This guy Kevin is really smart.. good video..thanks guys from Idaho!!
love u Kevin :-.
I still think that Microsoft are trying to force the UWP on everyone without fully addressing everything. There are a use cases that appear on desktop systems that are unique to desktop systems, and the UWP still doesn't adequately deal with these.
Little examples of this are how I often set up Visual Studio. The little tool windows, such as Solution Explorer, are often unpinned and then placed on a second monitor. While devices are often restricted in display size, you often find that desktop systems have more screen real estate. I know someone who does design with both Adobe Photoshop and Illustrator, and they lay out the windows in a similar way too. It uses more of the available space to maximise the work area but also keeping the tool windows available.
You can see the difference in the UI for Edge compared with the UI for IE. The download manager for IE can be in its own separate window, which keeps it alive so that it can download without the main window being open. There are also issues with the Edge settings exposing less, but also feeling cramped, stuffed into a corner. I really think the Edge team has done a wonderful job with the browser though.
But there are some things that are expected of desktops, but the UWP tries to unify too much and deteriorates the experience on desktops. This was one of the biggest complaints of the Modern UI for Windows 8/8.1 and I still think that it holds true. So before Microsoft can really tempt people away from "User and GDI" (which I still feel as if some people are assuming too much, since I have had the luxury of not needing to target XP for quite some time, so I have been really suggesting Direct2D), I really think Microsoft need to address the whole trying to treat a desktop in the exact same way as a mobile device problem.
Obligatory still no decent C++ related tooling or documentation for the native interfaces. No, the terrible C++/CX extension cannot be justified by "it is a Windows only target, so standards compliance shouldn't apply" either. I know this is another reason that has kept me away from modern apps, and I really think that it has had more of an effect than Microsoft thinks. While I know that Microsoft has hired Kenny Kerr for his native C++ library, I really think that this should have been available from the start AND the native runtime APIs should be fully documented. It really felt that this was just an attempt into strong arming people into doing what Microsoft wants. Of course, this is amusing since it happened right after the C++ renaissance.
Anyway, I apologise about this turning out to be a bit of a rant. But these are major issues that I feel exist and it is tough to get people to listen. Also to potential flamers, I really did try to make this into constructive criticism. I didn't write this because I am a Windows hater, I really like the fact that Microsoft have been trying to modernise the platform. I just really dislike some of the things they are doing.
@Darran: Fortunately they aren't trying to force UWP on anyone. All of your desktop development tools continue to run, and will continue to work for quite some time. There's nothing to panic or rant about here.
@kettch: Thanks for the reply, but I think you misunderstood my point.
Anyone who knows Microsoft's support policy should understand that they are committed to supporting legacy software. There are still functions from Windows 3.x still in Windows today due to this.
But the point I was making is Microsoft are really pushing people towards modern apps, but there are major issues still remaining, meaning moving to the UWP is difficult especially for applications with more complex UIs.