Winform vs Webform: how to choose?

[Dean Slindee]

I would like to hear some practical comments about how to decide whether a
new application becomes a Winform vs a Webform application. Would you say
that every app should be, by default, a Winform app unless it positively
cannot be (for some technical reason). Or vice-versa?
Obviously, Visual Studio could never be a Webform app because it requires a
lot of CPU cycles.
It appears to me that there is a broad sort of continuum in application
characteristics . Some apps are natural Winform apps (VS Studio), while
others are natural Webform apps (heavy textural content, non-updated).
However, between these two poles, lies most of the rest of the today's apps.
How do you decide which pole the new app should gravitate toward?

Here is a quote from Alan Cooper, just to raise the temperature and get you
started thinking (can you rebut this if you are a Webform afficionado):
"The browser is a red herring; it's a dead end. The idea of having batched
processing inside a very stupid pro*g*ram that's controlled remotely is a
software architecture that was invented about 25 years ago by IBM, and was
abandoned about 20 years ago because it's a bad architecture. We've gone
tremendously retrograde by bringing in web browsers. We have stepped
backward in terms of user interface, capability, and the breadth of our
thinking about what we could do as a civilization. The browser is a very
weak and stupid pro*g*ram because it was written as essentially a master's
thesis inside a university and as an experiment."

Thanks,
Dean Slindee

[Ken Dopierala Jr.]

Hi Dean,

Actually VisualStudio.Ne t is now a web form app offered by Microsoft over
the web. Huge programs like AutoCad and Office are also moving in that
direction. The future is that everything will be a web app run by smart
clients. Games (the industry I focus on) have just taken the first few
steps towards making themselves strictly web apps. In a decade I believe
apps run over the web will be far more popular than PC-installed apps. The
fact is, software developers are just freakin' tired of getting ripped off.
Ken.

--
Ken Dopierala Jr.
For great ASP.Net web hosting try:
http://www.webhost4life.com/default.asp?refid=Spinlight
If you sign up under me and need help, email me.

"Dean Slindee" <sl*****@charte r.net> wrote in message
news:10******** *****@corp.supe rnews.com...

I would like to hear some practical comments about how to decide whether a
new application becomes a Winform vs a Webform application. Would you say
that every app should be, by default, a Winform app unless it positively
cannot be (for some technical reason). Or vice-versa?
Obviously, Visual Studio could never be a Webform app because it requires a lot of CPU cycles.
It appears to me that there is a broad sort of continuum in application
characteristics . Some apps are natural Winform apps (VS Studio), while
others are natural Webform apps (heavy textural content, non-updated).
However, between these two poles, lies most of the rest of the today's apps. How do you decide which pole the new app should gravitate toward?

Here is a quote from Alan Cooper, just to raise the temperature and get you started thinking (can you rebut this if you are a Webform afficionado):
"The browser is a red herring; it's a dead end. The idea of having batched
processing inside a very stupid pro*g*ram that's controlled remotely is a
software architecture that was invented about 25 years ago by IBM, and was
abandoned about 20 years ago because it's a bad architecture. We've gone
tremendously retrograde by bringing in web browsers. We have stepped
backward in terms of user interface, capability, and the breadth of our
thinking about what we could do as a civilization. The browser is a very
weak and stupid pro*g*ram because it was written as essentially a master's
thesis inside a university and as an experiment."

Thanks,
Dean Slindee

[Mitchell Vincent]

Ken Dopierala Jr. wrote:

Hi Dean,

Actually VisualStudio.Ne t is now a web form app offered by Microsoft over
the web. Huge programs like AutoCad and Office are also moving in that
direction. The future is that everything will be a web app run by smart
clients.
I doubt very much that the desktop PC is going anywhere for a very long
time. The more things change the more they stay the same..
Games (the industry I focus on) have just taken the first few
steps towards making themselves strictly web apps.
Are you talking about the MMOG stuff? The most popular games are still
stupid simple games that run on a PC. That isn't going to change any
time soon (certainly not in 10 years)
In a decade I believe
apps run over the web will be far more popular than PC-installed apps.

I very seriously doubt that - 10 years is nothing! I had everything I
have now 10 years ago, the stuff I have now is just smaller and faster.
I expect the same thing to happen in the next 10 years.
--
- Mitchell Vincent
- kBilling - An easy and affordable billing solution
- http://www.k-billing.com

[Mitchell Vincent]

Dean Slindee wrote:

I would like to hear some practical comments about how to decide whether a
new application becomes a Winform vs a Webform application.
That very much depends on what your software is. If it is something that
you want to sell access to on a subscription basis then I'd say go web
based if that is possible.

There are plenty of technological speed bumps developing web apps and
needs to be approached carefully. There are a million things that you
can do when the software is running on the user's desktop that you can't
do web based.
Would you say
that every app should be, by default, a Winform app unless it positively
cannot be (for some technical reason). Or vice-versa?
Obviously, Visual Studio could never be a Webform app because it requires a
lot of CPU cycles.
It appears to me that there is a broad sort of continuum in application
characteristics . Some apps are natural Winform apps (VS Studio), while
others are natural Webform apps (heavy textural content, non-updated).
I've never seen a desktop type software running web based. Not saying
that there isn't some, just that I haven't seen it.
However, between these two poles, lies most of the rest of the today's apps.
How do you decide which pole the new app should gravitate toward?

I don't think it is an apples to apples comparision. Desktop software is
one thing, web based software is another.

--
- Mitchell Vincent
- kBilling - An easy and affordable billing solution
- http://www.k-billing.com

[Ken Dopierala Jr.]

Hi Mitchell,

The PC isn't going away, I agree. It is going to become more and more
powerful and more and more integrated into the home. In 10 years I believe
it will be the central household appliance. In 30 years, one of the biggest
selling points for homes will be the PCs that run them. In 30 years, the PC
that comes with the apartment will be a big selling point. Sort of like the
cable and broadband connection that comes with apartments are now. The PC
will become more and more powerful and more and more relied upon.

That said. Developers are focusing more and more on making their
applications a service, rather than a product. This means the web-based app
model will become the dominate force in software. You will know the time
has come when you read the headline along these lines "Your OS is a freakin'
browser, dude!". Once an OS is in place that can run software (i.e.
"content"), the way a browser can display HTML (i.e. "content"); developers
will jump on board and never look back.

There is still money in developing stand alone apps. However developing a
web based application, if you can do it with the current technology (and you
have a choice), will only make your life easier down the road. It'll make
you look smart too. Ken.

"Mitchell Vincent" <mi************ **@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:Oq******** ********@TK2MSF TNGP14.phx.gbl. ..

Ken Dopierala Jr. wrote:

Hi Dean,

Actually VisualStudio.Ne t is now a web form app offered by Microsoft over the web. Huge programs like AutoCad and Office are also moving in that
direction. The future is that everything will be a web app run by smart
clients.

I doubt very much that the desktop PC is going anywhere for a very long
time. The more things change the more they stay the same..

> Games (the industry I focus on) have just taken the first few
steps towards making themselves strictly web apps.

Are you talking about the MMOG stuff? The most popular games are still
stupid simple games that run on a PC. That isn't going to change any
time soon (certainly not in 10 years)

In a decade I believe
apps run over the web will be far more popular than PC-installed apps.

I very seriously doubt that - 10 years is nothing! I had everything I
have now 10 years ago, the stuff I have now is just smaller and faster.
I expect the same thing to happen in the next 10 years.
--
- Mitchell Vincent
- kBilling - An easy and affordable billing solution
- http://www.k-billing.com

[Cor Ligthert]

Dean,

My answer is very simple in this.

Can you (have the right in whatever way given to you) control the
environment of your clients "Winform", can you not control that environement
"Webform".

Even the distance is not important anymore with the oneclick install.

Just my thought,

Cor

[Mitchell Vincent]

Ken Dopierala Jr. wrote:

Hi Mitchell,

The PC isn't going away, I agree. It is going to become more and more
powerful and more and more integrated into the home. In 10 years I believe
it will be the central household appliance. In 30 years, one of the biggest
selling points for homes will be the PCs that run them. In 30 years, the PC
that comes with the apartment will be a big selling point. Sort of like the
cable and broadband connection that comes with apartments are now. The PC
will become more and more powerful and more and more relied upon.
I agree with everything you said there!
That said. Developers are focusing more and more on making their
applications a service, rather than a product. This means the web-based app
model will become the dominate force in software. You will know the time
has come when you read the headline along these lines "Your OS is a freakin'
browser, dude!". Once an OS is in place that can run software (i.e.
"content"), the way a browser can display HTML (i.e. "content"); developers
will jump on board and never look back.

I still don't see this happening. Until the "web platform" becomes one
in which you can do things like you do with a desktop app I just don't
see it happening. The biggest problem is that web based apps require
Internet access to work. Internet connections still isn't reliable
enough to put your entire computer working on the shoulders of your
cable/DSL/POTS modem.

Until there is solidarity and serious change (security) in the way the
entire web platform works I don't think we'll see much desktop computing
done by remote through a web browser.
There is still money in developing stand alone apps. However developing a
web based application, if you can do it with the current technology (and you
have a choice), will only make your life easier down the road. It'll make
you look smart too. Ken.

For products that are service based, I might agree. Selling services
opens the seller up to a whole new world of responsibility though. There
is a lot to be said for selling people something and never seeing them
again. That is why I switched from web apps to desktop apps! I was tired
of having to provide support that increased in parallel with the number
of copies (subscriptions) that I sold. Now I can sell 10,000 copies of a
software product and support *doesn't* increase at the same rate sales do.

In working with it for about 7 years I found the web platform to be hard
to develop for, hard to manage and even harder to deploy. There still is
no universally used browser or set of guidelines for writing web apps
that everyone can use. Until there is some inclusive and widely
distributed secure framework for developing remote desktop applications
I don't think we'll see this switch. I also think such a framework is
*way* down the road. Right now we seem to concentrate on expanding
current "technologi es" and making them faster or bigger. A whole new
platform needs to be developed for this day and age that can give
developers and end users alike the kind of security and performance they
need.

</rant> :-)

--
- Mitchell Vincent
- kBilling - An easy and affordable billing solution
- http://www.k-billing.com

[alf]

Only there are one adventage form webf. to winforms this is deploy.
Microsoft and other manufacture are crea thecnology to automatically deploy
like oneclick.
May be you use software in chached mode or simiare donwloading adn
installling /desinstalling automatica when you no use bat always when you
split you win and is a estupid idea use a powerfull pc only for rendering
html pages. is better spread along pc code al work millinon on processor and
no only one big processor in a webserver..

spanish man idea.

-_-


"Dean Slindee" <sl*****@charte r.net> escribió en el mensaje
news:10******** *****@corp.supe rnews.com...

I would like to hear some practical comments about how to decide whether
aly
new application becomes a Winform vs a Webform application. Would you say
that every app should be, by default, a Winform app unless it positively
cannot be (for some technical reason). Or vice-versa?
Obviously, Visual Studio could never be a Webform app because it requires
a
lot of CPU cycles.
It appears to me that there is a broad sort of continuum in application
characteristics . Some apps are natural Winform apps (VS Studio), while
others are natural Webform apps (heavy textural content, non-updated).
However, between these two poles, lies most of the rest of the today's
apps.
How do you decide which pole the new app should gravitate toward?

Here is a quote from Alan Cooper, just to raise the temperature and get
you
started thinking (can you rebut this if you are a Webform afficionado):
"The browser is a red herring; it's a dead end. The idea of having batched
processing inside a very stupid pro*g*ram that's controlled remotely is a
software architecture that was invented about 25 years ago by IBM, and was
abandoned about 20 years ago because it's a bad architecture. We've gone
tremendously retrograde by bringing in web browsers. We have stepped
backward in terms of user interface, capability, and the breadth of our
thinking about what we could do as a civilization. The browser is a very
weak and stupid pro*g*ram because it was written as essentially a master's
thesis inside a university and as an experiment."

Thanks,
Dean Slindee