InfoQ

News

Return of the Rich Client - .NET 3.0 Meets the NY Times

Posted by Jonathan Allen on Oct 01, 2006

Community
.NET
Topics
.NET Framework ,
Rich Client / Desktop ,
Web 2.0 ,
Rich Internet Apps
Tags
WPF ,
Web 2.0 ,
Useability ,
Visual Studio

Listening to all the Web 2.0 hype, you would think rich client applications have gone the way of DOS and dinosaurs. But it appears that the New York Times didn't get the memo, and they have the killer app to prove it.

The New York Times has released a beta of the Times Reader to critical acclaim. While some question the logic of creating a separate application just to view website content, they cannot actually find fault with the program. The readability enchancements alone are just too good. As Rafe Needleman says. "I admit that if I wanted to take a stand against this type of application, I could simply not use it--the Times' Web site has the same content. But the New York Times Reader really is a better way to read the Times' news."

The Times Reader isn't your typical rich client application. By leveraging Microsoft's ClickOnce technology, the application is updated automatically without user involvement. New features are automatically downloaded and installed whenever the user starts the program.

The presentation is done with Windows Presentation Foundation (WPF), a component of the soon to be released .NET 3.0. This gives the NY Times developers unprecedented control over the layout. Unlike a web browser, which has trouble displaying columns, the Times Reader can freely flow text from column to column as the page resizes. There are no scroll bars, users simply use the arrow keys to turn the page. And because it is an installed application, it can include the fonts used in the print edition of the NY Times. Other features not normally available to browsers include deep support for off-line viewing, automatic tracking of read pages, and the ability to annotate pages with your own notes.

Can this the beginning of a renaissance in rich client applications?

ClickOnce = WebStart for .net? by Eirik Maus Posted Oct 2, 2006 3:31 AM
Re: ClickOnce = WebStart for .net? by Joost de Vries Posted Oct 2, 2006 4:22 AM
Not cost effective by Abhijit Deb Posted Oct 2, 2006 11:19 AM
Re: Not cost effective by Eduardo Miranda Posted Oct 3, 2006 10:50 AM
Great News by Chris Marshall Posted Oct 2, 2006 11:28 AM
Why is everyone thinks rich clients are dead? by Jakob Jenkov Posted Oct 2, 2006 1:55 PM
Reboot by Laslow Veeblefetzer Posted Oct 2, 2006 3:01 PM
Re: Reboot by Jonathan Allen Posted Oct 3, 2006 11:25 AM
Rich Client is simpler by Christoph Henrici Posted Oct 4, 2006 4:09 AM
  1. Back to top

    ClickOnce = WebStart for .net?

    Oct 2, 2006 3:31 AM by Eirik Maus

    Sounds like microsoft has reinvented java webstart. Actually I am surprised that nobody has done this in java before, since webstart has been available for 3-4 years, giving exact the same set of hassle-free deployment benefits. Why not? Because there is no Java Presentation Framework?

  2. Back to top

    Re: ClickOnce = WebStart for .net?

    Oct 2, 2006 4:22 AM by Joost de Vries

    Java Desktop Network Components (JDNC) is a project from Sun that combines Webstart and RIA, as I understand it.

  3. Back to top

    Not cost effective

    Oct 2, 2006 11:19 AM by Abhijit Deb

    Thick Client Applications are not cost effective. I hope we can achieve similar level of usability in a browser based application pretty soon. Moreover, I would not want to install hundrads of application on my laptop or PDA (one for amazon.com, or google.com, or nyt.com or etc.) I do not understand why we have to go backwards?

  4. Back to top

    Great News

    Oct 2, 2006 11:28 AM by Chris Marshall

    When all websites I visit follow this great example, I'll only have 300 companies' applications downloaded onto my PC. What could possibly go wrong? And what easier way to switch from site to site than starting a new application from the start menu. Which now takes up the entire screen. Oh yes; and kill another application because, with 300 running, I'm a bit low on RAM.

  5. Back to top

    Why is everyone thinks rich clients are dead?

    Oct 2, 2006 1:55 PM by Jakob Jenkov

    I am having problems seeing why rich clients should be dead. Granted, less applications need be installed on computers in the future, because many apps work fine as web apps. But not all apps work well as web apps. My screen grabber wouldn't for one. And how do I implement that custom plugin my company needs for that diagramming web app?

    It's like people say "Web apps are cheaper, because we can update everybody in one go". But we just wrote a live update for a desktop app we are developing. You know what? It only took 2-3 days to implement! Every app can afford to implement live-update, even if it doesn't use .NET or Java WebStart. It's not that hard to do.

    We implemented live-update because Java Webstart doesn't let you make upgrades only available for people with valid licenses. And how do you do that in your web app, by the way? Let peopel continue using what they already paid for, without having to upgrade to the next version? Very easy with live-update, very messy with web apps.

    And, it's not like web apps are *always* easier to install than rich client apps. You can just download and run a .exe file without saving it. When you close the app, it's gone. It's the same with Java Applets.

    Yes, more and more apps will become web apps, but not *all* apps. Not yet at least. There are still times where people need to be able to run apps offline, or where the app is too big to be downloaded on demand, and where a web app just isn't suitable.

  6. Back to top

    Reboot

    Oct 2, 2006 3:01 PM by Laslow Veeblefetzer

    Installed this program, but clicking on an article caused my machine (Compaq 1230NX, XP Professional, 1gig memory) to reboot. I already had .net 2.0 installed but not 3.0. Not ready for prime time, I think.

  7. Back to top

    Re: Not cost effective

    Oct 3, 2006 10:50 AM by Eduardo Miranda

    Maybe we could migrate everything to web app and create a really thin cost effective client... Mainframe X clients ring a bell?

    History repeats itself, but there is nothign wrong about it, if we evolve each iteration. So, web is not a mainframe client and smart clients are not old PC app.

    Give it a try

  8. Back to top

    Re: Reboot

    Oct 3, 2006 11:25 AM by Jonathan Allen

    Well it is a beta. Once the final cut of .NET 3.0 is released, it should be more stable. You can expect that to occur at the same time as the Windows Vista launch.

  9. Back to top

    Rich Client is simpler

    Oct 4, 2006 4:09 AM by Christoph Henrici

    I believe a + for Rich Client is that you can target a much simpler architecture, with much less "pure" technical layers which are necessary as soon you start with distributed applications. You basically have your two tier application: GUI + Database.
    This does'nt mean that your application isn't well egineered, in contrary : you very well can have your layers and seperation of concern in the "Fat" Client. In contrary, you do not have to start tearing apart layers, because of distribution.
    For many a opertioaal Entreprice Application, such a architecture is completely sufficient. You have a application, which is simpler, robuster, easier to develop and maintain.
    Deployment issues, which you have for such a "Fat" Client, can be adressed, with other application transparent technology, eg. Citrix Mainframe or VNC Technology. I very much believe, that the Java Community, would be well advised to embrace Rich Client Technology, not "only" through RIA, which really is moving the code to the client again. Sometimes i suspect that the Rich Client vs Internet "fight" is very much a "political" one and does'nt adress "real" requirements of enterprice computer.
    What i would like to see, is more technology, which protects your investments in your application code, but let's you "exchange" or develop a new UI more quickly, be it Web or rich. In this area, i think Oracles ADF Technology could be showing a way. But sadly Oracle is also emphazing on the JSF/Ajax Client and not enought the Swing Rich Client capabilities.

Educational Content

Brian Marick on 4 Challenges and 5 Guiding Values of Agile Software Development

Brian Marick takes us through a quick tour of the most important values and challenges to adopting Agile successfully (they aren't the typical challenges and values we hear in the community).

Are You a Software Architect?

The line between development and architecture is tricky. Does it exist at all? Is an ivory tower actually needed? There's a balance in the middle, but how do you move from developer to architect?

Agile – A Way of Life and Pragmatic Use of Authority

The word 'authority' sometimes produces an allergic response in hard-line agilists. Freedom and authority – both are bad if misused and both are good if used in right spirit for a noble cause.

Getting Started with Grails, Second Edition

"Getting Started with Grails" brings you up to speed on this modern web framework. Companies as varied as LinkedIn, Wired, and Taco Bell are all using Grails. Are you ready to get started as well?

Using ITIL V3 as a Foundation for SOA Governance

Those familiar with only ITIL V2 often scoff at the thought that ITIL could serve as a governance framework for SOA. With ITIL V3, the focus of the framework shifted towards service-orientation.

Adrian Colyer on AspectJ, tc Server and dm Server

SpringSource CTO Adrian Colyer discusses AspectJ, SpringSource's dm Server and tc Server products, OSGi and Scrum.

Adam Wiggins on Heroku

Heroku's Adam Wiggins talks about Rails, Background Jobs, Add-Ons, Ruby, and how Heroku manages to work around Ruby's inefficiencies using Erlang and other languages.

SOA as an Architectural Pattern: Best Practices in Software Architecture

For Grady Booch the foundation of a good architecture is patterns, SOA being just one of many patterns. In this Second Life presentation, Booch attempts to bring more clarity on what architecture is.