The addition of frameworks like Qt and yes, web wrappers certainly complicates things unless you're presumably deep in it.
What isn't clear to me is whether Win32 is still technically a viable choice for "modern" Windows 10/11 development. In other words, could you submit a Win32 app to the Microsoft Store, if that was something you felt like doing?
> What isn't clear to me is whether Win32 is still technically a viable choice for "modern" Windows 10/11 development. In other words, could you submit a Win32 app to the Microsoft Store, if that was something you felt like doing?
I believe so, although originally the store required other toolkits, they changed thier mind.
That said, I don't think it's very important for windows programs to come from the microsoft store... the limitations are not worth the market, especially since the store is unreliable: at least in my experience, the installation can get messed up and it won't self repair, and then you can't install new software... Why would you want to support that, when you could just provide a downloadable installer and license keys? (And tell people the sequence to escape store only mode)
Don't get me wrong; I absolutely refuse to use the store.
I'm just not deep enough in this to know the correct terminology. What I think I'm trying to ask is whether Win32 is still considered viable / equal opportunity compared to something built with, for example, WinForms. (To pick a name I remember.)
From the outside, all of this churn makes me completely understand why web wrappers are so popular.
Yes, because anything WinRT has been messed up, it was going well between Windows 8 and Project Reunion, as it was progressively getting feature parity with Win32, then everything went downhill and you can safely ignore anything from Microsoft marketing related to WinUI/WinAppSDK.
It was so bad that on BUILD 2024, WPF regained its official status out of deprecation.
So, Win32 (+ COM, most new APIs since Vista are COM based), Forms, and WPF, or oldie MFC, if on Microsoft own stacks.
Otherwise Delphi, FreePascal, C++ Builder, Qt, Avalonia, Uno if going 3rd party.
Don't get me wrong; I actually appreciate the breakdown. It just makes me not want to even consider native Windows development. This is definitely an example of too many choices being a very bad thing.
This reply stuck in my head and bothered me enough that I am back several days later to tell you about it.
First, blaming this on developers is simply a bad take. Developing a native app shouldn't be a purity test. Electron and friends clearly offer a path of least resistance, even if it is deeply flawed. The decision to use it and accept the tradeoffs is just as pragmatic for the solo greenfield dev as it is for the many who are told by their employer to use the cheapest, fastest option.
No, if there is a fault, it is squarely on the shoulders of Microsoft for not successfully executing and sticking to their promises. Developers and companies are effectively investing in Microsoft's integrity when they decide to accept that the latest framework is truly the final form, and they've been let down over and over by them.
Second, defending the state of development on Windows as fine because everyone else is doing it is just... kind of lazy while being totally irrelevant to the larger question of how to develop native apps on Windows.
I'm annoyed because this comment really and truly feels like an example of why we can't have nice things.
The addition of frameworks like Qt and yes, web wrappers certainly complicates things unless you're presumably deep in it.
What isn't clear to me is whether Win32 is still technically a viable choice for "modern" Windows 10/11 development. In other words, could you submit a Win32 app to the Microsoft Store, if that was something you felt like doing?