3 ms·

Apple and Microsoft underinvest in their widget toolkits. It’s especially damning for Apple since they spend the money to write numerous custom widgets (e.g., t

Apple and Microsoft underinvest in their widget toolkits. It’s especially damning for Apple since they spend the money to write numerous custom widgets (e.g., the widgets in their professional apps like Final Cut Pro and Logic Pro) but don’t upstream. Nobody is inspired by yet another implementation of button or tab widgets.

somenameforme 2y ago
No idea about Apple, but I'd strongly disagree for Microsoft. In one way of speaking, they invest too much. WinUI3, like the article mentions has such a sordid history. It started as WPF, and WPF was (is) awesome. It's simple, clean, runs on a bunch of different platforms, doesn't have a zillion dependencies, has a great community, and is just all around pleasant to work with. So naturally Microsoft decided to completely scrap it, replace it with a far less functioning successor, flop, and then repeat this process over and over til we get where we are today after WPF->UWP->WinUI2->WinUI3. And WinUI3 has also already been completely abandoned. Contrary to this article, it still doesn't even have a visual designer. The amount of time, energy, and money Microsoft has spent with all of these successors is going to be remarkable, just to keep throwing everything away and restarting. Oh and while all of this was happening they've also been developing Xamarin, MAUI, and more that also all do pretty much the same thing - in completely incompatible ways, with a similar general trend of having the attention span, focus, and overall quality of a 13 year old ADHD boy, in a Japanese arcade, after 7 shots of espresso. This just isn't the sort of thing you could do without just completely absurd budgets and minimal concern about actually making something great. If they had instead just stuck to perpetually refining WPF, UI development on Windows would be a utopia today, and they probably would have saved an immense amount of money, or at least manhours.
- cjbgkagh 2y ago
  A lot of the best people left MS. People forget that MS was so completely dominant that it attracted a lot of talented people who wanted to do big things. Since then the competition from the FANG companies have brain drained them, not helped by MS insistence on paying less than their peers, sure there is no state income tax but the company shouldn’t be trying to capture all of that difference. The net effect is that not only are they not capable of building things as well as they used to, they can’t even maintain what they already have. And how would anyone go about fixing such a culture. I think that’s a big part of why MS has been so generous to OpenAI while also keeping them at arms length. Inertia is incredibly powerful and big companies can remain successful for long after their technical competence dissipates.
  - temac 2y ago
    Also, iirc there is no Windows department anymore at MS. Hard to make a great platform in these conditions.
- WorldMaker 2y ago
  > And WinUI3 has also already been completely abandoned. I'm not sure where you got that impression, but WinUI3 is in almost all of Microsoft's software at this point. Admittedly a huge amount of it is embedded inside React Native, but WinUI3 seems to be the UI toolkit that has won and is still going strong. They announced a bunch of WinUI3 enhancements at BUILD even. (One such announcement is a coming standard control for the sort of custom Windows Title Bar with a search box and branded logo and extra buttons that has become common in every first-party application from the Microsoft Store app to all of Office and many other places.) > Contrary to this article, it still doesn't even have a visual designer. Huh? Visual Studio has a visual designer for the WinUI 3 flavor of XAML. If you don't want to write XAML to back your UI they probably will never support a Visual Designer for you (ie, C# UI seems neat and maybe a bit more "functional programming", but I'd rather use XAML just to have the Visual Designer at least). Last I checked the XAML designer works just fine even in C++ projects targeting WinUI 3.
  - somenameforme 2y ago
    Visual Studio's designer really does not support WinUI 3. Try it! Hot reload also doesn't work worth anything. There's an ongoing issue/discussion on Github here [1] from 2021. There's also loads of fundamental issues like various controls causing replicable crashes with drag and drop, the community calls are disappearing, and more. [1] - https://github.com/microsoft/microsoft-ui-xaml/issues/5917 https://github.com/microsoft/microsoft-ui-xaml/issues/5917
    - WorldMaker 2y ago
      Sure, it is definitely very buggy, but the point is that it still exists and is useful to some extent. I was refuting the claim that there is *no* visual editor, not the claim that the visual editor we do have is maybe deficient and buggy. Relatedly, I still think it is something of a shame that (Expression) Blend didn't survive to the modern era. A designer-focused XAML design tool that doesn't need a full Visual Studio install (nor the same sort of expensive VS license) and feels more like Firefly or Figma or whatever other designer-focused tool is current en vogue would be really handy in a lot of situations. I don't think it is the only reason that designers tend to prefer HTML (and thus we use Electron or similar to placate the designers that think that "just copy and paste it from the design tool" works "well") over XAML, but it certainly doesn't help that there isn't a "XAML Figma" and it's a shame on multiple levels that Microsoft recognized that threat early on, built a solution, then got confused why they built it, confusingly merged it into Visual Studio licenses and installs, which lead to its sadly inevitable death just a few years before it would have been very helpful to have to send to some designers and stop getting HTML-only mockups.
jwells89 2y ago
While Apple could stand to improve some aspects of their UI toolkits (and you're right that private widgets have long been a frustration), I'd say they're in an entirely different plane in existence relative to Microsoft in this regard. The most solid of their toolkits is far and away UIKit on iOS. It's got almost all of the best parts of AppKit with over a decade of thoughtful tweaks, polish, and QoL improvements. AppKit has become a bit more neglected since iOS stole the title of favorite child from macOS but is still quite solid. Both have an extensive set of highly capable stock widgets and with both, you can write just about anything imaginable pretty easily without importing a single third-party library. Neither locks you into a WYSIWYG editor or hand-editing XML and are pure-code-friendly, particularly since the addition of autolayout anchors. SwiftUI is finally getting to the point where it's not so green and is becoming a more practical choice. Though it wasn't a headliner, this recent WWDC brought a number of long called-for improvements. By contrast, WinUI lacks such fundamental basics as a tableview/datagrid, meaning you're going to be rolling your own or importing third-party widgets much more frequently. While you're not as locked into XML layouts and resources as one would be with Android Framework with it, it's not as friendly to pure code. It's also decidedly mobile-esque relative to AppKit (likely owing to its UWP heritage) which might be a problem if the goal is to build a true desktop-class app.
- eschaton 2y ago
  UIKit is actually nearly 20 years old and AppKit is getting close to 40…
  - marcellus23 2y ago
    I'm not sure what point you're trying to make.

somenameforme 2y ago

No idea about Apple, but I'd strongly disagree for Microsoft. In one way of speaking, they invest too much. WinUI3, like the article mentions has such a sordid history. It started as WPF, and WPF was (is) awesome. It's simple, clean, runs on a bunch of different platforms, doesn't have a zillion dependencies, has a great community, and is just all around pleasant to work with. So naturally Microsoft decided to completely scrap it, replace it with a far less functioning successor, flop, and then repeat this process over and over til we get where we are today after WPF->UWP->WinUI2->WinUI3. And WinUI3 has also already been completely abandoned. Contrary to this article, it still doesn't even have a visual designer. The amount of time, energy, and money Microsoft has spent with all of these successors is going to be remarkable, just to keep throwing everything away and restarting. Oh and while all of this was happening they've also been developing Xamarin, MAUI, and more that also all do pretty much the same thing - in completely incompatible ways, with a similar general trend of having the attention span, focus, and overall quality of a 13 year old ADHD boy, in a Japanese arcade, after 7 shots of espresso. This just isn't the sort of thing you could do without just completely absurd budgets and minimal concern about actually making something great. If they had instead just stuck to perpetually refining WPF, UI development on Windows would be a utopia today, and they probably would have saved an immense amount of money, or at least manhours.

cjbgkagh 2y ago
A lot of the best people left MS. People forget that MS was so completely dominant that it attracted a lot of talented people who wanted to do big things. Since then the competition from the FANG companies have brain drained them, not helped by MS insistence on paying less than their peers, sure there is no state income tax but the company shouldn’t be trying to capture all of that difference. The net effect is that not only are they not capable of building things as well as they used to, they can’t even maintain what they already have. And how would anyone go about fixing such a culture. I think that’s a big part of why MS has been so generous to OpenAI while also keeping them at arms length. Inertia is incredibly powerful and big companies can remain successful for long after their technical competence dissipates.
- temac 2y ago
  Also, iirc there is no Windows department anymore at MS. Hard to make a great platform in these conditions.
WorldMaker 2y ago
> And WinUI3 has also already been completely abandoned. I'm not sure where you got that impression, but WinUI3 is in almost all of Microsoft's software at this point. Admittedly a huge amount of it is embedded inside React Native, but WinUI3 seems to be the UI toolkit that has won and is still going strong. They announced a bunch of WinUI3 enhancements at BUILD even. (One such announcement is a coming standard control for the sort of custom Windows Title Bar with a search box and branded logo and extra buttons that has become common in every first-party application from the Microsoft Store app to all of Office and many other places.) > Contrary to this article, it still doesn't even have a visual designer. Huh? Visual Studio has a visual designer for the WinUI 3 flavor of XAML. If you don't want to write XAML to back your UI they probably will never support a Visual Designer for you (ie, C# UI seems neat and maybe a bit more "functional programming", but I'd rather use XAML just to have the Visual Designer at least). Last I checked the XAML designer works just fine even in C++ projects targeting WinUI 3.
- somenameforme 2y ago
  Visual Studio's designer really does not support WinUI 3. Try it! Hot reload also doesn't work worth anything. There's an ongoing issue/discussion on Github here [1] from 2021. There's also loads of fundamental issues like various controls causing replicable crashes with drag and drop, the community calls are disappearing, and more. [1] - https://github.com/microsoft/microsoft-ui-xaml/issues/5917 https://github.com/microsoft/microsoft-ui-xaml/issues/5917
  - WorldMaker 2y ago
    Sure, it is definitely very buggy, but the point is that it still exists and is useful to some extent. I was refuting the claim that there is *no* visual editor, not the claim that the visual editor we do have is maybe deficient and buggy. Relatedly, I still think it is something of a shame that (Expression) Blend didn't survive to the modern era. A designer-focused XAML design tool that doesn't need a full Visual Studio install (nor the same sort of expensive VS license) and feels more like Firefly or Figma or whatever other designer-focused tool is current en vogue would be really handy in a lot of situations. I don't think it is the only reason that designers tend to prefer HTML (and thus we use Electron or similar to placate the designers that think that "just copy and paste it from the design tool" works "well") over XAML, but it certainly doesn't help that there isn't a "XAML Figma" and it's a shame on multiple levels that Microsoft recognized that threat early on, built a solution, then got confused why they built it, confusingly merged it into Visual Studio licenses and installs, which lead to its sadly inevitable death just a few years before it would have been very helpful to have to send to some designers and stop getting HTML-only mockups.

jwells89 2y ago

While Apple could stand to improve some aspects of their UI toolkits (and you're right that private widgets have long been a frustration), I'd say they're in an entirely different plane in existence relative to Microsoft in this regard. The most solid of their toolkits is far and away UIKit on iOS. It's got almost all of the best parts of AppKit with over a decade of thoughtful tweaks, polish, and QoL improvements. AppKit has become a bit more neglected since iOS stole the title of favorite child from macOS but is still quite solid. Both have an extensive set of highly capable stock widgets and with both, you can write just about anything imaginable pretty easily without importing a single third-party library. Neither locks you into a WYSIWYG editor or hand-editing XML and are pure-code-friendly, particularly since the addition of autolayout anchors. SwiftUI is finally getting to the point where it's not so green and is becoming a more practical choice. Though it wasn't a headliner, this recent WWDC brought a number of long called-for improvements. By contrast, WinUI lacks such fundamental basics as a tableview/datagrid, meaning you're going to be rolling your own or importing third-party widgets much more frequently. While you're not as locked into XML layouts and resources as one would be with Android Framework with it, it's not as friendly to pure code. It's also decidedly mobile-esque relative to AppKit (likely owing to its UWP heritage) which might be a problem if the goal is to build a true desktop-class app.

eschaton 2y ago
UIKit is actually nearly 20 years old and AppKit is getting close to 40…
- marcellus23 2y ago
  I'm not sure what point you're trying to make.