MFC under VS2010
in [MFC]
|
Prev: MDI App: start 2 DocTemplates in CMyApp::InitInstance
Next: How To: CStatubar panel Right-align text
From: David Ching on 1 Apr 2010 09:34 "Mihai N." <nmihai_year_2000(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message news:Xns9D4DAF4E379AMihaiN(a)207.46.248.16... > >> Opera and Firefox are no great loss if the built-in browser is decent. > > But (historically) the IE mobile was not decent. > > > Point is: a lot of other potentially nice applications will be left out. > Anything that is C++ and not a toy application (anything with many tens, > if not hundreds of thousands of lines of code). > One needs a very strong incentive to rewrite the whole beast. > > So let's recap the story as I see it: > - force developers to rewrite everything in a programming language > invented by me, which can't be used for anythign cross-platform > (Apple: Objective C, MS: C#) > - no multitasking (both Apple and MS) > - lock-down the thing and only allow applications to be installed > they my proprietary app-store (both Apple and MS) > > So haw is just copying the strategy applied by the leader > going to topple the leader, with some years handicap already. > What is the differenciating factor? > Why would I do a full rewrite from C++ to C# to work on a new > unproven platform, instead of just rewrite the GUI in Objective C > and run on the platform that is number one? > (you can still use C++ on iPhone and iPad) > > Personally, I was waiting for Win Mobile 7 for the freedom to > install what I want. So much for it. Now Android looks better. > Personally, I was staying out of the mobile market because there were too many OS's to worry about. Then Apple came with one OS. Except they required crappy Objective C, which I refuse to program in. I can't see the loss of not being able to port my Win desktop apps (C++) to Win Phone since it would be an almost total rewrite anyway for all but the most trivial apps, to go from desktop to phone. Besides, how good do you think an MFC app would look on a platform which has Silverlight as the basis for everything? It would look like a text mode terminal compared to GUI. Not a good way to sell a lot of copies. Personally, Windows Phone is great for my career. It allows me to leverage my investment into WPF and Silverlight on an emerging platform. For the first time in decades, Microsoft has my back again. -- David
From: Pete Delgado on 1 Apr 2010 12:24 "Mihai N." <nmihai_year_2000(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message news:Xns9D4DAF4E379AMihaiN(a)207.46.248.16... > >> Opera and Firefox are no great loss if the built-in browser is decent. > > But (historically) the IE mobile was not decent. > > > Point is: a lot of other potentially nice applications will be left out. > Anything that is C++ and not a toy application (anything with many tens, > if not hundreds of thousands of lines of code). > One needs a very strong incentive to rewrite the whole beast. > > So let's recap the story as I see it: > - force developers to rewrite everything in a programming language > invented by me, which can't be used for anythign cross-platform > (Apple: Objective C, MS: C#) > - no multitasking (both Apple and MS) > - lock-down the thing and only allow applications to be installed > they my proprietary app-store (both Apple and MS) > > So haw is just copying the strategy applied by the leader > going to topple the leader, with some years handicap already. > What is the differenciating factor? > Why would I do a full rewrite from C++ to C# to work on a new > unproven platform, instead of just rewrite the GUI in Objective C > and run on the platform that is number one? > (you can still use C++ on iPhone and iPad) > > Personally, I was waiting for Win Mobile 7 for the freedom to > install what I want. So much for it. Now Android looks better. I have to agree with you. I was looking forward to enhancements in Win Mobile 6.5 and what I got was a completely different operating system that provides some new features but takes away the core things that I use for development! While I don't mind learning something new, there *must* be a compelling reason for me to do it. With the latest version of Win Mobile, I just don't see any justification for learning it. I'll continue to look over the documentation as it is released, but I would rather not be confined to writing toy applications for my phone. I also think that Microsoft made a huge mistake with the UI because the HTC Touch-Flo 3D for Windows Mobile 6 was a superior interface when it was released a few years ago and I think that the most recent releases are still better than the new flagship UI for Windows Mobile 7. Sad... -Pete
From: David Ching on 1 Apr 2010 13:15 "Pete Delgado" <Peter.Delgado(a)NoSpam.com> wrote in message news:#pQbbfb0KHA.364(a)TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... > > I have to agree with you. I was looking forward to enhancements in Win > Mobile 6.5 and what I got was a completely different operating system that > provides some new features but takes away the core things that I use for > development! While I don't mind learning something new, there *must* be a > compelling reason for me to do it. With the latest version of Win Mobile, > I just don't see any justification for learning it. I'll continue to look > over the documentation as it is released, but I would rather not be > confined to writing toy applications for my phone. > > I also think that Microsoft made a huge mistake with the UI because the > HTC Touch-Flo 3D for Windows Mobile 6 was a superior interface when it was > released a few years ago and I think that the most recent releases are > still better than the new flagship UI for Windows Mobile 7. > > Sad... > > -Pete Hey Pete, this is interesting. Win Mobile had such a miniscule market share that it was not compelling for me, plus Windows never did scale down well to those tiny screens. I think HTC was the best Windows Mobile device, but that isn't saying much. (BTW, I've used a Blackberry all these years, still do and was never tempted with Win Mobile.) So it's surprising to hear that there are people here like yourself who actually like it and have invested in developing for it. I would be ticked too if I were in that position, seeing as how MS is basically giving you guys the boot and starting over. But what choice did they have? Windows Mobile was never going to achieve iPhone proportions and was even losing market share each year. What kind of apps are you developing and using such that you think Windows Phone promotes "toy applications"? I would not think it promotes toy or not toy applications, it gives you great hardware and a great programming environment. Whether you use it to make toy apps or not toy apps is up to you. (And don't say anything with animation in it is a "toy", that's not what we're talking about.) From what I've seen, developing Silverlight apps is way cooler than writing Objective C apps, so Microsoft may yet win this race by having better apps than iPhone. -- David
From: Mihai N. on 1 Apr 2010 23:35 > From what I've seen, developing Silverlight apps is way cooler than writing > Objective C apps, so Microsoft may yet win this race by having better apps > than iPhone. I agree that C# is better than Objective C. But let's remember: you are only forced to Objective C for the UI only. All the core logic can still stay C++. Applications like KeyPass take great advantage. Basically I use KeyPass on Win, WinMo, Mac. And it is also available for iPhone, Linux, Palm, Android, you name it. This is just an example. But basically if you have a C++ application, you don't have to throw everything away, just the UI. And that you must change big time anyway, to make it work nicely on a small screen and with touch interaction. Plus, I really resent asking Apple or MS for permission to install *MY* applications on *MY* device. -- Mihai Nita [Microsoft MVP, Visual C++] http://www.mihai-nita.net ------------------------------------------ Replace _year_ with _ to get the real email
From: David Ching on 1 Apr 2010 23:45
"Mihai N." <nmihai_year_2000(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message news:Xns9D4DD17848338MihaiN(a)207.46.248.16... > > I agree that C# is better than Objective C. > But let's remember: you are only forced to Objective C for the UI only. > All the core logic can still stay C++. > > Applications like KeyPass take great advantage. > Basically I use KeyPass on Win, WinMo, Mac. And it is also available > for iPhone, Linux, Palm, Android, you name it. > > This is just an example. But basically if you have a C++ application, > you don't have to throw everything away, just the UI. > And that you must change big time anyway, to make it work nicely > on a small screen and with touch interaction. > Yes, I see the advantage of having a common back end written in C++. But I would guess the majority of iPhone apps are iPhone-only, and the authors are perfectly fine with that. Similar with Win Phone apps, I would think. > Plus, I really resent asking Apple or MS for permission to > install *MY* applications on *MY* device. > I hadn't realized MS had set the rules for its (now non-existant) store yet. Anyway, I agree Apple has too much control and has screwed a minority of the developers. But this is no reason to boycott a device that has such potential to make us $. -- David |