Comments on: WPF/e, Prototyping, and Workflow http://jessewarden.com/2006/12/wpfe-prototyping-and-workflow.html A blog on software development, technology, games & movies. Sun, 20 Jul 2008 16:47:20 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5 By: John Dowdell http://jessewarden.com/2006/12/wpfe-prototyping-and-workflow.html#comment-3943 John Dowdell Tue, 05 Dec 2006 17:13:50 +0000 http://jessewarden.com/?p=1096#comment-3943 <em>"I truly believe they re-wrote Blend from the ground up, ditching what I played with, OR bought some company that had this product... it's that different."</em> Doug Olson's group took over the project awhile ago, and adopted the Lightroom-style interface. This group worked on Adobe ImageReady, then did work for Macromedia on Dreamweaver extensions -- I'm not sure if they moved to Redmond or are still in the Great Lakes region. Good group. <em>"Bottom line, Blend can create both WPF and WPF/e apps. That's like saying Flex Builder can create both Flash Player & Apollo apps."</em> I agree on the first line, but it may not quite parallel the second. WPF and WPF/e both use different sets of XAML, varying with the runtime engine chosen (a Vista box or a plugin). While Apollo will have a few more APIs than Player (synch, system notifications, etc), it will run SWF and HTML/JS as-is. I think there's more of a split in content types in what Microsoft is attempting, with the split based on how fully the playback system buys into Microsoft. Good stuff on production workflows, thanks... I'm still watching on how the stuff actually works, too. jd “I truly believe they re-wrote Blend from the ground up, ditching what I played with, OR bought some company that had this product… it’s that different.”

Doug Olson’s group took over the project awhile ago, and adopted the Lightroom-style interface. This group worked on Adobe ImageReady, then did work for Macromedia on Dreamweaver extensions — I’m not sure if they moved to Redmond or are still in the Great Lakes region. Good group.

“Bottom line, Blend can create both WPF and WPF/e apps. That’s like saying Flex Builder can create both Flash Player & Apollo apps.”

I agree on the first line, but it may not quite parallel the second. WPF and WPF/e both use different sets of XAML, varying with the runtime engine chosen (a Vista box or a plugin). While Apollo will have a few more APIs than Player (synch, system notifications, etc), it will run SWF and HTML/JS as-is.

I think there’s more of a split in content types in what Microsoft is attempting, with the split based on how fully the playback system buys into Microsoft.

Good stuff on production workflows, thanks… I’m still watching on how the stuff actually works, too.

jd

]]>