Longhorn，大家都在想什么？ [英] Longhorn, what does everyone think?

问题描述

花了一些时间在这里浏览：
http：// msdn。 microsoft.com/Longhorn/


我可以看到WinFS带来的好处（只要我们标记所有进入的

数据，这应该是很好，标记一切可能是一个乏味的

过程虽然）但我还没有能够获得XAML的实用

优势。根据我的评估，XAML将从应用程序的业务规则/程序中提供UI逻辑的分离。对于桌面应用程序UI来说，它似乎是一种HTML。但是，以这种方式设计桌面应用程序的优势在哪里？它可以为b-b提供一种创造UI-皮肤的好方法。为不同的用户提供定制的

体验，但这可以带来同样多的伤害，

它不是革命性的。


我可以想到这种方法的一些缺点，即所有的UI

逻辑必须在运行时处理（解释）和一般的

容器应用程序必须存在以在演示文稿

和程序代码之间编组。即使这个marshall进程是

核心操作系统的一部分，它仍然看起来像没有任何

清晰优势的不必要开销。


另外Longhorn UI指南也没什么值得惊叹的，有一个新的

边对接栏，我们可以用来提供一小部分信息

时间，它会很快变得杂乱。


我不知道你们大多数人，但拥有所有的处理能力或者

现代PC我希望有更激进的东西（操作系统的3D用户界面怎么样），我一个人在这里吗？

Just spent some time browsing around here:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/Longhorn/

I can see the benefits from WinFS (as long as we tag all in-coming
data this should be nice, tagging everything could be a tedious
process though) but I haven''t been able to pick up the practical
advantages of XAML. From my assessment, XAML will provide separation
of UI logic from business rules/procedures for applications. It seems
like an HTML of sorts for desktop application UI. But where are the
big advantages of designing desktop applications this way? It may
provide a nifty way to create UI-"skins" to provide a custom
experience for different users, but that can do as much harm as good,
it''s not revolutionary.

I can think of some disadvantages to this approach, namely all the UI
logic has to processed at run-time (interpreted) and a generic
container application has to exist to marshal between the presentation
and the procedure code. Even if this marshall process is part of the
core OS, it still seems like needless overhead without any
clear-advantages.

Also the Longhorn UI guidelines are nothing to wow over, there''s a new
side-docking bar that we can use to provide small bits of information
at all times, it''s going to get cluttered quickly.

I don''t know about most of you, but with all the processing power or
modern PCs I was hoping for something more radical (how about a 3D
User Interface for the OS), am I alone here?

推荐答案

你好JDeats，


" JDeats" < JE **** @ pdq.net>在消息中写道

news：b0 ************************** @ posting.google.c om ...

Hi JDeats,

"JDeats" <je****@pdq.net> wrote in message
news:b0**************************@posting.google.c om...

只是花了一些时间在这里浏览：
http ：//msdn.microsoft.com/Longhorn/

我可以看到WinFS的好处（只要我们标记所有进入的数据，这应该是不错的，标记一切可能是一个单调乏味的过程但是我还没有能够发现XAML的实际优势。根据我的评估，XAML将提供UI逻辑与应用程序的业务规则/程序的分离。它似乎像桌面应用程序UI的各种HTML。但是这样设计桌面应用程序的哪些优势呢？它可以提供一种创建UI-皮肤的漂亮方式。为不同的用户提供定制的体验，但这可以带来同样多的伤害，这不是革命性的。

我可以想到一些不利因素方法，即所有UI逻辑必须在运行时处理（解释），并且必须存在通用的容器应用程序以在演示文稿和程序代码之间进行编组。即使这个marshall进程是核心操作系统的一部分，它仍然看起来像没有任何明显优势的不必要的开销。


我已经很久了，现在希望在我的

windows应用程序中使用asp.net-ish功能（流程布局，嵌套元素，级联样式表， UI /逻辑

分离等）。到目前为止，我开发的

类应用程序的权衡取舍并不值得。听起来像XAML在没有

权衡的情况下为Windows应用程序带来了很好的ASP.NET开发，而且我非常兴奋。


我不会认为会严格解释XAML应用程序。

毕竟，ASP.NET并没有运行解释，而且XAML应用程序能够

将转换为严格的Windows应用程序。在Windows本身和

托管运行时之间，我怀疑容器进程（假设有一个
）会给应用程序增加任何重大开销。

另外Longhorn UI指南也没什么可惊叹的，有一个新的
侧面对接栏，我们可以用它来提供一点点信息
，它是会很快变得杂乱无章。


看着我的图标托盘，这似乎很有可能，是的。

我不知道你们大多数人，但拥有所有的处理能力或
现代PC我希望有更激进的东西（操作系统的3D用户界面怎么样），我一个人在这里吗？

Just spent some time browsing around here:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/Longhorn/

I can see the benefits from WinFS (as long as we tag all in-coming
data this should be nice, tagging everything could be a tedious
process though) but I haven''t been able to pick up the practical
advantages of XAML. From my assessment, XAML will provide separation
of UI logic from business rules/procedures for applications. It seems
like an HTML of sorts for desktop application UI. But where are the
big advantages of designing desktop applications this way? It may
provide a nifty way to create UI-"skins" to provide a custom
experience for different users, but that can do as much harm as good,
it''s not revolutionary.

I can think of some disadvantages to this approach, namely all the UI
logic has to processed at run-time (interpreted) and a generic
container application has to exist to marshal between the presentation
and the procedure code. Even if this marshall process is part of the
core OS, it still seems like needless overhead without any
clear-advantages.
I have for a long time now wished to have asp.net-ish features in my
windows app (flow layout, nested elements, cascading stylesheets, UI/logic
seperation, etc.). Until now it hasn''t been worth the trade-offs for the
kind of applications I develop. It sounds to me like XAML brings what is
good about ASP.NET development to windows applications without the
trade-offs and that I''m pretty excited about.

I would not assume that XAML applications will be strictly interpreted.
ASP.NET doesn''t run interpreted, after all, and XAML applications are able
to be converted into strictly windows apps. Between Windows itself and the
managed runtime, I would doubt that the container process (assuming there is
one) would add any significant overhead to the application.
Also the Longhorn UI guidelines are nothing to wow over, there''s a new
side-docking bar that we can use to provide small bits of information
at all times, it''s going to get cluttered quickly.
Looking at my icon tray this seems quite possible, yes.
I don''t know about most of you, but with all the processing power or
modern PCs I was hoping for something more radical (how about a 3D
User Interface for the OS), am I alone here?

3-D似乎是未来接口的必然方向，

但是提出的东西不仅仅是一个噱头似乎是一个相当大的挑战，特别是如果你希望从2-D界面世界顺利过渡

。


问候，

Dan

3-D seems like the inevitable direction for interfaces of the future,
but coming up with something that''s more than just a gimmick seems like a
sizeable challenge, especially if you expect to make a smooth transition
from the 2-D interface world.

Regards,
Dan

我有兴趣看看它是否会流行起来，对变革的抵抗，分离成长角牛营地和长角牛鞭子的分离。有趣的东西。时间

会告诉你。


-

-----------

有TidBits吗？

在此处获取： www.networkip。 net /花絮

" JDeats" < JE **** @ pdq.net>在消息中写道

news：b0 ************************** @ posting.google.c om ...

i''m interested to see if it will catch on, the resistance to change, the
separation into longhorn camps and longhorn biggots. interesting stuff. time
will tell.

--
-----------
Got TidBits?
Get it here: www.networkip.net/tidbits
"JDeats" <je****@pdq.net> wrote in message
news:b0**************************@posting.google.c om...

只是花了一些时间在这里浏览：
http ：//msdn.microsoft.com/Longhorn/

我可以看到WinFS的好处（只要我们标记所有进入的数据，这应该是不错的，标记一切可能是一个单调乏味的过程但是我还没有能够发现XAML的实际优势。根据我的评估，XAML将提供UI逻辑与应用程序的业务规则/程序的分离。它似乎像桌面应用程序UI的各种HTML。但是这样设计桌面应用程序的哪些优势呢？它可以提供一种创建UI-皮肤的漂亮方式。为不同的用户提供定制的体验，但这可以带来同样多的伤害，这不是革命性的。

我可以想到一些不利因素方法，即所有UI逻辑必须在运行时处理（解释），并且必须存在通用的容器应用程序以在演示文稿和程序代码之间进行编组。即使这个marshall进程是核心操作系统的一部分，它仍然看起来像没有任何明显优势的不必要的开销。

此外Longhorn UI指南也没什么可惊叹的。 ，有一个新的
侧面对接杆，我们可以随时使用它来提供一小部分信息，它会很快变得杂乱无章。

我不知道你们大多数人，但是凭借所有处理能力或现代PC，我希望有更激进的东西（操作系统的3D用户界面怎么样），我一个人在这里？

Just spent some time browsing around here:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/Longhorn/

I can see the benefits from WinFS (as long as we tag all in-coming
data this should be nice, tagging everything could be a tedious
process though) but I haven''t been able to pick up the practical
advantages of XAML. From my assessment, XAML will provide separation
of UI logic from business rules/procedures for applications. It seems
like an HTML of sorts for desktop application UI. But where are the
big advantages of designing desktop applications this way? It may
provide a nifty way to create UI-"skins" to provide a custom
experience for different users, but that can do as much harm as good,
it''s not revolutionary.

I can think of some disadvantages to this approach, namely all the UI
logic has to processed at run-time (interpreted) and a generic
container application has to exist to marshal between the presentation
and the procedure code. Even if this marshall process is part of the
core OS, it still seems like needless overhead without any
clear-advantages.

Also the Longhorn UI guidelines are nothing to wow over, there''s a new
side-docking bar that we can use to provide small bits of information
at all times, it''s going to get cluttered quickly.

I don''t know about most of you, but with all the processing power or
modern PCs I was hoping for something more radical (how about a 3D
User Interface for the OS), am I alone here?

Ya认为Window会流行吗？你真的吗？


-


Jack Mayhoff

微软在线合作伙伴支持

安全！ - www.microsoft.com/security

此帖子按原样提供没有保证，也没有赋予任何权利。


" Alvin Bruney" < vapordan_spam_me_not@hotmail_no_spamhotmail.com>写在

消息新闻：es ************** @ TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl ...

Ya think Window will catch on? Do ya really?

--

Jack Mayhoff
Microsoft Online Partner Support
Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security
This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no rights.

"Alvin Bruney" <vapordan_spam_me_not@hotmail_no_spamhotmail.com > wrote in
message news:es**************@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...

我很感兴趣看它是否会流行起来，对变化的抵抗，分离成长角牛营地和长角牛鞭子。有趣的东西。
时间会告诉你。

-

-----------
有TidBits吗？
搞定它这里： www.networkip.net/tidbits
" JDeats" < JE **** @ pdq.net>在消息中写道
新闻：b0 ************************** @ posting.google.c om ...

i''m interested to see if it will catch on, the resistance to change, the
separation into longhorn camps and longhorn biggots. interesting stuff. time will tell.

--
-----------
Got TidBits?
Get it here: www.networkip.net/tidbits
"JDeats" <je****@pdq.net> wrote in message
news:b0**************************@posting.google.c om...

只是花了一些时间在这里浏览：
http：// msdn .microsoft.com / Longhorn /

我可以看到WinFS的好处（只要我们标记所有进入的数据，这应该很好，标记一切都可能是虽然这是一个单调乏味的过程但是我还没有能够发现XAML的实际优势。根据我的评估，XAML将提供UI逻辑与应用程序的业务规则/程序的分离。它似乎像桌面应用程序UI的各种HTML。但是这样设计桌面应用程序的哪些优势呢？它可以提供一种创建UI-皮肤的漂亮方式。为不同的用户提供定制的体验，但这可以带来同样多的伤害，这不是革命性的。

我可以想到一些不利因素方法，即所有UI逻辑必须在运行时处理（解释），并且必须存在通用的容器应用程序以在演示文稿和程序代码之间进行编组。即使这个marshall进程是核心操作系统的一部分，它仍然看起来像没有任何明显优势的不必要的开销。

此外Longhorn UI指南也没什么可惊叹的。 ，有一个新的
侧面对接杆，我们可以随时使用它来提供一小部分信息，它会很快变得杂乱无章。

我不知道你们大多数人，但是凭借所有处理能力或现代PC，我希望有更激进的东西（操作系统的3D用户界面怎么样），我一个人在这里？

Just spent some time browsing around here:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/Longhorn/

I can see the benefits from WinFS (as long as we tag all in-coming
data this should be nice, tagging everything could be a tedious
process though) but I haven''t been able to pick up the practical
advantages of XAML. From my assessment, XAML will provide separation
of UI logic from business rules/procedures for applications. It seems
like an HTML of sorts for desktop application UI. But where are the
big advantages of designing desktop applications this way? It may
provide a nifty way to create UI-"skins" to provide a custom
experience for different users, but that can do as much harm as good,
it''s not revolutionary.

I can think of some disadvantages to this approach, namely all the UI
logic has to processed at run-time (interpreted) and a generic
container application has to exist to marshal between the presentation
and the procedure code. Even if this marshall process is part of the
core OS, it still seems like needless overhead without any
clear-advantages.

Also the Longhorn UI guidelines are nothing to wow over, there''s a new
side-docking bar that we can use to provide small bits of information
at all times, it''s going to get cluttered quickly.

I don''t know about most of you, but with all the processing power or
modern PCs I was hoping for something more radical (how about a 3D
User Interface for the OS), am I alone here?

这篇关于Longhorn，大家都在想什么？的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持IT屋！