Coffeehouse Thread

138 posts

Do you find WPF to be unnatural / unlogical?

Back to Forum: Coffeehouse
  • User profile image
    turrican

    Check out this : http://channel9.msdn.com/forums/TechOff/416378-WPF--anchor-doesnt-work/

    It starting to feel a lot "Linux" doing WPF. I have to guess stuff. How could I know to set Width to "Auto"? Nothing in the gUI. It doesn't even make sense, I mean, I already set the HAlign to stretch! Why do I have to even do this? WHAT IS WRONG WITH THE GOOD OLD ANCHOR PROPERTY? WHY THE CHANGE?

    ...omfg, WPF sucks big time so far. Totally unnatural/unlogical compared to what "we are used to" from winforms.

    Do you feel the pain as well?

  • User profile image
    stevo_

    Nope, and it seems to me you haven't grasped some of the concepts and reasons why some things changed..

    Personally for me, I think WPF is highly uncelebrated, along with WCF and I guess WF (which I haven't tried), concepts in WPF are extremely well thought out its really exciting for me to work with these technologies coming off the back of web applications.

  • User profile image
    turrican

    stevo_ said:
    Nope, and it seems to me you haven't grasped some of the concepts and reasons why some things changed..

    Personally for me, I think WPF is highly uncelebrated, along with WCF and I guess WF (which I haven't tried), concepts in WPF are extremely well thought out its really exciting for me to work with these technologies coming off the back of web applications.
    hm... ok.

    : |

  • User profile image
    stevo_

    turrican said:
    stevo_ said:
    *snip*
    hm... ok.

    : |
    Sorry if that sounded harsh.. but I really think WPF is a modern application ui framework done right (right not being 100% perfect before anyone jumps on that)..

    One of the biggest things a ui framework does is handling layouts, x and y are just one way of layout.. but how many ui frameworks I've seen where x and y are properties of the children.. their properties in regards to the children.. but the properties are important only to the parent..

    Attached properties are a great concept, because they represent that exact thing.. properties that are in regards to the child, but not actually part of the child.. but instead - its parent.

    Sure, .net as pure code isn't capable enough to automatically route this nicely, but the syntax for it isn't THAT bad, and xaml IS capable of routing these to look like properties of the child.

    This is just one focus, but theres lots of things that have been done right (in my eyes anyway)..

  • User profile image
    turrican

    stevo_ said:
    turrican said:
    *snip*
    Sorry if that sounded harsh.. but I really think WPF is a modern application ui framework done right (right not being 100% perfect before anyone jumps on that)..

    One of the biggest things a ui framework does is handling layouts, x and y are just one way of layout.. but how many ui frameworks I've seen where x and y are properties of the children.. their properties in regards to the children.. but the properties are important only to the parent..

    Attached properties are a great concept, because they represent that exact thing.. properties that are in regards to the child, but not actually part of the child.. but instead - its parent.

    Sure, .net as pure code isn't capable enough to automatically route this nicely, but the syntax for it isn't THAT bad, and xaml IS capable of routing these to look like properties of the child.

    This is just one focus, but theres lots of things that have been done right (in my eyes anyway)..
    Thanks. I'm actually starting to get this thing a little better. I think the bigger problem is bad RAD tools right now as I'm doing this in Visual C# Express so it's very limited and I have to write a lot of code manually and search the Internet a lot. However, this might not be a bad thing after all on second thought.

  • User profile image
    Sven Groot

    The dark side of the force is a gateway to many abilities, some of which are considered to be... unnatural.

    (sorry)

  • User profile image
    brian.​shapiro

    turrican said:
    stevo_ said:
    *snip*
    Thanks. I'm actually starting to get this thing a little better. I think the bigger problem is bad RAD tools right now as I'm doing this in Visual C# Express so it's very limited and I have to write a lot of code manually and search the Internet a lot. However, this might not be a bad thing after all on second thought.
    turrican,

    I think you'll find its really easy to do really complex things in WPF. You just have to understand a few concepts and then everything fits into place.

  • User profile image
    figuerres

    turrican said:
    stevo_ said:
    *snip*
    Thanks. I'm actually starting to get this thing a little better. I think the bigger problem is bad RAD tools right now as I'm doing this in Visual C# Express so it's very limited and I have to write a lot of code manually and search the Internet a lot. However, this might not be a bad thing after all on second thought.
    root problem: 

    WInForms model is not the same as WPF

    WPF has a "layout" model but winforms does not have that, only the winforms design tool creates a "layout" for Winforms.

  • User profile image
    turrican

    Thanks everyone for the answers. Today I got up fresch out of the bed and doing WPF 10-12 hours the day before, things started to settle into my mind I think. I think I will keep learnin this WPF thing. I kind'a actually like it this morning. Although I still wish we had better designing tool in Express editions.

    I'll go to Amazon and get a WPF book and see what comes out of it. Smiley

  • User profile image
    alexmac

    turrican said:
    Thanks everyone for the answers. Today I got up fresch out of the bed and doing WPF 10-12 hours the day before, things started to settle into my mind I think. I think I will keep learnin this WPF thing. I kind'a actually like it this morning. Although I still wish we had better designing tool in Express editions.

    I'll go to Amazon and get a WPF book and see what comes out of it. Smiley
    It is damn frustrating to use at the moment. I dont understand it yet either and the documentation & product is some what fluid which doesnt help but hey its new. Some items like the layout stuff are pretty clever once you get used to it - not that I have yet!

  • User profile image
    PerfectPhase

    turrican said:
    Thanks everyone for the answers. Today I got up fresch out of the bed and doing WPF 10-12 hours the day before, things started to settle into my mind I think. I think I will keep learnin this WPF thing. I kind'a actually like it this morning. Although I still wish we had better designing tool in Express editions.

    I'll go to Amazon and get a WPF book and see what comes out of it. Smiley

    Get the trial of Expression Blend, and use it for the 30 days to see how lays stuff out and what that looks like in XAML.

  • User profile image
    turrican

    PerfectPhase said:
    turrican said:
    *snip*

    Get the trial of Expression Blend, and use it for the 30 days to see how lays stuff out and what that looks like in XAML.
    Yeah. I'm gonna ask work to buy it for me but I still wish it would be integrated in my main dev tool. I hate having several tools.

  • User profile image
    Jaggu

    , brian.​shapiro wrote

    *snip*turrican,

    I think you'll find its really easy to do really complex things in WPF. You just have to understand a few concepts and then everything fits into place.

     

    Yeah... falls into place and then grinds to a squealing halt.. and even just scrolling in a views ramps the CPU to 100%...

    WPF is well thought out... NOT !!

  • User profile image
    QuickC

    @turrican:

    Well, WPF is far more like learning the MFC libraries then the pure fun of VB past.  That said, the leaning curve is hard.  Big difference is seen when using Blend however.  It makes the monster of WPF and the XAML all go away. 

    The XAML is nearly unlearnable to folks like me who refuse to use a product based on route memory.  The is no feeback or help in VS2010 to know what should go where and what it's scope of effects may be.  Clearly we are supposed to by Blend to make any "modern" faced apps.

  • User profile image
    battlebottle

    @QuickC: please note that apart form the previous 2 posts to this one. all the posts in this thread are over 2 years old.

  • User profile image
    W3bbo

    , battlebottle wrote

    @QuickC: please note that apart form the previous 2 posts to this one. all the posts in this thread are over 2 years old.

    Thread necromancy be damned, I'm going to make another of my trademark WPF-bashing posts.

    Today I ran a little program from Codeplex that provides additional services to iTunes. It provides a very simple UI comprised of three tabs with a bunch of textboxes on and not much more.

    Something like this could be done with WinForms or GTK# and load instantaneously and look good (with judicious styling and 'System' FlatStyle). But no, this was a WPF application. It takes 3 seconds to load every single time (it took 7 seconds to load the first time) and this is on a Core i5. The text rendering is dodgy (even though ClearType is enabled system-wide). The controls and widgets don't look right when compared side-by-side with their native equivalents. Opening one of the other tabs in the application causes it to freeze temporarily whilst it initialises. And it features a scoop of "because WPF lets me" styling that looks atrocious.

    The theory behind WPF could have been something special, but Microsoft mismanaged it and so we're left with this.

    And I'll remind everyone of one, key, fact:

    There does not exist a single non-Microsoft WPF application that doesn't want to make me tear my eyeballs out. And many first-party WPF applications are still highly suspect.

  • User profile image
    brian.​shapiro

    @W3bbo:

    Long Zheng's app looks pretty good. I'm working on my own WPF apps and I think you'll find they look good too.

    It'll be a matter of designers setting a good example for others. We dont have any more web pages with dozens of animating GIFs.

  • User profile image
    magicalclick

    For me, WPF is great, the end.

    Leaving WM on 5/2018 if no apps, no dedicated billboards where I drive, no Store name.
    Last modified

Comments closed

Comments have been closed since this content was published more than 30 days ago, but if you'd like to continue the conversation, please create a new thread in our Forums, or Contact Us and let us know.