[Discussion]DotNetBar

This is my personal opinion, but do not use it. It's got a really bad UI, and the code isn't exactly that well done (last i downloaded it - over a year ago).

It is nothing like the great Microsoft Experience, and it kinda looks dodgy / copied.

Really, I prefer the default Windows scheme, or your own custom ones. Copy-cats just don't function as well as their professionally engineered counterparts, and its a downer on originality.

My 2 cents. I hope you buy it.

Originally Posted by freedompeace

This is my personal opinion, but do not use it. It's got a really bad UI, and the code isn't exactly that well done (last i downloaded it - over a year ago).

It is nothing like the great Microsoft Experience, and it kinda looks dodgy / copied.

Really, I prefer the default Windows scheme, or your own custom ones. Copy-cats just don't function as well as their professionally engineered counterparts, and its a downer on originality.

My 2 cents. I hope you buy it.

Same as my suggestion !! The only control I like of dotnetbar is BreadCrumbBar. Really good. Other than that no just no -.-

Originally Posted by Hassan

Same as my suggestion !! The only control I like of dotnetbar is BreadCrumbBar. Really good. Other than that no just no -.-

The breadcrumb bar has been a part of Windows since Windows Vista.

Furthermore, it's easy to recreate using the Windows Presentation Foundation. I dont see the point of getting a whole SDK for thousands of components when you only need one, one that can easily be recreated.

Originally Posted by freedompeace

The breadcrumb bar has been a part of Windows since Windows Vista.

Furthermore, it's easy to recreate using the Windows Presentation Foundation. I dont see the point of getting a whole SDK for thousands of components when you only need one, one that can easily be recreated.

Sure, its easy. Who can't do hierarchies ? But seriously cbf to write. And no you just include a 2 MB dll and its done. So can be compromised !!

DotNetBar isn't that bad. Its being used way to much (getting played out) .
There are hundreds of professional controls that are great (better then DotNetBar) , But in comparison to MS standard components. There are some great enhancements.

Infragisi*** has some of the best components.
Telerik Rad Controls comes in second
ComponentOne
DevComponents last

there is nothing wrong with using enhancements, in fact most controls have just as much functionality as their MS counter parts with some additions.

Hassan knows I like custom controls over all. But for users looking to create a "enhanced" UI without alot of custom design, it isn't bad.

Originally Posted by NextGen1

DotNetBar isn't that bad. Its being used way to much (getting played out) .
There are hundreds of professional controls that are great (better then DotNetBar) , But in comparison to MS standard components. There are some great enhancements.

Infragisi*** has some of the best components.
Telerik Rad Controls comes in second
ComponentOne
DevComponents last

there is nothing wrong with using enhancements, in fact most controls have just as much functionality as their MS counter parts with some additions.

Hassan knows I like custom controls over all. But for users looking to create a "enhanced" UI without alot of custom design, it isn't bad.

Never heard of them, though I'll look when I wake up.

Custom controls are good, but I generally dislike controls that just don't match at aol with Windows. An example : weird programs that way overuse DotNetBar in a small 500px * 300px application.

I see some commercial apps whose GUIs are just total let downs. (but their functionality is alright). The type of GUI you use should depend on your target deployment environment. If you're righting a web browser, for example, don't stick in the dot net bar and thousands of flashy futuristic thing in it. Try and make it simplistic, as little controls as possible, as little effects as possible while maintaining a good visual look. People are focusing on the page, not your buttons. But, if you're designing a game, by all means, go for it !

Also, GUI without functionality is worthless. Same for functionality with a bad UI.

In short, some (or many) of the apps here at MPGH have graphics that don't fit with the target environment. DotNetBar seems to be one major controbuong factor in this (I'm not discrediting it - it's good when used with care).

Sorry for any grammar and spelling mistakes - on numerical keypad.

I do agree with your assessment, I just feel that any good commercial application should always have functionality, be user friendly and in the same sense, be held together with a usable and decent GUI.

A great balance makes a great application, proper GUI means user friendly applications. MS is really lacking in it's component dept. so developers heavily rely on third party components or create thier own.

WPF has some great components and functionality and really doesn't need any 3rd party components.

I just don't want to see users abandon the concept of having a great GUI. You never sacrifice looks for functionality or vise versa, it's bad coding practice.

in fact you should always extend the GUI Functionality and keep in mind the many users.

When developing an application, web site , web application and alike, keep in mind your target users, not so much the target deployment environment.

If your developing a web browser (commercially, not just for release here) keep in mind who your users will be, if you will be targeting a game community, the GUI and Functionality is key, in fact, stick load of features in a "flashy" GUI will grab the intention of most of the users here.

However, If I intend to release a browser to the community of another site and I want "word of mouth" to be the point of "sales"/"downloads" I will target that community, IE: If I am among Chrome users, I may create a similar UI and use webkit while holding similar features.

If I intend to release my browser (fully functional) on brothersoft or Cnet, etc. the browser should be well rounded.

Developing applications in general should always be like marketing a businsess. essentially you are marketing your application to a set of potential "customers".

Again, Don't get me wrong, I agree with your assessment, but the market is vast, and everyday different requests come in, and to limit the development to a specific set of rules only limits the mind to a set design.

I-Phone / Android / Blackberry's , Windows / Mac / Linux and applications in between all innovate at one point or another, and if we bind ourselves to rules and structures then we will never move forward.

Do what you as the developer thinks is best for your application, learn from your own mistakes and criticism of others. But never bind yourselves to etiquette (IMO).

So DevComponents to other 3rd party components, sometimes you can gain functionality, take advantage of it, just don't over use it.

(all this IMO)

Gotta wake up in 2.5 hours, and I'm really tired now.

Windows provides you with some components by default, and I don't see a problem with them. What's normally lacking is some creativity or will to get your ideas into viable, working code. The WPF makes this much easier, but I still prefer WinForms. Just as a note - WPF is basically WinForms on steroids - there aren't any new controls - they just beefed everything up for a more graphics intense application.

Your second point : the target deployment environment is PRIMARILY your customers. Coming a close second is the existing UI where this will be used - the developers will have already spent KGB time on this GUI part, and consistenty is something customers love. Imagine going from one product to another which have completely different layouts - (EG, an IM app, in the sinplest sense) on one, pressing enter sends the message, on the other, it creates a new line. From the very simple inconsistency, how annoyed would you be?

Your note about functionality + flashyness correct. I have no argument here. Except if it makes people have seizures :P

With your Chrome / web browser example... I didn't really get the wording of that... But if you're commercially releasing something, word of mouth doesn't go very far unless it's posed on popular review sites (CNet, GameSpot...)

"I-Phone / Android / Blackberry's , Windows / Mac / Linux and applications in between all innovate at one point or another, and if we bind ourselves to rules and structures then we will never move forward. " yes. This crappy mobile mode is an example. There's no option to get out of it, and it's made for like a prehistoric phone. Even if you are trying to move forward, you must make sure your change doesn't contradict your overlay (OS UI if it's a windowed app), and that's it's usable to someone who hasn't read a 5,000 page user manual ! Better yet, none at all ! You may have used Portal, Gingerbread or Sunrise. I've never included a manual of any type, not even a few instructions about how to use it. Yet, I've had praise for the amazing ease of use. You move forward, intuitively. Man this mobile mode is really stuffing up my explanation. My fingers are tired T.T

As a developer, I always self- review myself as a unknowledgable and inexperienced user, then as an advanced user. If both of those can use my application and be satisfied without having to read documentation, then it's a job well done. I have never followed etiquette. Nowhere, I have always considered the environment in which my product is to be released, Id say look at Trillian for Windows, Mac, iPhone and Android. They've practically got it ! Amazing UI adapted to every OS environment intuitively, while evolvin and staying one step ahead of their competition. Except their server uptime is at bet substandard.

DevComponents, I've never seen a good use for it, either, it's always easier / more extensible around your own, or it's better to make your own for some other reason. I have yet to find a good reason to use them. I must admit they were fun to play with

And so this ends my night up with a long discussion.

See you today ! (in a few hours), looking forward to any replies ! Time to sleep !

And if my ideas were poorly articulated or did not make sense, I apologies, please reply so, and I'll fix it when I'm not on a numerical keypad.

You were really tired and you typed all that on a numerical keypad ! ? FUCK !!

Titanium doesn't focus on the OS. That's where you are wrong. Titanium focuses on a target group, developers.
The application (like a business) will always keep in mind the "end user". Titanium may be one of the best applications in both UI and functionality (plus being cross platform, which is key in this type of application), but all of that means nothing to a different end user type. When constructing a application you must always keep in mind the end user. UI plus functionality. Sorry but windows components alone are horrible. As for wpf xaml and less controls are some of the big differences between a wpf application and a winform application. Though similiar not the same as a winform application. I know this has started as a deccomp discussion but my overall point is windows controls have much room for improvement and other then being overused, there is nothing wrong with 3rd party components, just like knowing when to use winforms and when to use wpf, you should know when to use 3rd party and when to use standard.

I'm sorry not to question you, but...how can you write all that but earlier you proclaimed you couldn't right 5 lines of code (in another thread) because you were on a numeric keypad.

This is the first time you've mentioned "Titanium", and havent explained what it actually is O:

So like i have no idea what you're talking about, yet :P (will google when I get home).

Predictive text <3

Typing code on a mobile is just annoying. So many dots and line breaks, and usually most of the phrases aren't in my dictionary O:

Titanium is a cross-platform native application development platform. It is used to create native mobile applications, tablet applications and desktop application using web based languages like Ja va script, html, css, ruby, PHP etc etc.

It is both sleek in design and extremely functional , it has over 1000 API's and more to come. (great piece of software really). But the reason I mentioned it was to discuss that the application is great to me because I (the End User) see it as such. However , I (the End User) see the application as "great" because they kept me (the End User) in mind.

My point throughout this whole discussion was not to question your entitled opinion of DevComponents, but to let members here know that a good application is both clean and functional, and also must keep in mind the Target user as much (if not more then) the Deployment Enviroment.

Ultimately, they determine the worth and value of the APP, not the operating system in which it resides.

@ Word Of Mouth.
Word of mouth is the single most popular used idea on the internet. Today word of mouth is different then the original concept. Now we want to create a "Viral Campaign" which is essentially the same thing. Press releases, Videos, uploads, downloads, updates, twitters, facebook, essentially all forms of the "Word Of Mouth" concept....What do you think "share this app with facebook" is all about?

@Deployment environment. To some extent you are right, of course if you are developing for an old phone, you should conform to that phones components.

But lets look at a example, development on the I-Phone has a specific UI and a Specific set of native controls, it wasn't until recently that JQtouch, Sencha, Titanium and a few others exploited these native functions using Java , because of their ability to go beyond the standard of the "Old Phone" they were able to create a flood gate of great web applications with native functions (including accelerometer) .

Point to that is yes, developing a Objective C application using it's controls is great, hell you can create a great UI, but why stop there, now we can create a native application that looks exactly how we want....

@ numeric Keypad

No way this

Code:

If My.Computer.Network.Ping("google.com") Then
  MsgBox("Online.")
Else
  MsgBox("Offline.")
End If

Was harder to type then

Gotta wake up in 2.5 hours, and I'm really tired now.

Windows provides you with some components by default, and I don't see a problem with them. What's normally lacking is some creativity or will to get your ideas into viable, working code. The WPF makes this much easier, but I still prefer WinForms. Just as a note - WPF is basically WinForms on steroids - there aren't any new controls - they just beefed everything up for a more graphics intense application.

Your second point : the target deployment environment is PRIMARILY your customers. Coming a close second is the existing UI where this will be used - the developers will have already spent KGB time on this GUI part, and consistenty is something customers love. Imagine going from one product to another which have completely different layouts - (EG, an IM app, in the sinplest sense) on one, pressing enter sends the message, on the other, it creates a new line. From the very simple inconsistency, how annoyed would you be?

Your note about functionality + flashyness correct. I have no argument here. Except if it makes people have seizures :P

With your Chrome / web browser example... I didn't really get the wording of that... But if you're commercially releasing something, word of mouth doesn't go very far unless it's posed on popular review sites (CNet, GameSpot...)

"I-Phone / Android / Blackberry's , Windows / Mac / Linux and applications in between all innovate at one point or another, and if we bind ourselves to rules and structures then we will never move forward. " yes. This crappy mobile mode is an example. There's no option to get out of it, and it's made for like a prehistoric phone. Even if you are trying to move forward, you must make sure your change doesn't contradict your overlay (OS UI if it's a windowed app), and that's it's usable to someone who hasn't read a 5,000 page user manual ! Better yet, none at all ! You may have used Portal, Gingerbread or Sunrise. I've never included a manual of any type, not even a few instructions about how to use it. Yet, I've had praise for the amazing ease of use. You move forward, intuitively. Man this mobile mode is really stuffing up my explanation. My fingers are tired T.T

As a developer, I always self- review myself as a unknowledgable and inexperienced user, then as an advanced user. If both of those can use my application and be satisfied without having to read documentation, then it's a job well done. I have never followed etiquette. Nowhere, I have always considered the environment in which my product is to be released, Id say look at Trillian for Windows, Mac, iPhone and Android. They've practically got it ! Amazing UI adapted to every OS environment intuitively, while evolvin and staying one step ahead of their competition. Except their server uptime is at bet substandard.

DevComponents, I've never seen a good use for it, either, it's always easier / more extensible around your own, or it's better to make your own for some other reason. I have yet to find a good reason to use them. I must admit they were fun to play with

And so this ends my night up with a long discussion.

See you today ! (in a few hours), looking forward to any replies ! Time to sleep !

And if my ideas were poorly articulated or did not make sense, I apologies, please reply so, and I'll fix it when I'm not on a numerical keypad.

Your point is correct, however, isn't that obvious? |:

You're designing your product to be used by your users. If they're not happy, who's going to use them? They'll just move off to a better product.

The deployment environment is (or at least, should be) a large factor (only initially) in designing how your controls look. Themida is one really bad example, especially when used with Windows 7.

And, you're perfectly correct with your iPhone (not I-Phone xD) example, though... that's kinda expected, isn't it?

I also need to ask you what you mean by a "native application" - I believe your definition is particularly different to mine. To me, a native application an application that whose code is compiled into a language that is specific to a machine. C++ is one great example, Cocoa Objective-C is another. Java, .NET on the other hand, are not native applications - they are compiled into interpreted assemblies, which are then compiled at runtime to their target OS (which can be multi-platform).
--
Too many keypresses to type the code O:

Plus, that was nowhere near as interesting as this discussion xD

By native application obviously I meant native functions.
I am aware of the actual definition of a native application. Executable code that is in the instruction set architecture of the CPU.

I also know the differences between Native Code and bytecode (interpreted Code)

Native in the sense of "Native features" IPhones have features that are native to the phone, we can exploit them using API.

So by "Native Application" I mean a application that runs native or is webbased (not native to the phone)

It's a tie. /

[Discussion]DotNetBar

Similar Threads

Tags for this Thread