On Mon, 18 Feb 2013 12:34:20 -0800, Jacob Carlborg <d...@me.com> wrote:
On 2013-02-18 21:10, Adam Wilson wrote:
Indeed it is a massive undertaking, but platform independence is KEY to
making this work for D because D itself is platform independent.
Building on-top of native kits comes with it's own complexities too. So
kits have things that others don't, so you end up with a very small set
of available widgets, AND no way to make new ones, short of huge amounts
of custom coding. You also run into layout problems as you can specify a
single size for all widgets, they have different paddings and margins so
the UI never looks right outside of the UI system the software was
designed on (for example the KDE widgets are very different sizes from
GNOME).
I haven't run into any problems with different sizes of widgets using
DWT/SWT. Do you think DWT/SWT just lay out widgets with standard
behavior? The code contains a huge amount of configuration to make the
widgets behave the same on all platforms. Setting values, overriding
rendering functions an so on.
Of course you can make new ones. Perhaps not as easy. But I see no
reason why you couldn't add a layer on top make it just as easy.
Define "not as easy"? I can restyle a List in WPF so completely that you
can't even tell it's a list in about 1/2 hour. Sure the list may not look
much like a list but it functions like one and looks the way that makes
most sense for it's usage. I have NEVER met an OS toolkit that could come
close to doing such major restyling so quickly. I'd have to build a new
widget from the ground up. QML can ... but it's also not an OS widget
toolkit either. QML also proves that it isn't just MS that thinks this is
a good thing...
The custom tool kits always invent their own ways of doing things,
breaking with the rest of the OS. The user then just gets confused when
one thing works in one application but not in the other.
I have yet to encounter this fabled user confusion during usability
testing, so I am gonna file this one under "myth".
The beauty of WPF/Silverlight/WinRT XAML, is that it looks the same no
matter where you're running. I understand that there are purists out
there who believe that you should always use the OS widgets, but in
today's fractured environments, it's just not realistic from a UI design
perspective anymore.
It only runs on Windows.
That has more to do with the fact that MS made it than any technical
limitation.
XAML-type systems have the same thing in common with HTML/CSS that
EVERYONE loves right now, with a little bit of design effort, they can
automatically reflow themselves for any device. Like it or not, the OS
widgets are a hold over from the pre-mobile era. How many people
actually use the default OS widget skin for HTML buttons?
If you want to build serious applications that take full advantage of
the platform, that never works. Just look at iPhone and iPad, they have
different widgets even though they're so similar.
It does with a Silverlight type toolkit. The iPhone/iPad widget situation
demonstrates part of the problem with OS widgets. They are tied
intrinsically to the platform, I am trying to free myself from having to
have multiple UI layouts for each platform. My point about fracturing is
that the same app can have completely different layouts from iPhone to
Android, all enforced by the OS. You don't honestly think thats a good
thing for cross-platform usability ... ? Sure, much of the difference has
more to do with Apple being dicks in the courtroom but as a third party
that doesn't provide any one style, they can't really make a legal case
against it. It's not like I am trying to copy their style or anything...
--
Adam Wilson
IRC: LightBender
Project Coordinator
The Horizon Project
http://www.thehorizonproject.org/
