5 ms·

Cross platform .NET usually means using a native toolkit on each different platform and the result is WPF on Windows, GTK# on Linux, and MonoMac on Mac. The pur

Cross platform .NET usually means using a native toolkit on each different platform and the result is WPF on Windows, GTK# on Linux, and MonoMac on Mac. The purpose of this is to avoid the uncanny valley of cross platform toolkits like Java Swing at the expense of writing extra UI code. Some wrappers like Eto.Forms and XWT exist but don't expect drag and drop visual designer tooling. Thanks to Mono WinForms is sort of cross platform to a certain extent but if you give it a try you'll see why it is not recommended.

jbigelow76 12y ago
>Cross platform .NET usually means using a native toolkit on each different platform and the result is WPF on Windows, GTK# on Linux, and MonoMac on Mac. What are the odds Microsoft announces WPF open sourcing and maybe a wrapper of some sorts for OSX support at Build this year? I give it at least 50/50 on the open sourcing part.
- c0wb0yc0d3r 12y ago
  If they did that I would be so happy! I think if they did that it would set the CLR up to effectively compete with Java.
- praeclarum 12y ago
  AFAIK WPF is managed by the Windows team. All this open sourcing has been happening form the Azure and developer teams. Chances of Windows open sourcing some of their code? Less likely. As someone who worked on WPF though, I will comment that the code may not actually be too useful. It is heavily tied to Windows and its graphics infrastructure. I'm more interested in seeing something like Moonlight ported to modern platforms.
- elektronjunge 12y ago
  Doubtful. WPF isn't even the recommended GUI toolkit on windows anymore.
  - jbigelow76 12y ago
    According to whom? And what is the current recommended GUI toolkit?
    - praeclarum 12y ago
      Windows RT (aka Metro, aka Store Apps). It's a model based on WPF but not fully compliant - it took in lessons learned form Silverlight. Call it WPFlight.
      - jbigelow76 12y ago
        Okay, yeah, so still XAML. I've only recently looked into Windows RT, my time was always spent in ASP.NET, so WPF/WinRT/Silverlight, it all seems like the same thing to me, but I do know a lot of Windows app developers that bitch up a storm about the diffs between WinRT XAML and what can be done in WPF :)
        praeclarum 12y ago
        The truth is they are essentially the same. I just draw the distinction because porting apps between them isn't always automatic.
      - MichaelGG 12y ago
        That's the toolkit if you want Metro apps, dealing with MS's crappy store, etc. etc. If you want a traditional Windows application that just works, then WPF is fine. (And I think WPF has an option for non-blurry text rendering, whereas every Metro app seems to be blurry.)
- will_hughes 12y ago
  WPF is very heavily tied into DirectX and other Windows-only APIs. Open Sourcing it is one thing, converting that into an engine that can do layout and rendering identically across multiple platforms is non-trivially difficult. Talk to the browser folks on how hard they had to work on that, and they wern't dealing with 3D stuff.

jbigelow76 12y ago

>Cross platform .NET usually means using a native toolkit on each different platform and the result is WPF on Windows, GTK# on Linux, and MonoMac on Mac. What are the odds Microsoft announces WPF open sourcing and maybe a wrapper of some sorts for OSX support at Build this year? I give it at least 50/50 on the open sourcing part.

c0wb0yc0d3r 12y ago
If they did that I would be so happy! I think if they did that it would set the CLR up to effectively compete with Java.
praeclarum 12y ago
AFAIK WPF is managed by the Windows team. All this open sourcing has been happening form the Azure and developer teams. Chances of Windows open sourcing some of their code? Less likely. As someone who worked on WPF though, I will comment that the code may not actually be too useful. It is heavily tied to Windows and its graphics infrastructure. I'm more interested in seeing something like Moonlight ported to modern platforms.
elektronjunge 12y ago
Doubtful. WPF isn't even the recommended GUI toolkit on windows anymore.
- jbigelow76 12y ago
  According to whom? And what is the current recommended GUI toolkit?
  - praeclarum 12y ago
    Windows RT (aka Metro, aka Store Apps). It's a model based on WPF but not fully compliant - it took in lessons learned form Silverlight. Call it WPFlight.
    - jbigelow76 12y ago
      Okay, yeah, so still XAML. I've only recently looked into Windows RT, my time was always spent in ASP.NET, so WPF/WinRT/Silverlight, it all seems like the same thing to me, but I do know a lot of Windows app developers that bitch up a storm about the diffs between WinRT XAML and what can be done in WPF :)
      - praeclarum 12y ago
        The truth is they are essentially the same. I just draw the distinction because porting apps between them isn't always automatic.
    - MichaelGG 12y ago
      That's the toolkit if you want Metro apps, dealing with MS's crappy store, etc. etc. If you want a traditional Windows application that just works, then WPF is fine. (And I think WPF has an option for non-blurry text rendering, whereas every Metro app seems to be blurry.)
will_hughes 12y ago
WPF is very heavily tied into DirectX and other Windows-only APIs. Open Sourcing it is one thing, converting that into an engine that can do layout and rendering identically across multiple platforms is non-trivially difficult. Talk to the browser folks on how hard they had to work on that, and they wern't dealing with 3D stuff.