"The current Win32-based Windows UI graphics subsystem, found in Windows XP, has been around for nearly 20 years. It's aging and limited, and as a result, user interface development has been somewhat, well, constrained at best. The Windows Presentation Foundation, which is built on the .NET Framework, provides new techniques for developing applications, and makes better use of current hardware and technologies. In this article, we'll show you 10 of the most significant advances that make WPF superior to its Win32 forebears." In related news, here are shots of Vista server.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-07-06
Great so their UI's are in C#. I still don't see the big deal and it's bulkier. I dunno. Is C# really that great over managed C++ libraries that are more open source friendly which is the future by the way. I see more vulnerable security risks because of the closed source nature of .NET.
I'm not trying to bash C# but I dont see why they are bashing C++ stuff like QTools, GTK+ and Fox which are very simple to use.
You should read about .NET's architectual details and code access security. This should give you a more accurate view of C#/.NET and provide the reasons why they chose to implement WPF and some other user mode systems in managed code.
There's nothing to be gained by using managed C++ over C# in implementing managed code. It all compiles to IL, then native machine code before execution. It's also incorrect to state that managed C++ would be more OSS friendly. If it's managed code, you're going to need a compatible runtime to use it. Last, the article doesn't even mention the other toolkits. If you're just asking again, "why not use C++?", the primary answer is security. Toolkits such as the ones you mentioned are vulnerable to coding errors like buffer overruns because they are implemented in languages like C++.
Member since:Basically I meant managed in terms of managed libraries not MS' definition of managed code. Also their definition of safety is awkward to me. Safety means a coding error? I would think safety should mean code security like if someone hacks it.
My 2cents. Maybe C# is better as I am coming from C# into C++ but am liking C++ better because of the easier access to the managed portion of the code. We'll seee.... I like PHP too because of the ability to jump in and out of managed code on the fly. It's really rising in usage after PHP 5.
Member since:
Great so their UI's are in C#. I still don't see the big deal and it's bulkier. I dunno. Is C# really that great over managed C++ libraries that are more open source friendly which is the future by the way. I see more vulnerable security risks because of the closed source nature of .NET.
I'm not trying to bash C# but I dont see why they are bashing C++ stuff like QTools, GTK+ and Fox which are very simple to use.