that aren't in silverlight and gives more flexibility for desky stuff [here's an article you can read if interested - http://briannoyes.net/2010/06/01/WPFNdashIrsquomNotDeadYet.aspx ]), this should be able to handle most of your stuff including playing with 3D objects (to create them I'd use something like Blender 3D, its free but the learning curve for a first timer is kinda steep).
Lastly, it probably wouldn't be a bad thing to learn HTML5, but booting out Silverlight to do it probably isn't the way you want to go. There's bound to be ways in which Silverlight will enrich the browsing experience even with pages using HTML5 in the future, so don't kick it all out yet :)
My present interest lies in desktop development. But on graduating from college, I wish to market myself as a .NET developer. The industry seems to be drooling for web stuff. Can Silverlight do both equally well? (I see on searches that SL works "out of browser").
The industry likes the web because deployment is easy and you usually don't have to support users running different versions of your application. Still, are reasons to choose WPF over SL (performance, things not yet implemented in SL). I'd say stick with learning XAML + C#. You'll be able to leverage it for WPF, Silverlight, and Windows Phone programming.
I have two fair-sized hobby projects planned that will have hawt UIs with lots of drag n drop, sliding animations etc. These are intended to be desktop apps that will use reflection, database stuff using EF4, networking over LAN, reading-writing of files... does this affect which graphics technology can be used?
Either way, database access should be done through services (not directly from a WPF app). There will be differences, but they should be mostly similar.
At some laaaater point, if I become interested in doing a bit of 3D stuff in .NET, will that affect which technologies can be used?
Silverlight 5 will have 3D support. Beta should be announced by this year's MIX conference and released by the end of the year. In the meantime, you can check out the WPF 3D API.
Or what if I look up to the heavens, stick out my middle finger, and do something crazy like go learn HTML5 even though my knowledge of it can be encapsulated in 2 sentences?
While SL is nothing like web programming, I think there is an expectation in the market that SL programmers should have a little ASP.NET (Web Forms or MVC) experience too. (Because, hey, you should know how to work with the environment its hosted in.) I think HTML5 is still a ways off since HTML5 applications will require users to have the latest browsers which are just coming out. Still, couldn't hurt to know it :-)
Fear not, WPF and Silverlight is going to be strong in Line of Business applications, there are some serious security features added even in SL5 and it ties in nicely with all the existing Microsoft infrastructure most corporations have.
It's a similar thing to all the bloggers crying the end of Flash after seeing some planned HTML5 features (and yet not even the codec for the video tag is settled), but upgradeable runtimes to support any browser (IE6 corporate market share is still sky high...) and the really nice Microsoft developer stack (VS + Blend) makes these technologies more resilient than people only using cutting edge technology would think.
Having used Flash for years before Silverlight I can tell you that developing custom UI with SL is a really pleasant experience, so if you're less into multimedia and games (which are areas where Flash still has edge), this is the place to be for you.
And there's Windows Phone 7, with the Nokia strategic partnership I doubt no one would want to get anything developed.
These being said, if you have the chance don't be afraid to venture off to learn some completely different programming languages, for me personally learning Ruby on Rails changed the way I look at backend development, and some of these eye opener ways of doing things more efficiently transfer nicely between environments.
WPF and Silverlight are definitely alive and well. Also, don't let people fool you into thinking it has a "steep learning curve" (which is a common myth.) WPF isn't a walk in the park, granted, but it is also not the hardest thing to learn.
I recommend the book "WPF 4 Unleashed" by Adam Nathan.
http://www.amazon.com/WPF-4-Unleashed-Adam-Nathan/dp/0672331195
It will teach you everything you need to get started with WPF (and Siverlight, which is WPF-based.)
Yes, silverlight can do desktop and web environment equally well, and is your best bet right now. As for 3D designs, you might want to learn XNA. Its quite easy to use.

From Winforms to WPF time?

We are a team of .net winform and asp.net developers building custom enterprise applications for organisations mainly in the public sector. Is it time to retrain/retool the team in WPF/Silverlight? How to make management, in first place and clients second buy the idea?
Clients shouldn't care, necessarily. You'll convince clients by showing them how you can be more productive and succeed in their goals, not by explaining tech. to them.
Management, on the other hand, is trickier. You need to convince them of the arguments for using WPF or Silverlight vs. Windows Forms. This can include:
Easier maintainability, especially when designed properly
More flexibility
More options to gain a competitive edge, via using new techniques such as better graphics/etc
Better support/lifecycle, since the newer technologies are actively developed and improved by Microsoft
Better deployment options (particularly with Silverlight), allowing for more flexible deployment strategies
Personally, I think that with VS 2010, WPF is finally mature enough to be the only option. Previously it was held back by performance issues, poor text rendering and a lack of out-of-the-box controls.
Here's what Rocky has to say, and I completely agree with him:
Silverlight and WPF both compete with
Windows Forms. Poor Windows Forms is
getting no love, no meaningful
enhancements or new features. It is
just there. At the same time,
Silverlight gets a new release in less
than 12 month cycles, and WPF gets all
sorts of amazingly cool new features
for Windows 7. You tell me whether
Windows Forms is legacy. But whatever
you decide, I’m surely spending zero
cycles of my time on it
http://www.lhotka.net/weblog/ItIsOnly8HowCanItBeLegacy.aspx
Before you go down that path, have a careful read of the Silverlight 4 news that is coming out of PDC. You will end up doing a mix of both Silverlight and WPF, it is unlikely that you will end up doing only one, and they are sufficiently alike that skills from one can be used in the other. However you don't want to be wasting money and time on Silverlight training that is out of date, as Silverlight 4 will be no more than 6 or 9 months away from being released (possibly sooner). Therefore you may want to do the WPF training first.
To add to what #Reed said:
faster development cycle (once the developers are familiar with the technology)
very easy to do automated testing, including automated UI testing
Is it possible for you to step towards WPF by embedding a WPF app into one of your existing WinForm applications?
It can be a lot harder to sell a complete retooling without an example of some of the benefits (in particular, maintainability and flexibility, especially in the UI). Try starting with a well used portion of your current application and giving a demo with it in WPF.

Is WPF the future of user interface design? Should I learn it now?

There has been a lot of talk surrounding the likes of WPF. I am wondering if WPF will become a new standard for graphical interactive user interface design. Is this where we are headed in terms of windows interfaces? Will it really take off like everyone says it will?
See also
Learning Windows Forms vs. Windows Presentation Foundation
(Contains links to many other useful posts on WPF).
I think there are plenty of applications still done in Win32, MFC and of course, WinForms. I think it would be a wise choice to add WPF to your tool belt. Should you drop everything and learn it today? That's up to you. I am seeing more demand for WPF. It's not overwhelming, but neither was C#/WinForms in 2001.
So the long winded answer is that you just have to take the chance. No one knows if WPF apps will dominate the market. I'm leaning towards the possibility and I'm also thinking Silverlight may be a real player in web apps moving forward. Since there are transferrable skills between the two, I'm hedging my bet a little bit by continuing to learn WPF.
Please see also Is it better to use WPF over WinForms
Sorry it's not a concrete answer.
You're asking us to predict the future :)
I think a better way to approach this is to look at the other technology you could learn if you didn't learn WPF. I would weigh the various tradeoffs and pick the one that was more valuable to me.
For instance if the choice was WinForms or WPF I would certainly go with WPF. WPF has a steeper learning curve than WinForms. However once you get past that learning curvie it is so much easier to work with. WPF can do in a few lines what took several hundred lines of a custom control in WinForms.
WPF is an ultimate graphic platform for Windows. Win32's GDI was a "first try", WPF is a "permanent structure". For the combination of Windows and flat displays (f.e. 3d displays might require something else), it will never be replaced. So learn it, it is a good commodity.
There is hell lot to learn in WPF. You need to die and reborn as a GUI programmer.
But is it worth the effort. Why?, Here is my answer.
Since you are asking this question, I assume you are Microsoft technologies based programmer.
As the direction of MS is towards WPF for GUI development, I see no choice. Win Forms will last long for probably 2 years more. Since the cool look and feel of WPF make users to ask for more and more WPF applications than Win Forms. As you know for many users GUI is the S/W :)
Now if you are non MS based programmer, probably from Java, I say WPF has lot of similarities with Java Swing. But it is a very-very big super set of Swing.
To have Swing catchup with WPF might take at least 2/3 years and by that time WPF might be ruling the word and I don't expect Swing to be much easier than this, if not difficult.
As silverlight is kind of platform independent and as it's model is similar to WPF, I predict WPF is going to rule at least for next 6/7 years if not a decade.
I believe and hope MS would make things much more easier for the programmers so that learning curve would be shortened or delegated to GUI artiists (using expression blend).
Hope I answered your question.
Microsoft has a habit of throwing everything in the wall and seeing what sticks... The Pocket PC platform, J#, and so on. With regards to WPF, it is too early to tell if adoption will increase in the future.
If you have programmed .NET Winforms and/or Webforms, the learning curve is not that steep. I would suggest dabble with it but don't throw all the eggs in the proverbial WPF (or even Silverlight) basket. As the others have noted, better to treat it as just another tool in your arsenal.
WPF has been around for a few years now and Microsoft's decision to rewrite Visual Studio (2010) in WPF is a good sign that it is here to stay. Remember, this is one of the most popular IDEs on the market and a sign of intent from the guys at Microsoft.
My organization adopted the technology last year and while it has a steep learning curve - you really have to learn to think in different terms - it has paid dividends in the richness of applications we are able to develop. I love winforms and am a big fan of asp.net but what blows me away about WPF is that you are provided with the building blocks and the possibilities are endlesss...
If I were you I would learn WPF for the experience and reap the rewards later. Don't forget - you'll also be learning the core of Silverlight if you adopt WPF - these are two technologies that in my humble opinion are going nowhere!
Using WPF is way better then WinForms and you need to have different mindset.
All I can say is Microsoft should have used HTML syntax when creating WPF and Silverlight applications so that front end coulde reused or at least for silverlight apps so that people that develope on Desktop could reuse the same code when writing browser apps that could be used anywhere.
If HTML5 becomes better I'm sure it will become popular as trend is toward open source (cheap technologies). No doubt WPF is far better for developing desktop apps then anything else I've used and c# is more powerfull as language (not speed) and how it's used.
Yes start learning it. It's applicable to Silverlight (though not a 1 to 1 mapping), it's also a very similar model to Abobe Flex's paradigm of MXML So you'll be getting 3 wins for the price of 1.
We're starting to see work come in that calls for it, so there's definitely a good reason to have it on the old utility belt.
I am begining to learn it Matthew MacDonald has writen a super book about it. I recommend that book to everyone (Infact I was surfing internet to learn WPF till I came across with his book and one more thing "stay away from Microsoft site (MSDN)"
Yes, if you will be designing desktop applications on the Windows platform, WPF is the emerging standard. WPF replaces the Win32 API that has dominated the Windows desktop until now, and Microsoft expects a similar lifetime for the WPF platform.
Besides, it's way cooler.
And then there is Silverlight, of course.

Learn Silverlight or WPF first?

It seems that Silverlight/WPF are the long term future for user interface development with .NET. This is great because as I can see the advantage of reusing XAML skills on both the client and web development sides. But looking at WPF/XAML/Silverlight they seem very large technologies and so where is the best place to get start?
I would like to hear from anyone who has good knowledge of both and can recommend which is a better starting point and why.
Should you learn ASP.NET or Winforms first? ASP or MFC? HTML or VB? C# or VB?
Set aside the idea that there is a logical progression through what has become a highly complex interwoven set of technologies, and take a step back and ask yourself a series of questions:
What are your goals; how do you want to balance profit against enjoyment
Are you short term oriented or in for the long haul
Are you the type of person who likes to get good at something and do it a lot or do you get bored once you fully understand it?
The next and hardest step is to come to accept that any advice you are given is bound to be wrong; and the longer the time horizon the more likely it is to be incorrect. If the advice is for more than six to 12 months, the probability the advice is wildly incorrect approaches 1.
I can only tell you my story, quickly. In 2000 I was happy as a consultant working profitably in C++ on Windows applications, writing about ASP.NET and WinForms. then I saw C# and the world turned upside down. I never went back.
Two years ago I had the same kind of revelation, only an order of magnitude bigger, stronger and with more conviction about Silverlight. Yes, WPF is magnificent, and it may be that I'm all wet about this, but I believe in my gut that Silverlight changes everything. There was no doubt then and there is no doubt today that Silverlight is the most important development platform for Microsoft since .NET (certainly) and possibly since the switch to C++.
In a nutshell, here is why. I don't understand where its limitations are. With most platforms I do: you can do this, but you can't do that. WPF is a pretty good case in point, as was ASP.Net and WinForms and, well really everything until now.
With Silverlight, I don't see the boundaries yet. Silverlight has already leaped off the desktop onto phones, and I don't see any reason for it to stop there. Yes, it is true, it is bound by the browser, but I see that less as a jail cell than as a tank in which Silverlight will be riding over lots of terrain (it must be very late, I should go to bed).
In any case, for now, learning Silverlight is a gas, there is a lot of material on the Silverlight.net site, and what is the very best thing about learning Silverlight is that if you don't see what you need you can holler at me and I'll make sure you get it pretty quickly.
Enjoy, good luck and the dirty little secret is you'll be fine whichever you choose. It's all just software.
-jesse
Jesse Liberty
"Silverlight Geek"
I'd say go with Silverlight first!
I have programmed with WPF and Silverlight before.
But as Silverlight is a subset of WPF if you go in too deep and try to switch to writing Silverlight applications, you'll be scratching your heads looking for that "tag" you learned to love in WPF but is not available in Silverlight.
When you master the basic things in Silverlight first, the extra mechanism/trigger/whatever features in WPF will simply add to most of what you've already known.
Silverlight in WPF differs at the features level, not just some missing controls or animations. Take the WPF triggers mechanism for example, is not available fully in Silverlight.
So learning the smaller subset first, you can extend that knowledge to the full set later, but if you started at the full set and gets addicted to some of the niceties available, you'll have trouble down the line when someone asks you to port your designed-utilizing-WPF apps to Silverlight.
I'll go against the grain and say learn WPF first.
Here's my reasoning:
Much more resources are available for WPF than Silverlight, such as books, blogs, and msdn documentation
WPF Books
You're not dealing with a Beta, moving target
You don't have to deal with working with only asynchronous calls
Not limited by lack of features such as Merged Dictionaries, Triggers, TileBrushes, etc.
You don't have to worry about re-learning to do things correctly because of lacks of features in SL
Silverlight is a stripped down version of WPF so it should have fewer things to learn inside. On the other hand, the two platforms have different targets (web & rich client) so I guess it depends on what app you're going to build.
If you just want to learn for yourself (no app in the close future) I'd pick Silverlight because it would be less to assimilate. Still, Silverlight is pretty much a moving target, much more than WPF, so you'll have to keep up with some changes from time to time (the joys of being an early adopter :)).
WPF has lots more stuff that you will probably want to use at some point but I would wait for the needs to arise first.
Every industry expert I've heard on podcasts, blogs and interviews recommend learning Silverlight first and then gradually moving to WPF which is a huge UI framework.
Silverlight is light and allows you to work on smaller subset of controls and features such that you get your head around this new UI building paradigm based on,
Templating
DataBinding
Styles
Update: 07/2011
I hate to mention this, but in recent times Microsoft has put more focus on HTML5, Javascript and CSS by bringing forward powers of IE 9 and IE 10, as well as the upcoming Windows 8.
More and more developers and CTOs are skeptical about Silverlight as a LOB application platform as the time passes by, we are suspecting Silverlight will be limited to Windows Phone and niche, domain areas like healthcare of graphics related applications rather than a regular LOB app.
As it seems right now, as of summer 2011, the future might look fragmented with more opportunities for pure web technologies (HTML5, JS and CSS) as opposed to a plugin and OS-specific UI technology.
I would start by learning XAML, by reading a few tutorials and playing around with XAMLPad. This will give you a feel for the basics before actually building an app.
I would start with WPF and doing very simple control familiarizaton samples. You goal should be to learn XAML and Binding. So if you just create some basic WPF window apps will bootstrap your learning speed. Then eventually you can move to silverlight. Yeah as other mentioned here Silverlight is a subset of WPF.
Well, it depends on what you are going to be working on. If you are working on client/server, then I would go with WPF. If you are working in an environment where you can guarantee that .Net is installed on all of the machines, then I would go with WPF as well, because you can use what is called an XBAP, which is a WPF application that is run through the browser.
It's really up to you. However, I would state that silverlight is not RTM yet, and WPF is. WPF has a lot of books out on the subject, where silverlight does not. It may be easier to get the whole Zen of WPF by reading a few of those books, and then dive into which ever one you would like to play with.
Just keep in mind that silverlight has a subset of the controls of WPF, a paired down .Net framework, and does not do synchronous calls. As long as you know that up front, you can start learned the core of the whole foundation and tailor your practical experience later on to whichever technology is best for you.
Some tips at Getting started with Silverlight Development

How popular is WPF as a technology? [closed]

Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 9 years ago.
Improve this question
I had a discussion with some colleagues mentioning that there are not too many projects that we do which make use of WPF for creating UI for a windows application (we almost always use Windows Forms instead).
Are your experiences the same - i.e. there is not too much adoption of this technology?
Why do you think that is? And will we have a time when we see much more of WPF?
Have a look at this survey it was done by a Windows Forms Contol Vendor in Australia.
Personally I have worked on two commercial projects in the last year that were using WPF to varying degrees.
The adoption of WPF is on the rise. Microsoft I believe is putting all their eggs into the WPF basket.
WPF Rocks in terms of what the technology can do. It's simply the best UI building technology on the planet (my opinion). But, but there is a huge initial and long term investment in learning and getting your head around it. Also from tooling perspective it has barriers like unusable Cider designer, you've to get blend to do styling etc.
I am sure it will become popular, but would take time. But right now it's not so popular.
Check this thread on WPF
Check this conversation on msdn forums about WPF for LOB apps
Absolutely - the adoption is tiny. There was lots of hype but it does not seem to have materialized.
I used WPF for one project and I can certainly say it left a very unfinished taste in my mouth. It was far too difficult to acheive simple things and the whole thing had very many rough edges - the reasons behind them certainly existed but were not obvious or even visible at all. The Visual Studio designer completely bugged out for most of my pages and I never did figure out why...
All in all, I'd say WPF is barely beta-quality from a developer friendliness standpoint.
WPF has a steep learning curve, and the development tools for it (expression studio/web) are expensive, so, I'm not surprised that the industry has not jumped on it. However, in terms of Windows programming, it is much more robust and powerful than Windows Forms, so I would like to see its popularity grow over the next few years as Microsoft makes improvements to WPF, WCF, and .NET in general. If MS would decrease the price of its Expression products, I would expect to see the framework's popularity grow much faster.
Another troubling thing about WPF is the total lack of good online tutorials for the framework. I'm trying to learn WPF at home, and I have found it to be a pain in the neck. I had to fork over a ton of cash for the development tools, and then I had to pay more money for a good book because there just isn't enough online to really get me into the framework and its languages. I can learn quite a bit about Java for free just by visiting the Sun website, but for WPF, I have to get a book. There is also a terrible lack of reference materials, in my experience, for WPF. To me, it reminded me of programming in VB6. Unless these things are remedied, I wouldn't expect to see any rapid growth in the framework. I do believe the main driving force behind the industry's adoption of the WPF and WCF technologies is MS support.
Though WPF was introduced few years ago it was too raw to use it in the real world apps. Major problem that stops WPF from wide adoption is a lack of RAD tools and out-of-box components. Currently we have Blend, more or less working Cider, but usable versions of these tools came not so long ago. Another reason is a completely different architecture which leads to longer development time as compared with WinForms due to prolonged learning\adoption period for developers.
I think we will see rising of WPF in the next few years.
People usually jump the technology bandwagon when there is a a real productivity to gain. Something to compensate for all the productivity loss that normally occurs when you adopt a new platform. WPF is just not there yet. It still takes more effort and more time to build a WPF app than a Forms app, and by a long shot.
Combine this with less documentation on the net about WPF than Windows Forms, less people with WPF experience, less blogs on WPF, less books on WPF, less tips/tricks,etc.
And don't get me started on XAML. Is it XML? is it a script? is it a code? Why did they decide that a hyperlink is just a label property? A lot of things still need to be ironed out there.
I cannot afford to build my next project in WPF, it will cost me a lot more to do it (in manpower and time), with nothing to show for in return. At the moment all we do in WPF is pure-research-inhouse-hobby projects.
I'm currently working on a WPF project - my first one. The learning curve has been incredibly steep, but in the end I think WPF is a great technology. The potential is fantastic, especially for advancing the state of data visualisation. I really like the data binding features, and the potential of styling. But it really does take a while to get your head around this.
I think that Silverlight adoption will eventually drive WPF adoption back on the desktop - or maybe there won't be a desktop as much of what can be accomplished with Silverlight will replace many previously desktop applications.
I am playing around with WPF and I must say I am not impressed. I seek a technology which will help me be productive in creating business applications. I remember building my first classic ASP website and being disgusted at the spaghetti code required to build a simple app. Viewing a single page I found HTML and java script mixed with vbscript with include files and calls to com objects--in short, a bloody illogical mess. In my view, it is important to have a simple and VISUAL development model with standards. I built many VB6 and .Net windows apps and they have a simple metaphor for development, making them easy to debug and modify by developers who did not write the original app. Forms encapsulate presentation logic, modules and classes in referenced assemblies encapsulate business logic and data logic. ADO.Net and other tools make data access robust, scalable, dynamic and customizable. Resizing windows controls and graphics to suit monitor resolution or client preference is easily done with Win Forms.
It may be that WPF has many advanced features in graphics, but for most business apps, form should follow function--in other words, I am not putting goofy animated graphics on my banking windows app.
One of the reasons I have not liked web development is because of the wide variety of ever-changing and complex technologies required for relatively simple applications which don't deliver enough significant change in actual functional results.
Oh well, that's my two cents.
' )
We deployed a pretty major WPF application for a large investment bank I worked for. It turned out extremely successful, involving 3d visualization of OLAP data that allowed quicker trend analysis. It's being used extensively.

Resources