|
dandy72 wrote: IMNSHO, that's why you're not finding anyone. While I know mostly Windows developers, nobody's even remotely interested in UWP. There's more interest in transitioning from Windows to other platforms than UWP.
You'd be better off skipping that requirement so you don't scare anyone away. Instead look for someone who can adapt to new technologies.
Sorry, but that's a very short-sighted view. Microsoft has made it very clear that Win32 is an endangered species. Microsoft is still over 90% of the desktop and laptop market (and laptops are making a comeback as people learn that Android tablets are not a suitable replacement). Being able to code for UWP is going to become IMMENSELY important to developers as UWP provides a much richer experience than web apps and they use a very similar model in the architecture of how the apps interact with the business systems. Business are not going to toss out there very, very, very expensive dependency on Microsoft Windows and move to Mac or GNU/Linux. Even Google is getting into the UWP game. They are working with Microsoft for a joint app framework based on UWP that will run on both Android (or its rumored replacement) and Windows 10 with Android providing the mobile support and Windows 10 providing the deeper application support. It's very clear the Google sees the writing on the wall about desktop, and that Microsoft was probably already working on this stuff for quite a while before killing Windows 10 Mobile.
|
|
|
|
|
Sharp Ninja wrote: Microsoft has made it very clear that Win32 is an endangered species
Microsoft also thought it would all be replaced by Metro apps by now. And UWP is little more than the natural progression of that.
Remind me, how's the Windows Store doing?
Yeah, the writing may be on the wall for Win32 apps, but nobody's impressed with the alternative MS is proposing.
|
|
|
|
|
The only people who aren't impressed with UWP have never used it, and the Windows Store has many, many, many quality apps in it.
|
|
|
|
|
Sharp Ninja wrote: the Windows Store has many, many, many quality apps in it
That's a well-kept secret if I've ever heard one. Every time the Windows Store is brought up in an article, invariably, even amongst life-long Windows tech journalists, it's to deride it.
|
|
|
|
|
To deride it for what? Publishing to it is harder than for Android. Why? Microsoft actually has security and quality standards. Google allows ANYTHING that compiles to be posted to Google Play Store. Sure, it may get taken down later when they find the porn or cryptocurrency malware, but Google encourage crap apps to go there to bolster the numbers.
|
|
|
|
|
Sharp Ninja wrote: To deride it for what?
Ok, clearly, you're either trolling or in denial. I'm out. Enjoy the Kool-Aid.
|
|
|
|
|
It was an honest question. I have worked with Windows Store/UWP apps since Windows 8.1. I've followed the progression of the APIs, the changes to permissions in the various versions and ultimately the integration with .Net Standard 2, which gives you a multitude more programming cases and designs to fit those cases than in previous versions.
What gets me is the assertions that if I like something that someone else doesn't then I must be <insert your="" derogatory="" comment="" here="">. Or I could take the easy route and nod in agreement and then take a shower.
|
|
|
|
|
Ok, here's the thing: I'm a life-long Windows software developer. Going back to DOS in fact. Some would call me a fanboi.
While I'd love to say the future is UWP, even the Microsoft evangelists will readily admit that adoption is nowhere near to what they'd like it to be. You've got to ask yourself, why is that. There's probably a bit of a catch-22 in the answer.
I just find it very uninspiring. I find UIs today to be a serious step back, all in the name of "keeping things simple". However - and this is all my own opinion - based on what've seen, simplicity apparently comes at the cost of functionality, or (if you're lucky) the equivalent functionality requires more clicks to get the same thing done. I'm just not a fan of what's being proposed as the "desktop replacement".
|
|
|
|
|
The young-uns(people under 35 as far as I am concerned) where I work laugh at Windows apps and scoff at anything that is not web development.
Having come from a background of winforms development I am probably one of those who might be in demand at some point.
That said - any decent web developer(someone experienced in MVC, C# SQL) should have little difficulty developing on a non web system - the thing is finding people willing to do that work is probably not going to be easy ,as the future seems to have been web development for the past 10 years and more.
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”
― Christopher Hitchens
|
|
|
|
|
GuyThiebaut wrote: Having come from a background of winforms development I am probably one of those who might be in demand at some point.
That said - any decent web developer(someone experienced in MVC, C# SQL) should have little difficulty developing on a non web system - the thing is finding people willing to do that work is probably not going to be easy ,as the future seems to have been web development for the past 10 years and more.
Well, I somewhat agree with this point. Web developers who didn't start with WROX books or Google searches shouldn't have a problem, but those that are less skilled can still succeed with UWP (and even WPF) because the programming model is basically the same, and XAML is a natural transition for HTML developers. The biggest hurdle with going from web to UWP is having to wrap your brain around styling XAML. But once you have the concepts grasped, it's much more powerful than CSS and JavaScript.
|
|
|
|
|
Strange, according to most posters to this thread i should not be existing...
Still i am here and chose desktop instead of elephanting we(e)b stuff. 
Rules for the FOSW ![ ^]
if(!string.IsNullOrWhiteSpace(_signature))
{
MessageBox.Show("This is my signature: " + Environment.NewLine + _signature);
}
else
{
MessageBox.Show("404-Signature not found");
}
|
|
|
|
|
Are you looking for a job?
|
|
|
|
|
Oh im fine with mine, thanks.
Also, i wouldn't relocate to another country 
Rules for the FOSW ![ ^]
if(!string.IsNullOrWhiteSpace(_signature))
{
MessageBox.Show("This is my signature: " + Environment.NewLine + _signature);
}
else
{
MessageBox.Show("404-Signature not found");
}
|
|
|
|
|
There is a widespread feeling in the developer community that platform dependent desktop development is a dead-end. WinForms/GDI+ is considered a new VB6, WPF is half-baked and hasn't had an update for years, and Xamarin requires GTK. Multi-platform desktop products can now be build using alternatives such as Electron Framework and JavaScript. So, yes, desktop development is fading away from the mainstream. Most newcomers prefer agile'n'web drone career, with just enough back-end knowledge for a hello world service using REST/JSON/OWIN/UNITY/Newtonsoft/oauth/(insert 10 other frameworks) technology. In addition to that, the philosophy of old Windows Desktop development and WPF is radically different. So having a good C/C++ programmer once guaranteed a good WinForms programmer, but does not guarantee good WPF programmer, and vice versa, further cutting the developer stock. Tips? Are your requirements carved in stone? Can you live with another technology? If not -- steal a corporate drone. A lot of us still do maintain line of business apps on WinForms/WPF. We can be found either in IT companies that create LOB software or in corporations maintaining legacy LOB systems.
p.s. Don't use web developers. They have radically different mindset, they work with gazillion of frameworks, don't know strong typing, storyboard their life, and inject'n'pattern everything that moves. That's all very nice, and cool too, but you don't use a wrench to cut hair. And beware of "standard control" freaks. They don't innovate and their software looks like living DevExpress mutant from the 90ties, with 20 switchable fluorescent control skins that scare the sh*t out of you, and without any catchy innovative approach that makes your app stand out. You'll recognize them by bloated data-modeling and raping you with screen wireframes.
modified 13-Apr-18 4:57am.
|
|
|
|
|
Tomaž Štih wrote: they work with gazillion of frameworks, don't know strong typing, storyboard their life, and inject'n'pattern everything that moves
I will put this in my forum signature some day 
GCS d-- s-/++ a- C++++ U+++ P- L+@ E-- W++ N+ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t+ 5? X R+++ tv-- b+(+++) DI+++ D++ G e++ h--- ++>+++ y+++* Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
|
|
|
|
|
Tomaž Štih wrote: p.s. Don't use web developers. They have radically different mindset, they work with gazillion of frameworks, don't know strong typing, storyboard their life, and inject'n'pattern everything that moves. That's all very nice, and cool too, but you don't use a wrench to cut hair. And beware of "standard control" freaks. They don't innovate and their software looks like living DevExpress mutant from the 90ties, with 20 switchable fluorescent control skins that scare the sh*t out of you, and without any catchy innovative approach that makes your app stand out. You'll recognize them by bloated data-modeling and raping you with screen wireframes.
Sorry, but I couldn't disagree with you more. WPF lends itself well to multi-tiered architecture, but UWP is even better. As a matter of fact, following Microsoft's development guidelines for UWP provides a VERY rich and consistent user interface paradigm (something that iOS, but no so much Android thrives upon) which will become very natural in the future, especially since the Win32 versions of Office are about to become extinct. Web development of SPA and ASP.Net MVC is not much different than UWP development. With UWP now being run from DotNet Core, you can even use that back end and put it in the app and have a distributed app that is self contained and can work offline, simply syncing with servers as networking becomes available. You CANNOT do that easily with Web, and hardly anybody does it with mobile. UWP is far more powerful than any other framework out there. Also, with WebAssembly starting to take off, the days of Javascript/Bootstrap/Angular hell are numbered, and those same skills will be directly applicable to UWP as much a WebAssembly.
And those "dinosaur" C++ developers have a VERY good platform with UWP to continue their careers as UWP has a very good support for COM objects interacting with the new Windows API from C++.
|
|
|
|
|
Sharp Ninja wrote: Also, with WebAssembly starting to take off, the days of Javascript/Bootstrap/Angular hell are numbered
This made my day! JavaScript is an abomination.
|
|
|
|
|
I found your job posting on ZipRecruiter. I think the primary turnoff (for me anyway) is that the position is "temporary". How temporary is it?
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
|
If this is true that it is a temp, no decent experienced developers would ever apply. Those that can't find work anywhere would apply, but they are not going to qualify for the job.
|
|
|
|
|
Talk to me in four months.
|
|
|
|
|
I don't know about windows, I work on iOS and Android apps, but one day out of sheer curiosity, I have tried to replicate an HTML5/CSS3/JavaScript(with addons) UI with native elements. Result: disaster, the HTML5/CSS3/Javascript combination happens to be the best and fastest UI platform.
Even microsoft tried at one point WinJS I think.
throughout my life, my two greatest assets have been mental stability and being, like, really smart.
modified 20-Oct-19 21:02pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Stable Genius wrote: I don't know about windows, I work on iOS and Android apps, but one day out of sheer curiosity, I have tried to replicate an HTML5/CSS3/JavaScript(with addons) UI with native elements. Result: disaster, the HTML5/CSS3/Javascript combination happens to be the best and fastest UI platform.
iOS and Android apps are not as fully baked as UWP is. Neither uses XAML (unless you are using Xamarin Forms) and that's a BIG disadvantage for them. The AXML paradigm for Android is horrible. XAML is much more natural for web developers. The biggest hurdle is wrapping your brain around styling with XAML, but once you get it, CSS sucks.
Now, if someone doesn't WANT to learn a typed language such as C# or C++, then that's not a fault of the platform, but of the developer. Personally, I HATE Javascript development, but I do it when I have to.
|
|
|
|
|
We are a dying breed. I have been a Desktop Programmer since 1978. Most Guys like me are settled and have found our own niche (Wives, children, grandchildren, homes, mortgages, favorite bars, etc.)
"Developer" is the term du Jour, to guys like me. Don't use it.
Also, consider allowing a candidate to work remotely. Even then expect to pay more, we know how "rare" we are becoming. Supply and Demand - Adam Smith had it right, it's not just a theory, it's a fact. I get contacted by "head hunters" two to three times a week.
I am currently upgrading my package from VB6 to C#, so my current clients have a fighting chance of finding someone to maintain my code after I am gone. Yes, I do expect my software to outlive me. 
It's a random chance Universe and we are all out there riding waves of Probability.
"Newer" is NOT automatically better, only Different. (And more complex and bug ridden when it comes to all of the "boutique" languages / frameworks out there)
|
|
|
|
|
Windows Desktop
Universal Windows Platform
Xamarin
You're looking for a mobile developer on two platforms who also knows the Win32/64 API. You're looking for three different detailed skill sets.
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
