4 ms·

Using WinUI is really easy to do. Whether you're using WinUI 2.8 with UWP or WinUI 3. So native GUI development isn't difficult at all. XAML is similar to HTML

Using WinUI is really easy to do. Whether you're using WinUI 2.8 with UWP or WinUI 3. So native GUI development isn't difficult at all. XAML is similar to HTML in a lot of ways. If you have your mind set on web development and want a native GUI, you could go with React Native for Windows.

pjmlp 3y ago
Yeah, if one wants to have fun debugging all the issues that are still open since Project Reunion was announced in 2020, with less capable tooling than .NET Native and C++/CX, specially fun having to deal with CsWinRT and C++/WinRT, the latter already in maintenance, stuck in C++17, as the team is now having fun with Rust/WinRT. At least Native AOT might support WinUI in .NET 9, something to look forward to, for anyone that still cares outside Redmond.
- m_mueller 3y ago
  I think the alphabet soup thrown around in this thread alone is indicative for what‘s wrong with Microsoft‘s native user interface story…
  - pjmlp 3y ago
    I can throw similar alphabet soups from other ecosystems, either one is in and gets them, or not.
    - tonyedgecombe 3y ago
      Not really. Apple has a much more consistent story on UI frameworks.
      - pjmlp 3y ago
        Not being around Mac OS long enough?
        m_mueller 3y ago
        such as? If I remember correctly (has been a few years), over the last 15-20 years there were iOS: UIKit -> SwiftUI MacOS: AppKit -> Catalyst -> SwiftUI there was definitely some churn within each one of those from version to version, but no complete rewrite needed afaik.
        pjmlp 3y ago
        I advise then to pay attention to Apple developer podcasts for rants regarding each of them, and porting issues, you can start with ATP.
        m_mueller 3y ago
        I listen to almost every ATP. I know the rants. None of them were along the lines of: Apple forces me to completely rewrite Overcast, or else it won't work on the next iPhone.
        tonyedgecombe 3y ago
        I wouldn't even include Catalyst in the list. It is only relevant to a small subset of developers.
        tonyedgecombe 3y ago
        My first Mac was an SE/30.
Const-me 3y ago
I’ve just created and compiled an empty WinUI3 project, and I got 131 MB of binaries just for the AMD64 architecture. The EXE from that folder crashes on startup with DllNotFoundException “Unable to load DLL 'Microsoft.ui.xaml.dll' or one of its dependencies” Apparently, Microsoft couldn’t even setup the project template, need to manually edit the project file adding WindowsAppSDKSelfContained setting. After that it launches, but the binaries are now 151MB in 386 files, for a single AMD64 architecture. By comparison, an empty WPF application compiles into 171 KB of binaries in 5 files, and the binary is CPU-agnostic, it runs on all CPU architectures. It depends on the .NET 7 runtime, but the runtime for my processor only takes 55MB to download. And if you’re unhappy about the runtime, you can instead target the older .NET framework 4.8 which comes preinstalled on Windows 10 and 11.

pjmlp 3y ago

Yeah, if one wants to have fun debugging all the issues that are still open since Project Reunion was announced in 2020, with less capable tooling than .NET Native and C++/CX, specially fun having to deal with CsWinRT and C++/WinRT, the latter already in maintenance, stuck in C++17, as the team is now having fun with Rust/WinRT. At least Native AOT might support WinUI in .NET 9, something to look forward to, for anyone that still cares outside Redmond.

m_mueller 3y ago
I think the alphabet soup thrown around in this thread alone is indicative for what‘s wrong with Microsoft‘s native user interface story…
- pjmlp 3y ago
  I can throw similar alphabet soups from other ecosystems, either one is in and gets them, or not.
  - tonyedgecombe 3y ago
    Not really. Apple has a much more consistent story on UI frameworks.
    - pjmlp 3y ago
      Not being around Mac OS long enough?
      - m_mueller 3y ago
        such as? If I remember correctly (has been a few years), over the last 15-20 years there were iOS: UIKit -> SwiftUI MacOS: AppKit -> Catalyst -> SwiftUI there was definitely some churn within each one of those from version to version, but no complete rewrite needed afaik.
        pjmlp 3y ago
        I advise then to pay attention to Apple developer podcasts for rants regarding each of them, and porting issues, you can start with ATP.
        m_mueller 3y ago
        I listen to almost every ATP. I know the rants. None of them were along the lines of: Apple forces me to completely rewrite Overcast, or else it won't work on the next iPhone.
        tonyedgecombe 3y ago
        I wouldn't even include Catalyst in the list. It is only relevant to a small subset of developers.
      - tonyedgecombe 3y ago
        My first Mac was an SE/30.

Const-me 3y ago

I’ve just created and compiled an empty WinUI3 project, and I got 131 MB of binaries just for the AMD64 architecture. The EXE from that folder crashes on startup with DllNotFoundException “Unable to load DLL 'Microsoft.ui.xaml.dll' or one of its dependencies” Apparently, Microsoft couldn’t even setup the project template, need to manually edit the project file adding WindowsAppSDKSelfContained setting. After that it launches, but the binaries are now 151MB in 386 files, for a single AMD64 architecture. By comparison, an empty WPF application compiles into 171 KB of binaries in 5 files, and the binary is CPU-agnostic, it runs on all CPU architectures. It depends on the .NET 7 runtime, but the runtime for my processor only takes 55MB to download. And if you’re unhappy about the runtime, you can instead target the older .NET framework 4.8 which comes preinstalled on Windows 10 and 11.