|
You must not like music 
|
|
|
|
|
OK, so I took a look, but wanted that look to be look in full-screen.
I got a "can't do full-screen -- see why" message, so I clicked it, and got this[^].
I'll get the missus to translate it at the weekend, but I'm pretty sure it won't be interesting.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
OK, so I took a look, but wanted that look to be in full-screen.
I got a "can't do full-screen -- see why" message, so I clicked it, and got this[^].
I'll get the missus to translate it at the weekend, but I'm pretty sure it won't be interesting.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
So I asked this question once a few months after Windows 10 was released, but now that it has matured a little I wonder what people's opinions are. I personally don't see any advantage to UWP. Windows Phone is dead, Hololens is kinda cool, but is expensive and despite what Microsoft wants you to think, there is probably o value in porting your apps to work with it. That leaves us left with targeting Xbone and PC. Hardly universal anymore, and to be honest, unless you are developing games (I'm not) Xbone is not a useful target. I'm sure there are a lot of PC users to target, but how many people actually use the store? I know I have 3 or 4 store apps and they are all games. It makes more sense just to use WinForms or WPF at this point. What do y'all think? Is there much point in targeting UWP for you apps?
i cri evry tiem
|
|
|
|
|
| No
- I would love to change the world, but they won’t give me the source code.
|
|
|
|
|
I have developed my app (C'YaPass: F*orget All Your Passwords | Never Memorize A Password Again <br/> Never Type A Password Again <br/> Never Make Up A Password Again[^]) as a WinForm app, Android app (both released) and as an iOS app (soon to release) and as a UWP.
I was initially going to deploy as UWP to the windows store, but the burdens of it became so overwhelming that I've mostly given up on it and the thing is that it actually runs. It's just all of the stuff for deployment. Getting the icons and splash screens going.
I did all of that for the Android app and it was a really streamlined process. Even getting it into the Android store was so easy. Lots of hurdles to get to the UWP release.
Last Straw
The last straw was when I learned that the UWP would run exclusively on Windows 10 Anniversary edition. To get it to run on people's Win8.1 machines I had to target another UNIVERSAL deployment.
I even made this graphic in dishonor of microsoft's use of the word UNIVERSAL:
http://raddev.us/images/cp/uwpNot.png[^]
|
|
|
|
|
does that mean you've dumped the UWP code in the bitbucket entirely, or has MS came up with a sane way to distribute UWP outside the store?
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, waging all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies.
-- Sarah Hoyt
|
|
|
|
|
Dan Neely wrote: does that mean you've dumped the UWP code in the bitbucket
Thanks for asking and continuing the conversation.
I plan to still deploy the UWP (probably as two versions - win8.1 and win10) because the code is completely done. I just need to get a WinStore / dev account and do all that overhead work.
Right now focusing on getting to iOS then after that I'll release the UWP.
|
|
|
|
|
Haha. If you think the store hoops to jump through for UWP are painful, don't ever try pushing an iOS app. Apple is the worst 
|
|
|
|
|
Yortw wrote: Apple is the worst
Honestly, I'm already quivering from the possibility of problems.
I'm hoping somehow I fall through the cracks and my app is immedately received.
I just got an email (minutes ago) and it looks like I'm officially an AppleDev now so we will see.
|
|
|
|
|
James_Parsons wrote: UWP
What's UWP? 
Does that answer your question?
A more complete answer is that it struck me as one of those dead on arrival technologies (moreso than most, actually), so I've been ignoring it.
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
I'd say that depends on your target audience. If they want a desktop or a client/server app, Winforms and/or WPF should be perfectly fine. If they want a web-app then perhaps you'd use ASP.NET or something similar. If they want a mobile app - your priority targets would certainly need to be iOS and Android (95%+ combined market share), and if so you'd want to use Xamarin.
Using UWP would make sense if your product includes a device - so you'd be selling a pre-customized Win 10 tablet/laptop with your app running on it. Although at that point you need to ask yourself if you'd be better off writing an old fashioned desktop app.
|
|
|
|
|
> It makes more sense just to use WinForms or WPF at this point
I preferring an ultimate way in Windows development - firstly target Windows Desktop (WinForms/WPF/etc. for Windows XP+), and next Windows Phone and UWP/Metro (Windows 8+ only).
All another depends on specific application and its goals.
|
|
|
|
|
It is so universal that only W10 platform can run it... and that explains why you have nothing in it...
Skipper: We'll fix it.
Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this?
Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.
|
|
|
|
|
I don't see the point developing in UWP but if getting on the Store is your target you can convert a regular windows program using the desktop converter (project centennial)
|
|
|
|
|
If there's a choice between an app that runs on the desktop and a similar* "universal" app, everyone I know (and I know a lot of arty types, as well as techies) goes for the desktop option.
It looks to me like UWP will soon be added to the long list of half-@rsed ideas that ms has abandoned.
* "Similar", in this instance, almost always maps to "comparatively crippled".
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Good in business as we can write an app for the desktop, surface, phone and ...surface hub
|
|
|
|
|
No. I want my apps to be more portable, not less portable.
UWP will eventually die and will become just another failed MS technology, like Silverlight and WinRT
|
|
|
|
|
If you are interested in building an application to run on an IoT device such as a Raspberry Pi and you need that device to drive a nice responsive display such as a touch screen monitor (kiosk) or TV screen, UWP offers you the ability to build your application using C#/XAML in Visual Studio & Blend, test it on a laptop, then deploy to that device.
|
|
|
|
|
I am targeting UWP with a combination of C# and C++. I find it very easy especially with its similarity to WinForms. Backward compatibility is an issue, but more people are running Windows 10 by far than are running Linux yet that doesn't stop developers from targeting Linux. Also, I don't have the anti-Microsoft sentiment that drives a lot of developers these days. I prefer to target familiar platforms with robust tools.
If I understand Microsoft's current strategy, then developing for UWP makes sense. Why would a business equip it's staff with top-of-the-line iPhones or Androids that are not allowed for personal use when they can buy either a cheaper Windows Phone for strictly phone/email or a more powerful one that is ready for Continuum? The fact that the Windows Phone has less apps is then a positive and adds to the security of the platform. That may change as more business people start ditching laptops in favor of Continuum phones and start demanding more apps. I definitely see the potential there.
I also find targeting the Windows Store to be almost painless especially with its integration into Visual Studio. Sure, there are a handful of icons/splashes that cover various resolutions that you need to make, but any good graphics editor will be able to churn those out and your app benefits. It's also extremely easy to release updates.
The big negative of UWP is, as has been mentioned in this thread, Microsoft's track record of quickly abandoning a technology. I don't know if there's infighting going on there or what, but it is a risk to adopt anything they offer. I can only say that I've seen many development technologies and in my opinion UWP is superior.
|
|
|
|
|
We have two LoB UWP applications being shipped to customers. Mostly they are being used on Windows Phones, or on devices like the (Honeywell) Dolphin CT50. WPF & WinForms don't really work on those devices due to the OS. Prior to that we were using the Motorola 3090/3190 devices which ran WinCE, so they required use to use .NET CF and the tooling for that was abandoned around 2008-2010. So basically, yeah, there is a point to UWP for us.
Also, UWP has some nice API's that could benefit regular desktop apps (settings that sync across devices, credential vault etc), and some improvements to XAML (triggers/relative panel etc) to make stuff easier when you want to alter the UI based on screen size/input mode (important if you want to write one app to run on tablet or desktop PC - and Surface while small is still a viable tablet market - it's not dead the way WP is).
Yes, you can use at least some of those API's from a regular desktop app if you edit the project file and add the right references, but at that point, why not just go with UWP? Unless you really need to support Win7 which is officially EOL (except for the WePOS version), or possibly Win8.1 (which is a tiny market share) you might as well go UWP. The user's largely can't tell the difference except it came from the store.
Not saying it's perfect, or always the right choice, but I don't think it's always the wrong one or has zero benefts either.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm a dinosaur "legacy" desktop developer for Windows 7 and 10 PC's. I've been developing applications that run industrial machines for 25 years. Visual Studio + C# + WPF are the best set of tools and technologies that I've ever had the pleasure of using. Screw UWP.
|
|
|
|
|
I really like UWP as a platform. The major thing I dont like is the control venders seem to think if you want UWP you want big finger clickable controls. I wish you could easily adjust the control sizes for mouse and keybord to give a more WPF control sizing and have an easy toggle to let users switch to touch screen mode. The other thing I dont like is if you are accessing a database like documentDB you cant do it directly from UWP easily. This makes prototyping a pain as you have to setup a prototype web api and a prototype UWP app. I guess with other mobile development it is the same.
|
|
|
|
|
Actually I did think of releasing not one but two UWP. The 1st is a free fancy test app to get a feel of API and get ready for my 2nd AR app.
During my research of my 1st app, I found out GDI+ is not supported and text outline functionality is not supported by UWP graphics API, meaning I have to totally rewrite and reimplement my library using freetype2. Too much work for a free app!
For my 2nd app, I am not sure if DirectShow is supported.
What UWP attracts me is the Microsoft store. If I were to sell my app myself, I dun think any credit card merchant will bother with someone like me who has no money or sales record.
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
