Develop Reference

which is simple framework for WPF ?

I am doing lot of desktop application but using .Net WinForm.
But now for productivity as WPF provide lot of further. I am stating to doing development using WPF.
We are developing small application not very large but lot of enhancement comes for most of application.
I am just want know which WPF framework/approach for WPF is good for me with considering following point
Framework is Simple to understand and manage
If support Fast Development its very good for us
New enhancement its easy to add
Its Support UI management
Support new further link LinQ, Entity Framework

WPF, in general, doesn't really require a framework. Choosing an appropriate framework really should happen after understanding the basics.
There are quite a few good, lightweight "frameworks" that help fill in the gaps, such as MVVM Light and Caliburn Micro.
However, if you're new to WPF, I'd start at the fundimentals, first. I wrote a series of articles on moving to WPF from Windows Forms which explains how to think about WPF, and why you should try to think differently than you do in Windows Forms. Often, when people first start using WPF, they make assumptions (like the requirement for a "framework") based on their Windows Forms experience, and waste a lot of time that could be better spent just building the application directly.

To not scary you, but WPF It is not simple, especially if you are moving from Windows Forms. I, personally think it would be easier to someone who never did before desktop development, or at least WindowsForms dev.
So if you are searching for something to learn fast and boost your productivity, it's not about that.
Wpf is about testability, reliabity and scallability which is really beautiful and I strongly encorage you to begin to learn it. But consider that you will need understand and learn it, write basically more code then, may be, you did in WinForms. But this is a pay you have to pay for most advanced, flexible and powerful windows desktop dev framework I ever worked with.
In short, you have to learn it:)

Quickest (Easiest) GUI MFC or C# or QT or?

I have just finished my first real commercial application written in C++ / MFC.
The application consisted of agent installed on users workstations which in turn was controlled from a GUI Application on an administrators workstation. I choose C++ / MFC for these reasons.
Because I didn't know C#
Because I was not sure how long it would take for me to become as productive in a new lanuage
Because I did not want the hassle of installing the .NET runtime on workstations some of which might be W2K.
Now I am thinking of my second application which will again consist of an agent & a GUI Application. I am happy to continue on the same track with the agent for the reasons above but the GUI application will be much more complicated then the first. The first GUI app took a very long time to develop, was torturous and looked out of date even though it was freshly made.
Should I just bite the bullet with .net c# or look into something like QT.
TIA.

If you want really fast results, use .NET WinForms. Nothing beats the speed of putting together a GUI app and filling it with life, except maybe Delphi. The C# language and the .NET Base Class Library will also give you a huge productivity gain, even over the already great Qt framework. If you stick to the basic Windows Forms controls, it will even run on Mono.
WPF is even more productive once you're used to it, but getting used to it takes way more time than for Windows Forms.

.NET C# is a very good choice for GUI applications more generally. It's simple, to-the-point and there are vast resources on the internet.
The only thing against it I can think of, is platform compatibility, but if you're limiting yourself to C++/MFC, that shouldn't be a concern to you.
Even if you want to go platform-independent some time later, you can make a separate Gtk in .NET on Linux (Mono, the open-source .NET framework). Heck, there's even a Cocoa (Mac OS X) binding, I just don't know how mature it is. Furthermore Windows Forms is largely supported in Mono already... it really surprised me how mature it is when I was trying it out, although my primary experience with C# is on Windows.
For GUI application, you won't regret using C#. Even if you want to go cross-platform, and certainly not if you intend to only target Windows clients.

C# will almost definitely make you more productive!

Delphi. Produces stand-alone Windows executables which will work fine on Win2K (best OS Microsoft ever produced - this post is being written on it). Only disadvantage is Object Pascal, but if you know C++ it's very easy to pick up - and its was designed buy the guy who designed C#. The IDE is several orders of magnitude more productive than MFC with VS.

I've done them all - a monkey can use C#, it's all drag and drop interfacing and public accessors. I wouldn't wish using MFC upon my worst enemy, and QT just wasn't as intuitive as C# for me. It's also really easy to make C# look nice. Difficult things like changing colors and flashing controls are trivial in C#. It also has built in styles to use. I use it professionally daily. The only time I use C++ is if I'm programming a server where every microsecond counts.

The first question would be exactly what caused the difficulty in developing the GUI with MFC. Was it inherent to MFC, or what it because you were learning something new, and didn't really know what you were doing? To put it slightly differently, if you had to do it again today, how would the difficulty compare?
Make no mistake about it -- MFC is an old design with far more than its share of problems, shortcoming and design flaws. .NET is a lot newer, but has far more than its share of problems, shortcoming and design flaws as well.
Along with that, .NET is just plain huge. It's reasonably well organized, which helps, but it still takes quite a while to digest the sheer volume of information necessary to use it well. Likewise, while C# (for the most obvious example) is a perfectly decent language, learning to use it well isn't an overnight task either. This is probably a smaller issue though: C# doesn't really have many new concepts compared to C++. Just for example, a competent C++ programmer can easily read C# almost immediately, and while he may not use it optimally, can also write bits of C# immediately as well.

on which platform will your second app run on?
if it's XP and up i'll suggest C# / WinForms / GDI.

C# isn't that hard to adapt to, and there are literally a ton of examples online, and great books (the Head First one caught my eye as you can code a nethack clone and other fun projects). I've had to transition from C++ to C# myself, and it wasn't that rough at all (in fact it seemed like a pretty easy transition), and allowed me to rapidly prototype.
Good luck!

Windows Mobile is hell for new developers? (If I'm not wrong)

I am new here and new to windows mobile development. But I have seen and experienced, for new developers having no trainers or experienced people around windows mobile development is like a hell shaking one. In complex topics you are going to find help from nowhere except you are lucky.
So my question is how should I gain expertise in windows mobile without having any trainer. The thing that i only know is C# and have a rough experience of one and a half months in windows mobile development

Yea.... it's quite a step to be honest. It's evil as well because at first glance it looks to be so very simple but then it turns around and bites you.
I speak from experience as I made this journey starting in 2003. Oh, I had no trainer either so I just learnt via bitter experience.
Know your limitations
I remember the first ever CF application. I was such an idiot..... I wasn't much good at developing back then either. First mistake I made was overestimating CF 1.0. I couldn't possibly imagine that the CF didn't have a read-write datagrid so I specced it...... then found out that oh yes, there wasn't one. So I had to write one myself (and remember I was rubbish at this time too). I hacked one into the existing datagrid (although tbh I should have just started from scratch). I remember that the "delete" function where I had to remove a row and then select the "now currently selected row" was hellish because it would go up or down depending on how many items were in the collection and where the scrollbar was.
There are many times that my desktop development buddies will categorise me as mad when I tell them what i'm working on.
"You're doing manual Xml Parsing? Are you crazy?"
"Ewwww code gen?"
"You.... re-use your windows forms?"
Yes, working on CF will make you look crazy to outsiders.
Performance
This can be taken to extremes but every little does help. If your building a big flexible application then think very carefully about perf. Consider replacing Reflection with codegen. Consider using an XmlReader instead of an XmlDocument. Sure this advice might be crazy in most cases for desktop but for CF it is sensible.
Know your PInvokes
In desktop land you can live in pure managed. No chance of that happening on CF. Some of the simplest things (playing a sound, setting the time, changing the volume, networking, etc etc) still only exist in the unmanaged world in Mobile. OpenNETCF have done an awesome job in exposing some of these but you will always stumble into one or two where you will need to write your own.
There is true, there is false but there is also FILE-NOT-FOUND
PowerManagement, how I love thee. In a usual C# app code goes the way of the logic (like a fork with an IF), perhaps an exception will be thrown and perhaps there will be many threads treading the path of the code. This is already complex. Add into the mix the idea that the power might vanish at any point. That's right, the using statement you were relying on to call Dispose might never call dispose because the device was turned off and then it ran out of power.
Device specific fun
Another big difference in desktop/mobile world is hardware and manufacturers. On the PC you can generally assume that the hardware will be okay and firmware updates should do the job. In CF a firmware update may well kill your code. Some hardware might sorta, kinda work if you bash it round the head in a certain way. Basically your device integration can (worst case) be a big black hole of time. Remember to work this into your estimates.

Learning to write actual maintainable, saleable and usable applications for the Compact Framework is difficult. The CF is way, way scaled down, so there is a lot that a desktop developer will not have that they are used to. I'd been developing CF applications since before the CF existed and I still find many things difficult (just try getting a control with transparency drawn into a container on a form with a background image and doing it without looking at the code in Project Resistance).
In my opinion, there really are 2 things that are essential.
You must be able to read and understand C/C++. All of the SDK docs are in C and a large amount of samples for using anything useful on the device tend to be in native code. If you can't translate that, you're at a serious disadvantage and you have to hope someone else has already done the work. Even if they have, they you have to rely on them having done it right.
You need CF experience. Desktop experience is largely worthless in the CF environment once you get past syntax. Laziness like data binding, using Data Sets, not cleaning up objects and all of those things that desktop developers do every day will kill a CF app. You need to throw out what you think you know and start re-learning. You do that by simply writing code every day.
Don't expect miracles either. I've been writing code for Windows CE for over a decade now and the amount of things I don't know about the platform still far outweighs the things that I do know.

If I understand your question....
If you have c# experience, you will not really need a trainer.
Building on Windows Mobile is very straight forward and easy if you know .net.
If you have Visual Studio (I think any edition apart from express), it is simply a matter of starting a new project and selecting mobile device.
I honestly love it! I build small applications all the time for my phone... little calculators for when I go shopping, programs that fire off a trigger and get a response from a web service and more... basically to make my phone do what I want (and no one else would be interested in).
I go by the method of simply writing an application the way I want and then if a feature is not supported by the cut down .net compact framework, I try and search for an alternative method that is - however, I have found little that doesn't work.

Developing in the CF can be challenging. Knowing C# is important before moving forward with the Compact Framework - to which you have. I would suggest that you start with smaller applications. Once you get the feel of Visual Studio and working with the emulator, I would suggest that you play around with a setup project. Once you get an idea on the flow of CF development, deployment will probably be your next step.
One area that I find that I spend time on is Designer support. If you are writing controls for other developers - design time support is crucial. Checkout the article at http://www.mooseworkssoftware.com/VS2005%20Control.htm for more information (I know its for VS2005, but it really helped our development).
As you move forward, create small projects in different areas and learn the pitfalls to each. An example would be GUI and dealing with different screen resolutions that are supported by different devices. Next, maybe DB support. After you get comfortable with a couple of areas, bring them together in a project and build from there.
Give it time - sometimes it will be painful, but the possiblities are endless in writing applications for the CF and what the market is calling for.
Craig

To answer your question, Windows Mobile is like paradise for new developers. You use the same tools and languages you are used to from the desktop world and essential things like in device debugging and emulators are just there for you. You can build simple applications with no training, just by following one of the many beginners tutorials available.
After that, there are of course many complicated and difficult issues to overcome, but in my opinion the fact that you will be able to start quickly is very important.
Also, you need to also need to compare Windows Mobile with other mobile platforms. Compared to platforms like Symbian, Brew and J2ME Windows Mobile is much more advantageous for new developers. I don't have experience with iPhone and can't comment about it, but comparing to everything else, Windows Mobile is easier.

.Net is increasing my development time - am I missing something?

I recently started playing with C#, but I am finding it very frustrating. It seems every time I want to add what I think is a simple control, I end up either scouring the internet or writing my own. I just feel like I spend more time recreating controls to get them to work the way they should, and less time actually creating applications.
For example: In another question, I asked if it was possible to remove the border on a combobox; something I thought should be built into the control, but alas I had to build my own control for this simple alteration.
Am I just too new to C#/.net, or am I just expecting too much? I know SO loves C# so don't bite my head off for feeling this way, just help me understand what I am missing and whether I should continue learning and working with C#.

I spent 4+ hours today tracking down an 8 byte memory leak in a C++ program. There are threads involved and attaching the debugger would alter the thread timing so I couldn't do even something as simple as breaking on the Nth alloc to see where the leak was. Additionally I knew generally in between which two events the memory was allocated. Unfortunately both threads thought that was a great time to allocate lots and lots of 8 byte size objects. At the end of the investigation I found a ref count error on a COM pointer was leading to the leak.
Not having to pull your hair out over investigations like this is why you should move to C#.

For example. In another question I asked if it was possible to remove the border on a combobox; something I thought should be built into the control, but alas I had to build my own control for this simple alteration.
Of course you can't remove the border on combo boxes. They are Win32 controls and they have to play by the rules of Win32. That inlcudes giving the OS and the user, not the application control over styling.
If you want something you can style completely on Windows then you need to look at WPF.

I think what you really mean is:
Windows Forms on .NET is increasing my development time - am I missing something?
I think you are missing several things:
Open mindedness - with any new programming language comes not only new syntax, but new paradigms. If you come from C++ paradigms such as garbage collection may sound "too automatic" from you and you'd like to have more control but alas, you have to let go. Whenever you jump from one paradigm to another the prerequisite is always the ability to unlearn what you've always known.
Windows controls aren't the same as web controls - I've checked your previous questions and they look like you've been from VBScript, which probably means that you use it either from Office or ASP Classic. That being said your demand for controls that were easy to conjure when you were in the web would be much tougher for Windows -- Windows was not designed to be easily modifiable. That's why WPF/Silverlight was made.
Productivity is a function of ability to learn - There, I said it. It might hurt but, if you have cynicism or hostility blocking your learning process, you will simply not become productive soon. If you've been used to not having to learn new things, you will also not become productive soon. If you think you're really good at learning new things you will find ways to become productive in that language -- and then we can discuss about merits of your arguments vis-a-vis development time.

With any new technology there is a substantial learning curve at first, and some have a higher learning curve then others. I think you will see as you gain more experience that these things become substantially easier. C# has a lot of power with the .Net architecture to leverage from, but a lot of it takes time to really appreciate. C# is also changing and growing to allow for new coding styles (newer versions incorporate a lot of influences from functional programming) that keep it both in vogue and powerful. Stick with it and keep learning.

You're not the first, nor the last developer to have this sentiment. It always seemed to me that every time I needed to do something that wasn't part of a demo, I had to spend hours trying to figure out how to accomplish one small task. Much of my frustration was with ASP.NET web controls.
That being said, I found that once I got over the (steep IMHO) learning curve of control development, many of my frustrations were eliminated. I feel that using inheritance and overriding virtual members to create new behavior is a very clean approach. Plus, it creates output that can be very easily reused. Using OO practices just always seemed better to me than pasting JavaScript snippets all over the place.
Microsoft does a good job of providing many base controls to use out of the box, but every application always seems to need something that's missing. I would recommend learning control development, or looking to third party solutions if possible. There are many companies that exist solely to fill the voids. Either way, I wouldn't judge the whole language based off of the default control set.

It sounds like you are just new to it. It's not C# that's the problem it's the .net framework. If you used VB.net for example you'd likely have the same issue.
I went through this issue when I went from classic ASP to ASP.net. For half a year or so I felt the things I wanted to do in ASP.net were so much easier in classic ASP. Eventually that went away. Now I'm going through it again as I try to learn ASP.net MVC. Things I could do in 5 minutes in ASP.net are taking me days to figure out in ASP.net MVC.
In your case it sounds like you are using windows forms. Were you working with winforms before (i.e. VB6)? If you want more control over styling you might want to look at WPF.

Yes. You are missing something -- experience with the tools you are using.
For example, a few months ago I decided that my next project would be in ASP.NET MVC. I had been doing WebForms for several years and had dabbled with RubyOnRails for a couple of personal apps. MVC fit in with my desire to increase the testability of my apps and I prefer writing my own HTML for the most part anyway.
Despite my experience with ASP.NET, C#, and experience with MVC in RoR, it still took my awhile to match the velocity I had with WebForms. I felt like I had to spend all my time looking for how to do stuff. Now, a few months later I feel like I'm able to develop just as quickly as before. More to the point, I know the various paradigms and can apply them easily when faced with a similar problem to one I've solved before. I'm also building up a collection of extensions, snippets, and components that can be reused over and over.
I suggest that you give C#/.NET a chance for long enough to get over the inevitable early struggle and then decide whether it's the technology that's the problem.

Could it be that what you're trying to do is not, let's say, common? Most GUI developers follow some sort of human interface guidelines so that their application fits in well with the window manager of the OS being used. It helps with the user experience. Most GUI elements are designed with this in mind. So, it could be that you're trying to make your interface radically different than most, and thus, are finding that you have to do some custom work. That would be normal.

Depends on where you are coming from. I find c# to be very effective.
I rarely if ever use other controls as they often do not work 100% to my use cases and they create dependencies on your app.
So when you want to upgrade your project to c# 4 and can't because control X Y and Z don't work in c# 4 ... your SOL.
So I just take the hit up front and write my own controls which causes less grief later.

Future proofing a large UI Application - MFC with 2008 Feature pack, or C# and Winforms?

My company has developed a long standing product using MFC in Visual C++ as the defacto standard for UI development. Our codebase contains ALOT of legacy/archaic code which must be kept operational. Some of this code is older than me (originally written in the late 70s) and some members of our team are still on Visual Studio 6.
However, a conclusion has thankfully been reached internally that our product is looking somewhat antiquated compared to our competitors', and that something needs to be done.
I am currently working on a new area of the UI which is quite separate from the rest of the product. I have therefore been given the chance to try out 'new' technology stacks as a sort of proving ground before the long process of moving over the rest of the UI begins.
I have been using C# with Windows Forms and the .net framework for a while in my spare time and enjoy it, but am somewhat worried about the headaches caused by interop. While this particular branch of the UI won't require much interop with the legacy C++ codebase, I can forsee this becoming an issue in the future.
The alternative is just to continue with MFC, but try and take advantage of the new feature pack that shipped with VS2008. This I guess is the easiest option, but I worry about longevity and not taking advantage of the goodness that is .net...
So, which do I pick? We're a small team so my recommendation will quite probably be accepted as a future direction for our development - I want to get it right.
Is MFC dead? Is C#/Winforms the way forward? Is there anything else I'm totally missing? Help greatly appreciated!

I'm a developer on an app that has a ton of legacy MFC code, and we have all of your same concerns. A big driver for our strategy was to eliminate as much risk and uncertainty as we could, which meant avoiding The Big Rewrite. As we all know, TBR fails most of the time. So we chose an incremental approach that allows us to preserve modules that won't be changing in the current release, writing new features managed, andporting features that are getting enhancements to managed.
You can do this several ways:
Host WPF content on your MFC views (see here)
For MFC MDI apps, create a new WinForms framework and host your MFC MDI views (see here)
Host WinForms user controls in MFC Dialogs and Views (see here)
The problem with adopting WPF (option 1) is that it will require you to rewrite all of your UI at once, otherwise it'll look pretty schizophrenic.
The second approach looks viable but very complicated.
The third approach is the one we selected and it's been working very well. It allows you to selectively refresh areas of your app while maintaining overall consistency and not touching things that aren't broken.
The Visual C++ 2008 Feature Pack looks interesting, I haven't played with it though. Seems like it might help with your issue of outdated look. If the "ribbon" would be too jarring for your users you could look at third-party MFC and/or WinForms control vendors.
My overall recommendation is that interop + incremental change is definitely preferable to sweeping changes.
After reading your follow-up, I can definitely confirm that the productivity gains of the framework vastly outweigh the investment in learning it. Nobody on our team had used C# at the start of this effort and now we all prefer it.

Depending on the application and the willingness of your customers to install .NET (not all of them are), I would definitely move to WinForms or WPF. Interop with C++ code is hugely simplified by refactoring non-UI code into class libraries using C++/CLI (as you've noted in your selection of tags).
The only issue with WPF is that it may be hard to maintain the current look-and-feel. Moving to WinForms can be done while maintaining the current look of your GUI. WPF uses such a different model that to attempt to keep the current layout would probably be futile and would definitely not be in the spirit of WPF. WPF also apparently has poor performance on pre-Vista machines when more than one WPF process is running.
My suggestion is to find out what your clients are using. If most have moved to Vista and your team is prepared to put in a lot of GUI work, I would say skip WinForms and move to WPF. Otherwise, definitely look seriously at WinForms. In either case, a class library in C++/CLI is the answer to your interop concerns.

You don't give a lot of detail on what your legacy code does or how it's structured. If you have certain performance criteria you might want to maintain some of your codebase in C++. You'll have an easier time doing interop with your old code if it is exposed in the right way - can you call into the existing codebase from C# today? Might be worth thinking about a project to get this structure right.
On the point of WPF, you could argue that WinForms may be more appropriate. Moving to WinForms is a big step for you and your team. Perhaps they may be more comfortable with the move to WinForms? It's better documented, more experience in the market, and useful if you still need to support windows 2000 clients.
You might be interested in Extending MFC Applications with the .NET Framework
Something else to consider is C++/CLI, but I don't have experience with it.

Thank you all kindly for your responses, it's reassuring to see that generally the consensus follows my line of thinking. I am in the fortunate situation that our software also runs on our own custom hardware (for the broadcast industry) - so the choice of OS is really ours and is thrust upon our customers. Currently we're running XP/2000, but I can see a desire to move up to Vista soon.
However, we also need to maintain very fine control over GPU performance, which I guess automatically rules out WPF and hardware acceleration? I should have made that point in my original post - sorry. Perhaps it's possible to use two GPUs... but that's another question altogether...
The team doesn't have any significant C# experience and I'm no expert myself, but I think the overall long term benefits of a managed environment probably outweigh the time it'll take to get up to speed.
Looks like Winforms and C# have it for now.

Were you to look at moving to C# and therefore .NET, I would consider Windows Presentation Foundation rather than WinForms. WPF is the future of smart clients in .NET, and the skills you pick up you'll be able to reuse if you want to make browser-hosted Silverlight applications.

I concur with the WPF sentiment. Tag/XML based UI would seem to be a bit more portable than WinForms.
I guess too you have to consider your team, if there is not a lot of current C# skills, then that is a factor, but going forward the market for MFC developers is diminishing and C# is growing.
Maybe some kind of piecemeal approach would be possible? I have been involved with recoding legacy applications to C# quite a bit, and it always takes a lot longer than you would estimate, especially if you are keeping some legacy code, or your team isn't that conversant with C#.