macosxrumors: Microsoft porting Windows Presentation Foundation to Mac OS X

Posted:
in macOS edited January 2014
Quote:

Microsoft announced earlier this week that, along with the release of Vista, it is porting its Windows Presentation Foundation framework to Mac OS X as well as for handheld devices. Microsoft calls the project Windows Presentation Foundation Everywhere (or WPFE).



Windows Presentation Foundation (WPF) is a user interface toolkit, mainly based on a Microsoft version of XAML language, that will be made available to .Net programmers so as to create powerful user interfaces for Windows Vista.



Porting WPF to the Mac means that Microsoft will also have to bring a big part of its CLR to the platform. We can also expect the company to make extensive use of the technology in future versions of its Mac software.



WPF will probably also help other companies than Microsoft to port their Vista applications to the Mac easier, as usually the biggest part of a standard application?s development is the user interface.



[...]



The full article is

here




This could be very important for corporate customers in which two important deployment environments are Java and .NET.



It could mark a new era for the MBU by easing the share of source code between Office for Windows and Office for MacOS X.

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 8
    toweltowel Posts: 1,479member
    Wait, is this like the Microsoft equivalent of Yellow Box for Windows? Write in .Net, compile to run anywhere?
  • Reply 2 of 8
    Yes in a way... more like Java. Develop on a platform and deploy everywhere...



    But the port of the user interface layer doesn't mean that everything an application need will be ported... The CLR (the VM and the core classes) will undoubtly be needed but the fate of other parts of the .NET framework in not certain on the Mac.



    But it's still a good news for the Mac platform and for the future commitment of the MBU.
  • Reply 3 of 8
    kickahakickaha Posts: 8,760member
    So let me get this straight... they'll port the godawful UI, but not the libraries that do actual work.



    And this is a good thing.







    Either that's whacked, or I really need more coffee.
  • Reply 4 of 8
    andersanders Posts: 6,523member
    [Show hand]Eh. Stupid kid in class here.[/show hand]



    What does this actually mean? That apps can be ported from windows and keep their menu bar in the app window and make the port easier?
  • Reply 5 of 8
    kickahakickaha Posts: 8,760member
    It means that Windows apps ported to the Mac would look like Windows apps, not Mac apps, but the developers would still have to rewrite all the logic on the back end, because none of the libraries that get the work done would be ported.



    Worst of all worlds.
  • Reply 6 of 8
    The problem is that beyond HTML there is no W3C standardization around a more modern XML like language for the description of UI.



    There is actually two languages for this:



    - XUL developed for the UI of Mozilla/Firefox. David Hyatt (which now works on the Safari team) has worked on this project some years ago.

    - XAML developed by Microsoft.



    The two specifications are aimed at allowing the deployment of "Rich Client". That's applications that can be hosted on a server (like a Web application) but with a more powerful/complex user interface and more client side logic (more client side logic than AJAX).



    In this way it's a important thing that Microsoft port Windows Foundation to the Mac.



    Don't forget also the fact that Microsoft tends to go towards ASP application (for application like Office).



    So in that regard, you could see Windows Foundation like a way to remotely access remote applications.



    An .NET/Windows Foundation application that's run on the local machine won't run. But the user interface of a remote Windows Foundation application could be accessed from your Mac.



    So it's important to have it for not been isolated from those applications.
  • Reply 7 of 8
    chuckerchucker Posts: 5,089member
    There's also serialized Carbon over XML, which is what iTMS does, but I don't think Apple intends to ever release that for general use.
Sign In or Register to comment.