Anonymous

My feedback

  1. 8,066 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    Check!
    (thinking…)
    Reset
    or sign in with
    • facebook
    • google
      Password icon
      I agree to the terms of service
      Signed in as (Sign out)
      You have left! (?) (thinking…)
      under review  ·  377 comments  ·  Visual Studio IDE » .NET  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
      Anonymous commented  · 

      The larger forces like Apple, google, ms all try to create a walled garden.

      Let's stop hoping for a universal standard from one of the larger players and get behind Avalonia and Neosis.

      Innovation will come from smaller more agile software houses.

      I for one am prepared to port all our apps to Neosis should it get Telerik controls support.

      As developers we have one goal a single platform to write code without a mess of Libs.

      MS have too much red tape to even get close to the above. If Neosis have large apps running well then MS will most likely buy Neosis as they did Xamarin.

      @Mike-EE great work on pushing Neosis for third party controls support. Perhaps you could create a forum for companies to show interest in using Neosis to port WPF, SL and UWP apps. I'm positive that this would not only inspire Neosis to push harder, but would also help them raise funding and support from the likes of Telerik.

      Anonymous commented  · 

      Currently there is :-
      1. Neosis and Ammy
      2. Avalonia UI

      The winner for me in regards to LOB will be whichever gets EF support and third part controls such as Telerik and Component One? Plus, WASM support thereafter.

      Anonymous commented  · 

      OK so

      1. Avalonia is SL 2.0 open source
      2. Neosis is potentially SL 3.0 with xaml support

      My feeling is that once one of these platforms gets Telerik, component one etc etc it'll be go to place for LOB apps.

      Thoughts?

      Anonymous commented  · 

      So basically, we're saying :-

      1. Xamarin Forms isn't up to scratch for a LOB app.

      2. UWP is a bit pants.

      3. WPF / SL are still pretty good all things considered.

      Therefore, either MS or someone else needs to put WPF/ SL or improved UWP in WASM?

      As I think we could all be waiting indefinitely for MS to do this (because they appear to be silent on the matter) - should we create another forum for people to show their interest in picking up mono in some way with xaml or equivalent? Something that make it easy for third party control vendors to make controls for.

      Would be very nice to have something ready for when WASM matures. I think perhaps it would pull some devs away from the JS, Angular mess.

      Thoughts?

      Anonymous commented  · 

      @Mike-EEE

      Based on mono support for WASM. Would it be correct that there is no xaml GUI in mono?

      Only moonlight that didn't make it to full SL4?

      Why wouldn't the interested people on this forum pick up moonlight for development?

      Surely, it would be relatively easy for third party controls vendors to port controls to moonlight.

      If Moonlight supported SL + .net standard etc. would there be anything superior out there for WASM?

      Anonymous commented  · 

      @Mike-EEE

      http://www.noesisengine.com/

      Looks very impressive! I think it's more fine for them to charge for the platform especially for LOB projects and games.

      Would be nice perhaps to see a free version for non-commercial use or a license model similar to Xamarin.

      Has anyone converted a WPF, SL project to Neosis who can comment on its viability, releiabiliy and ease of migration?

      Also, I don't see any third party component support from the likes of Telerik, Component One etc.

      Do you know if it'll support things like EF?

      Anonymous commented  · 

      Why not give the guys at Avalonia some cash and good jobs at MS? Work with them to build UWP cross platform in core. Plus, actually finishing UWP and getting better third party controls support would help.

      Then we can leave web for scripting and put substantial apps on the desktop where they belong.

      I never understood why we needed to put desktop apps in a browser as it = slow performance and lengthy development as previously stated.

    • 5,708 votes
      Vote
      Sign in
      Check!
      (thinking…)
      Reset
      or sign in with
      • facebook
      • google
        Password icon
        I agree to the terms of service
        Signed in as (Sign out)
        You have left! (?) (thinking…)
        73 comments  ·  Visual Studio IDE » .NET  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
        Anonymous commented  · 

        The problem is Microsoft.

        Microsoft abandon developers.
        They abandoned Silverlight developers
        They abandoned LightSwitch developers
        They abandoned VB6 programming developers

        If you use Microsoft you just know they will abandon you too.

      Feedback and Knowledge Base