4 ms·
I'm dealing with slick and pretty consumer apps. Getting winforms to be pretty is not reasonable. With WPF, you can get the pretty, and then trying to get it t
by m_fayer 9y ago
I'm dealing with slick and pretty consumer apps.
Getting winforms to be pretty is not reasonable. With WPF, you can get the pretty, and then trying to get it to perform reasonably where no browser would break a sweat will drive you to distraction.
And UWP, well don't get me started. Perpetually half-baked, trying hard to push a design system (whatever they're calling metro these days) that isn't popular, isn't thought through, and is so low in information density that I can't even imagine pulling off Spotify with it. And you end up shackled to the Windows Store, the sandbox, and a mobile-style execution lifecycle.
- tonyedgecombe 9y agoMicrosoft's attention seems to be elsewhere.
- pjmlp 9y agoIt is in UWP. 10 years ago everyone was resiting Windows 7, any XP was the best OS on Earth. Now 10 years later, it is the same song with Windows 10 and Windows 7 as protagonists.
- pjmlp 9y agoI have been doing mostly WPF/UWP the last four years and hardly got any performance or L&F complaints. Yes, sometimes the default template is not the best, but with a bit of game development skills it is quite easy to improve it, all the way down to metal. With the browser one needs to find the magic browser specific CSS properties incantation, with the hope of having a set of divs accelerated by the browser engine, without any control how it actually happens.