4 ms·

As a .net Developer this also doesn't make much sense to me. I do know that I can keep firing up Visual Studio and keep working on my existing applications with

by dep_b 9y ago

As a .net Developer this also doesn't make much sense to me. I do know that I can keep firing up Visual Studio and keep working on my existing applications without this stuff hurting me. Also switching between .net versions will be fairly painless since they're all really similar. The only hard thing is understanding if you can port legacy app x to new stack y. Nothing that would stop me from using .net. Microsoft is really good to keep developers dangling. Can / should I still use WPF? Did it secretly continue under a different name?

WorldMaker 9y ago
This issue seems to mostly be (healthy) debate on that "can you port legacy app x to new stack y" front. It should (eventually) resolve to most people's satisfaction, but the sausage is being made in public on GitHub and that's new and frightening to some .NET veterans. «Can / should I still use WPF? Did it secretly continue under a different name?» You can still use WPF if you are happy with it. The Universal Windows Platform (UWP)'s .NET/XAML stack is the relatively open and acknowledged successor to WPF. It should be quite familiar to existing WPF developers and offers some nice new features and performance. Porting to UWP is still sometimes tough from WPF, but Project Centennial/the Desktop Bridge can make it a lot easier to do the transition a piece at a time.