When creating a new GUI, is WPF the preferred choi

Question

Most restrictions and tricks with windows forms are common to most programmers. But since .NET 3.0 there is also WPF available, the Windows Presentation Foundation. It is said that you can make "sexy applications" more easy with it and with .NET 3.5 SP1 it got a good speed boost on execution.

But on the other side a lot of things are working different with WPF. I will not say it is more difficult but you have to learn "everything" from scratch.

My question: Is it worth to spend this extra time when you have to create a new GUI and there is no time pressure for the project?

Answer 1

There are many differences. We loved WPF for:

1. The declarative style of programming.
2. Animations and state transitions
3. Expression Blend is a great tool
4. Good style support.

However, we stuck with Windows Forms because:

1. The extra time it takes for a developer to learn WPF when they already know Windows Forms.
2. WPF will not run on Windows 2000 or lower.

Answer 2

As a side bonus, Silverlight is based on WPF and starting with either lets you gain the know how for working with the other. If things continue to go web based, having prior knowledge (and a library of existing code) to transfer easily to the browser (or Windows Live Mesh) might help give your software an extra lease of life.

Answer 3

I don't agree with some of the answers here. WPF is really well suited for line of business (LOB) applications. (The frog design LOB client is the best example). And besides all the possibilities to have your UI be eye candy (which is not necessary in business applications), WPF offers a lot more for you.

The data binding and templating features are just superior to Windows Forms. It also offers a far better way for separating code and presentation. We've successfully used WPF for 2 LOB applications in teams with no more than 2-3 developers.

The biggest problem you will face is probably the steep learning curve of WPF (compared to Windows Forms) which will decrease development speed with developers not used to WPF.

Answer 4

Well, one answer is "when you have to support 1.1 or 2.0", since WPF is part of .NET 3.0. There are known OS limitations for WPF, and there is an obvious skills issue: if you have a team of developers that know winforms, then it may be easier to turn out robust code with winforms. However, if you are writing a lot of UI code it is probably worth beginning to pick up WPF at some point.

WPF also shares a lot in common with Silverlight, so it has transferable benefits.

Answer 5

WPF requires either Windows Vista or Windows XP SP2, which is not an onerous requirement, but it is a relevant one. If you want to run on Windows 2000 (which some people still do), then WPF won't work for you.

WPF is also a newer technology and not as proven as Windows Forms so you might choose Windows Forms as a less risky option, particularly for larger applications.

That being said, yes WPF is the future. Visual Studio 2010 is being rewritten in WPF, which will probably be the largest WPF application to date and it will also be a real test for the technology.

Obviously, legacy Windows Forms applications would be another situation where it is the correct choice.

Answer 6

The biggest consideration when deciding which one to use is to consider what .NET Framework your target audience have installed. I find that more people have the lower .NET Framework versions that only support Windows Forms, but that's just my personal experience.