Board index » delphi » Re: There is no .NET in Vista Code?

Re: There is no .NET in Vista Code?


2006-03-21 01:45:44 PM
delphi174
Quote
I've always admited that VCL Forms were faster than WinForms but that
WinForms are plenty fast to make desktop apps (such as Omea) that are
not useless and {*word*99}py as some naysayers would have you believe.
It is, by far, one of the slowest apps I have installed in terms of redraw
speed. WinForms could REALLY stand some optimization...
Ryan
 
 

Re: There is no .NET in Vista Code?

"Ryan McGinty" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes
Quote
>I've always admited that VCL Forms were faster than WinForms but that
>WinForms are plenty fast to make desktop apps (such as Omea) that are
>not useless and {*word*99}py as some naysayers would have you believe.

It is, by far, one of the slowest apps I have installed in terms of redraw
speed. WinForms could REALLY stand some optimization...
So, .NET is resulting in:
1) more bugs (because code is being rewritten even though it was working
fine before)
2) slower apps that require ungodly amounts of RAM
3) a download that requires broadband internet connectivity during
installation (in order to get the .NET runtime)
Great.
 

Re: There is no .NET in Vista Code?

Quote
www.bloglines.com/preview
Finally, someone who is not a sheeple that will pull one example as a
"proof" to further spew dribble from the mouth. While one man has
extensively researched a topic, countless other refuse to do their own
research and instead point to him as gospel when trying to make the point
that agrees with their own philosophy that they should embrace .NET because
MS doesn't. What they're really saying is that they have no interest in
seeing for themselves the pros/cons of another platform, and adding it to
their toolbox if/when the time is needed.
One is an isue of credibility. Grimes is credible, but he also stepped down
and lost his confidence in .NET. Rather than leaving it at that, he embarks
on a quest to prove his own convictions and .NET and MS be damned. While
many applications in Vista may not be .NET applications, I see no reason why
they should be. MS has millions of lines of codebase and it doesn't make
sense to rewrite them and introduce bugs that have long since been
corrected. Just because it doesn't meet his own expectations, and the fact
that he is on such a vengeance towards .NET, I decreasingly regard him as
credible and view him instead as just another source of information to
consider.
Maybe he's right, maybe he's not. But MS is spending billions on .NET and
even the SQL server team integrated .NET into their database engine. Office
got sound .NET integration and is getting more. Office Live is based on
.NET. I think they have complete faith in .NET. They are using .NET where
it makes the most sense (in their constantly revising strategy, regardless
whether it matches our own strategy).
I'm a .NET believer, and I am highly dissappointed with many of MS's
decisions lately, such as the unportability of .NET 1x ==>2.0 without
endless frustration, .NET is a formiddable platform and much more pleasant
to work with than VB6 and C++. I am not a Java programmer so I can not comment
on how it stacks against Java. I know what I have read but having not made
any efforts myself to make my own informed decision based on experience, I
choose to stay out of such discussions.
I do make a living programming the .NET platform, and while it has things I
abhor and things I love, I am generally satisfied with it and it keeps
getting better. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but when you read
the weblogs of MS programmers and most former MS programmers you read of
nothing but e{*word*277}ment. Certainly they are not living in a culture where
they own employer makes them work long endless hours for a product the
company has no faith in. It is rather the people who are not MS programmers
and generally people who don't want to be, or who have jumped ship, that
cling to such nonsense.
<ducks and hides>...
Thanks,
Shawn
 

Re: There is no .NET in Vista Code?

"John Jacobson" writes:
Quote

So, .NET is resulting in:

1) more bugs (because code is being rewritten even though it was working
fine before)
2) slower apps that require ungodly amounts of RAM
3) a download that requires broadband internet connectivity during
installation (in order to get the .NET runtime)

Great.
Damnit Jake, I wish you wouldn't do that. My dog was so amused by the
nonsense that you spewed forth that he is rolling on the floor howling like
a banshee. Now I will be up half the night getting him quieted down so the
neighbors will stop complaining.
 

Re: There is no .NET in Vista Code?

"Ryan McGinty" writes:
Quote
>I've always admited that VCL Forms were faster than WinForms but that
>WinForms are plenty fast to make desktop apps (such as Omea) that are
>not useless and {*word*99}py as some naysayers would have you believe.

It is, by far, one of the slowest apps I have installed in terms of redraw
speed. WinForms could REALLY stand some optimization...
How do you measure redraw speed? I am running the latest version of Omea
(2.1.4) on a PIII 800MHz, 512Mb using Intel's onboard graphics (no speed
demon machine). I know this is somewhat subjective but when normally using
the app I don't notice all that much difference between Omea and say OE from
a usability POV. If I take the lower right corner an quickly change the size
of the apps window to force a redraw, then Omea is slightly slower than OE
but not by very much and certainly not enough to judged "useless and
{*word*99}py".
As I have said before, in my judgment WinForms are plenty fast for building
the typical commercial business applications. YMMV
I know I am in Microsoft's tank on this but still I don't understand what all
the fuss is about. If one doesn't want to use WinForms in a .NET app then
use VCL Forms, if one doesn't want to use .NET use W32. Why go around making
mountains outta mole hills just to poke fingers in each others eyes?
 

Re: There is no .NET in Vista Code?

"Shawn B." wrote
Quote

Finally, someone who is not a sheeple...
I must admit, I have never seen that word before!
www.langmaker.com/db/eng_sheeple.htm
Etymology [< sheep & (peop)le]. Note. Coined by right-wing activist
Barbara Anderson in 1984 to mock people who believe in the m{*word*203}authority
of the U.S. Government and its right to impose taxes in its name.
Definition A political term, generally used in reference to the
American people, referring to those who follow the flock rather than take
the time to think for themselves in any capacity.
 

Re: There is no .NET in Vista Code?

Quote
Definition A political term, generally used in reference to the
American people, referring to those who follow the flock rather than take
the time to think for themselves in any capacity.
Consider this an extension of its use, to refer to those who follow someone
else's opinion on a matter rather than take the time to think for themselves
in any capacity. <gigles>
Thanks,
Shawn
 

Re: There is no .NET in Vista Code?

"Shawn B." writes:
Quote
>Definition A political term, generally used in reference to the
>American people, referring to those who follow the flock rather than take
>the time to think for themselves in any capacity.

Consider this an extension of its use, to refer to those who follow
someone else's opinion on a matter rather than take the time to think for
themselves in any capacity. <gigles>
In that case just consider me a .NET programmer in sheeple clothing,
thinking makes my head hurt so from now on I am wearing my sheeple-skin
jacket.<g>
 

Re: There is no .NET in Vista Code?

Quote
How do you measure redraw speed? I am running the latest version of
Omea (2.1.4) on a PIII 800MHz, 512Mb using Intel's onboard graphics
(no speed demon machine). I know this is somewhat subjective but when
When Outlook shows me an email alert (that fades to transparent) and Omea
is open, it sits there and flickers the screen horribly. You can actually
watch it paint top to bottom. Plus, you can take an explorer window and
drag it rapidly over the app and see "left-overs" where the screen hasn't
totally redrawn. This doesn't happen in any other app that I have open,
but to be honest could be something in Omea's implementation more than a
"framework thing." I have an AMD 64 3200+ and nVidia 6600GT. The fact that
I can see any redraw on a business app of any sort is sorta depressing ;)
Quote
Omea is slightly slower than OE but not by very much and certainly not
enough to judged "useless and {*word*99}py".
I never said that. I was just offering my opinion about the not-so-{*word*226}
redraw speed and the fact that it is a 100% .NET app (one of the few that
I've come across). I use it every day, and it is not "useless and {*word*99}py"
at all.
Quote
what all the fuss is about. If one doesn't want to use WinForms in a
.NET app then use VCL Forms, if one doesn't want to use .NET use W32.
Only we Delphi peeps have this choice* and it should not be taken for granted
;)
Ryan
*Well, in one up-to-date IDE anyway...
 

Re: There is no .NET in Vista Code?

Quote
So, .NET is resulting in:

1) more bugs (because code is being rewritten even though it was
working
fine before)
2) slower apps that require ungodly amounts of RAM
3) a download that requires broadband internet connectivity during
installation (in order to get the .NET runtime)
I believe this trend has been the "bloat is best" mantra at MS for awhile
and started back with VB(Visual Basic) :) You can not have sleek {*word*226} programs running on
an OS that keeps growing exponentially in size and requirements. That would
just be wrong.
Seriously though, .NET has some nice things and some great benefits. Unfortunately,
having used Delphi all these years, their are no "killer" reasons that I
have seen to get jealous (at least in what I use day-to-day). It has its
place, but Win32 (partially because of a large code base, partially because
I still have a choice, and partially because I have the most experience with
it) is where I am staying for awhile.
That doesn't mean I wouldn't look at .NET for some new side projects, but
it just is not compelling enough to justify porting existing stuff at this
point...
Ryan
 

Re: There is no .NET in Vista Code?

"Ryan McGinty" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes
Quote

I believe this trend has been the "bloat is best" mantra at MS for awhile
and started back with VB(Visual Basic) :) You can not have sleek {*word*226} programs running on
an OS that keeps growing exponentially in size and requirements. That
would just be wrong.

One of the great things for developers producing .NET applications is that
this trend has at last been reversed.
Maybe you are thinking of Delphi .NET apps? These certainly have some
significant overhead but that is a Delphi problem not a .NET problem.
Typically my non-VCL, non-Delphi .NET apps are less than 1/10th of the size
of the original Delphi Win32 app that I translated.
e.g. one Win32 Delphi app I ported was originally 670K. The new Component
Pascal for .NET version exe is a sleek {*word*226} 44K. Added bonuses are that it
has more features than the original and no longer needs third-party
components - everything I needed was included in the .NET framework
The requirement for the user to download the .NET framework is the only
thing that is holding me back from distributing .NET apps. However, it is a
very short-term issue. Sooner rather than later it will be pre-installed
along with the OS (some manufacturers are already doing so). It will be no
more necessary to download and install the framework than it was to download
and install Comctl32.dll and all the other Win32 dlls needed for your Win32
app to run.
Unfortunately for Delphi, it is highly unlikely that the VCL.NET framework
will ever be bundled in with the OS.
 

Re: There is no .NET in Vista Code?

Chris Burrows writes:
Quote
Maybe you are thinking of Delphi .NET apps? These certainly have some
significant overhead but that is a Delphi problem not a .NET problem.

Typically my non-VCL, non-Delphi .NET apps are less than 1/10th of
the size of the original Delphi Win32 app that I translated.

e.g. one Win32 Delphi app I ported was originally 670K. The new
Component Pascal for .NET version exe is a sleek {*word*226} 44K. Added
bonuses are that it has more features than the original and no longer
needs third-party components - everything I needed was included in
the .NET framework

The requirement for the user to download the .NET framework is the
only thing that is holding me back from distributing .NET apps.
However, it is a very short-term issue. Sooner rather than later it
will be pre-installed along with the OS (some manufacturers are
already doing so). It will be no more necessary to download and
install the framework than it was to download and install
Comctl32.dll and all the other Win32 dlls needed for your Win32 app
to run.

Unfortunately for Delphi, it is highly unlikely that the VCL.NET
framework will ever be bundled in with the OS.
Please don't trot out that tired old argument. I remember it being
used a lot to compare lean VB(Visual Basic) EXEs to Delphi, conveniently forgetting
the additional runtime. And if you decide that you need third party
libraries or controls in Winforms apps, you have to deploy more
assemblies. In most cases, where I can not control the machines being
installed to, I prefer having as much as possible rolled in to a single
EXE. it is easier for installation and, more importantly, support.
I'm not arguing against .Net. The particular false economy of exe size
always just bugged me.
On the bright side, I understand there's at least one tool that will
roll everything I need for a Winforms app in to a single EXE. I
haven't looked at it, but it is there if it is important enough for me.
Having the .Net framework as a prerequisite is kind of a sticking
point, but not a serious one. If there are enough advantages for me
and/or the customer (mostly me), I have no problem requiring that they
have the correct framework and any additional pieces (like WinFX)
installed. I deploy a lot of applications on CDs, which are cheap, so
I can just include what they need.
And I agree that Microsoft probably won't ship Windows with the VCL.Net
pieces. For any pieces that aren't rolled in to the EXE, the same
argument applies. If there is enough advantage, I will make sure the
customer has what they need to run the application. I have a recent
example where I couldn't use MidasLib and had to include Midas.dll in
the installation. Oh well...
--
Regards,
Bruce McGee
Glooscap Software
 

Re: There is no .NET in Vista Code?

I.P. Nichols writes:
Quote
As I have said before, in my judgment WinForms are plenty fast for
building the typical commercial business applications. YMMV
It does. My mileage, I mean. Native VCL and VCL.Net forms are
noticeably snappier than Winforms on faster hardware than you mention.
Enough that customers comment on it. Yeah, I know there are steps you
can take to make this smoother, but that time could be used more
productively.
For the cases where I have to use Winforms, I am still kind of holding
out hope that Microsoft adds support for acceleration in hardware to at
least bring GDI+ on par with GDI, but I understand this won't happen.
--
Regards,
Bruce McGee
Glooscap Software
 

Re: There is no .NET in Vista Code?

"Ryan McGinty"writes:
Quote
>How do you measure redraw speed?

When Outlook shows me an email alert (that fades to transparent) and Omea
is open, it sits there and flickers the screen horribly. You can actually
watch it paint top to bottom. Plus, you can take an explorer window and
drag it rapidly over the app and see "left-overs" where the screen hasn't
totally redrawn. This doesn't happen in any other app that I have open,
but to be honest could be something in Omea's implementation more than a
"framework thing." I have an AMD 64 3200+ and nVidia 6600GT. The fact
that I can see any redraw on a business app of any sort is sorta
depressing ;)
While I don't use Outlook, I am aware that when dragging a window across
Omea it will leave "left-overs" or "tracks". I know it would be prettier if
that didn't happen and wish it didn't but I also wish I were rich instead of
being so doggone handsome.<g>
Quote
>Omea is slightly slower than OE but not by very much and certainly not
>enough to judged "useless and {*word*99}py".

I never said that. I was just offering my opinion about the not-so-{*word*226}
redraw speed and the fact that it is a 100% .NET app (one of the few that
I've come across). I use it every day, and it is not "useless and {*word*99}py"
at all.
Never intended to imply you had said that, rather it was in the paragraph of
mine you had quoted and I simply said it again to emphasize my displeasure
about those naysayers who would have us believe that WinForm apps are
totally "useless and {*word*99}py". Opps, there I said it again...
 

Re: There is no .NET in Vista Code?

"Ryan McGinty" writes:
Quote

That doesn't mean I wouldn't look at .NET for some new side projects, but
it just is not compelling enough to justify porting existing stuff at this
point...
It always has intrigued me as to why someone would take a perfectly good
Delphi W32 app and degrade it by recompiling it into a .NET app.
I can readily accept the argument for reusing the legacy Delphi business
logic code in a new .NET project but heavens forbid, not the legacy UI code.
However it has been my experience that translating (rewriting) the legacy
Delphi business logic code into C# has disclose many places the legacy code
can be improved. If for no other reason as I get older I get better... And
of course after translating I am no longer "stuck" with all that legacy
Delphi code that restrains me from adopting .NET for all my new projects -
and who said I could justify my crazy scheme.<g>