CAB vs. UIPAB (questions)

Topics: CAB & Smart Client Software Factory
Oct 18, 2006 at 4:07 AM
originally posted by: Kyjan

Greetings to all!

I have a very interesting question - one that I could not find an answer to no matter how much I searched; therefore, I figured I would ask those who are closest to the source of my inquiry. :-)

I realize that the UIPAB was used for smart client applications (desktop based) before .NET 2.0. With the recent release of the CAB though, I've done some research and found that personally, for desktop applications, CAB would be the way to go. Now, I also know that the P&P team is working on bringing the UIPAB over to .NET 2.0, but is that something that I should really wait for before choosing a pattern to work from. Everything I've read seems to indicate that the UIPAB will be web based, not desktop based. Am I right in thinking that that I should go with the CAB because the UIPAB offers nothing that the CAB does not already have? (I think I've heard navigation graphs as an argument before, but I don't see the point in them now.)

I'm very interested to hear everyone's thoughts and input.

Thanks in advance,

Oct 18, 2006 at 4:57 AM
originally posted by: askew

I agree with your analysis. UIPAB & UIP2 seems web oriented and CAB is the smart client guidance for .NET 2.0.
Oct 18, 2006 at 2:55 PM
originally posted by: ChrisHolmes

If you need to build a desktop app, CAB is the way to go.

I was at the Patterns and Practices Summit last week, and they showed some of the Web Client Software Factory (I do not know if that ties in, or is an implementation of, the UIPAB). What was cool about that though: using WF behind the scenes to manage page navigation.

But in a Windows Form application, or a WPF application, that's not really necessary.