locked
How is this better than CAB/SCSF RRS feed

  • Question

  • Can someone give a breakdown as to why and how this is better than CAB and SCSF? 

    Tuesday, June 5, 2007 3:34 AM

Answers

  • The Acropolis framework is explicitly targetting CAB scenarios and is adding:

     

    * Full .Net Fx support.  The Acropolis framework (unlike the CAB) will be an integrated part of the .Net Client framework and will be a fully supported product.

    * First class support for a WPF front end -- including new features such as pluggable transitions and themes and view switching.

    * Full VS/Tooling support.  We are building out a designtime experience.  We know the CAB is popular and powerful, but its lack of tooling can make it unapproachable for a large number of folks

    * Other new features -- such as Xaml declarative support, document management and navigation.

     

    Some of the folks that helped to deliver CAB are also working on Acropolis and we are deeply involved with the Patterns and Practices team that released CAB.  So, you should not be surprised if there are similarities to CAB.  One interesting question would be what do you think CAB has done well (or not so well) and what do you see missing so far in Acropolis?

     

     

    -Ben

     

    Development Lead

    Microsoft

    Tuesday, June 5, 2007 2:36 PM
  • Hi Matt,

     

    Yes I do see where your going!  One of the basic tenents we've established for the Acropolis Framework is that Simple things should be Simple and as you incrementally become more complex you also incrementally become exposed to additional parts of Acropolis.  Or in other words, there should never be a cliff that you fall off of and have a huge learning curve just to make a simple tweak to a basic scenario.  You should be able to deviate a little bit from the standard scenarios and only have to learn 'a little bit' to accomplish that.

     

    Now obviously this is our first CTP so that concept might be hard to see at this stage of the game, but as we progress through CTPs this summer and deepen the feature set and functionality of Acropolis one of our goals is that this will become more readily visible.  The cost in learning curve should hopefully always be less than the benefit of functionality as you explore more and more complicated scenarios and build richer and richer UIs.

     

    Monday, June 11, 2007 5:47 PM

All replies

  •  

    I have the same question.

     

    But i see Acropolis manager it's very interesting tool.

     

    regards,

     

    Emilio Velardiez

    Tuesday, June 5, 2007 6:13 AM
  • The Acropolis framework is explicitly targetting CAB scenarios and is adding:

     

    * Full .Net Fx support.  The Acropolis framework (unlike the CAB) will be an integrated part of the .Net Client framework and will be a fully supported product.

    * First class support for a WPF front end -- including new features such as pluggable transitions and themes and view switching.

    * Full VS/Tooling support.  We are building out a designtime experience.  We know the CAB is popular and powerful, but its lack of tooling can make it unapproachable for a large number of folks

    * Other new features -- such as Xaml declarative support, document management and navigation.

     

    Some of the folks that helped to deliver CAB are also working on Acropolis and we are deeply involved with the Patterns and Practices team that released CAB.  So, you should not be surprised if there are similarities to CAB.  One interesting question would be what do you think CAB has done well (or not so well) and what do you see missing so far in Acropolis?

     

     

    -Ben

     

    Development Lead

    Microsoft

    Tuesday, June 5, 2007 2:36 PM
  • Thanks,

     

    There are a number of things that I am trying to draw parallels to in CAB that I don't see in Acropolis:

    •       Workitems as a the embodiment of scenarios/use cases
    •       Role based module loader
    •       Workitem extensions
    •       Command Adapters

     

    In addition it is difficult to see how the Acropolis Manager will scale with large solutions, if I need to organize and group, how do I do that?

    Tuesday, June 5, 2007 3:58 PM
  • I second Marlon's question and would like some information on how things like CAB workitems translate to Acropolis, as well as modules.
    Tuesday, June 5, 2007 7:48 PM
  • Hi Marion.

     

    Check my blog post for details. Acropolis is as very different animal than CAB/SCSF though some of the underlying principles are the same. Regarding work items and such, we will be working tightly with the Acropolis team to provide a mapping between CAB/SCSF and Acropolis. I do know that dependency injection and event broker type functionality are supported. Once we have more of an idea of how CAB features map, I will post on my blog.

     

    Regards

     

    Glenn Block

    p&p Product Planner - Client UX

    Wednesday, June 6, 2007 7:47 AM
  • Hi

     

    I bet CAB germinated as a simple idea, and was simple when it first started. Then it grew and grew and ended up having a huge learning curve and therefore barrier to take-up.

     

    So SCSF was created. With probably a large amount of investment, which enables you to righ-click to create the basics of CAB solutions. The only problem - it has a fixed mindset of the solutions one might want to create and I'm guessing that as soon as you deviate a  little you have to learn all abour CAB and SCSF. Which means a huge learning curve and therefore barrier to take-up.

     

    So Acropolis was created. With probably a large amount of investment, which enables you to righ-click to create the basics of CAB solutions.

    You see where I am going? Please assure me that Acropolis will not grow too big for its boots, too unwieldy, and have to be replaced after only a couple of years just like CAB and SCSF

     

    Matt

    Wednesday, June 6, 2007 11:50 AM
  • I don't think Acropolis was created because CAB is complex and SCSF is more complex than CAB and now they are trying to simplify.

    Acropolis was created because CAB/SCSF was succesful among developers that wanted to create composite smart client apps using mechanisms like Event Broker, Commands, Service, Dependency Injection, WorkItem, etc. You will have a learning curve like you have with any new techonlogy, but if you already know CAB/SCSF things will smell familiar. Hopefully the learning curve is not that big. VS designers will help, but it's a framework and there are concepts to leverage.

     

    Matias

    http://staff.southworks.net/blogs/matiaswoloski

    Thursday, June 7, 2007 12:47 AM
  • I think recommending that folks interested in learning Acropolis go off and absorb all there is to know about CAB/SCSF might actually be a little intimidating. I think a more practical approach might be to recommend that total newbies get their feet wet in Acropolis first (which is arguably simpler than CAB) and then, when they get to questions like "why does all this work out the way it does? What's the philosophy here?", then they can go dive into CAB.
    Thursday, June 7, 2007 2:32 PM
  • I'm saying that if you worked with CAB/SCSF you will find similar concepts and patterns in Acropolis. If I start a new project (6-12 months time frame) I would pick CAB/SCSF and move to Acropolis in a future beta 1 or 2. Based on this post (http://blogs.msdn.com/gblock/archive/2007/06/06/acropolis-the-future-of-smart-client.aspx) from Glenn Block (patterns & practices), they will invest in migration guidance from one to the other.
    Saturday, June 9, 2007 3:30 PM
  • @Matt

     

    Thanks for your comments. You are correct that SCSF was created to help remove some of the CAB complexity. Acropolis on the other hand is not being created due to the complexity of CAB. Think of CAB / SCSF as a V1 which although functional, appealed to a much smaller audience. Acropolis is slated to be the V2 that takes CAB concepts to the next level, brings these concepts into the platform and makes them more digestable to the masses through the use of tooling, VS integration, and through leveraging XAML. Acropolis also provides an architecture where the UI tier is more loosely coupled than CAB. This means it should be able to scale as new technologies emmerge and should not need to be completely replaced. As to the concerns of Acropolis becoming too unwieldy, the team certainly will do its best to prevent that from happening. Keep bringing the feedback so that we can know whether or not we are on the right track.

     

    Regards

    Glenn

    Monday, June 11, 2007 1:30 AM
  • Hi Matt,

     

    Yes I do see where your going!  One of the basic tenents we've established for the Acropolis Framework is that Simple things should be Simple and as you incrementally become more complex you also incrementally become exposed to additional parts of Acropolis.  Or in other words, there should never be a cliff that you fall off of and have a huge learning curve just to make a simple tweak to a basic scenario.  You should be able to deviate a little bit from the standard scenarios and only have to learn 'a little bit' to accomplish that.

     

    Now obviously this is our first CTP so that concept might be hard to see at this stage of the game, but as we progress through CTPs this summer and deepen the feature set and functionality of Acropolis one of our goals is that this will become more readily visible.  The cost in learning curve should hopefully always be less than the benefit of functionality as you explore more and more complicated scenarios and build richer and richer UIs.

     

    Monday, June 11, 2007 5:47 PM