Apollo or WPF/E or Firefox

Which one would you choose for RIAs-for-Desktop or Occasionally-Connected-Clients (OCC) ?
We are familiar with Apollo, some of us know about Microsoft’s WPF/E platform which is said to be cross-platform. Mozilla Firefox rocks, specially Firefox 2.0, it provides you persistent-storage APIs among other new features.
I am just thinking why would I be using either of these? Meanwhile, if you have any thoughts please share it.
I would posting my opinion in later post.

  • Apollo, definitely!

  • @Quentin – same here.
    I am also thinking about what are those things that make us choose either of these? Is it ease of development? Is it company/community behind technology, where you see some kind of long term commitent?
    Just wondering…Try to find out many points..

  • I was asking the same question to some of the Ajax community over a year ago. I wanted to know why not use a XUL wrapper for use on the desktop but no one really ‘got it’. Zinc always has me on edge because it never does everything it claims on the mac and PC. Every update has new surprises.Stuff that worked in the previous version may not work as expected in the next. Until Apollo, It still seems like the best choice for quick Desktop RIA dev work.

  • “…Microsoft’s WPF/E platform which is said to be cross-platform….”
    Microsoft’s WPF/e browser plugin is already available in preview release for IE, Windows XP, and Firefox on recent Mac OS. Press materials mention other browsers to come. Linux info is unclear.
    I haven’t seen any mention of differences in capability between the Mac and Win versions… the functionality the plugin offers (transparency, vectors, WMP) seems to work on both Mac and Win. It doesn’t do much, but it’s got basic “cross-platform” already.
    XUL is cool, but whenever I’ve asked people why they didn’t use it, the answer came back consistently as complexity and fragility.
    It’s hard for me to compare Firefox, the Microsoft browser plugin, and the upcoming Adobe Apollo project… three different goals, three different ranges of user experience. (If Firefox is a car, then WPF/e would be a stereo system in it, and Apollo would be a travel service which includes auto rental.)

  • @JD – I installed WPF/E for Firefox on MacOSX, I tried playing one sample, my browser got hung and I have to killl the process. I never tried after that.
    You are right, it’s hard to compare.. I am trying to figure out what are those factors that matter while making choice for a platfom?

  • Hey Abdul,
    A better question is Apollo or WPF or Firefox. WPF/E isn’t meant for the kinds of desktop RIAs that Apollo is. WPF (while not cross platform) is the real competitor to Apollo. Great post!

  • @Ryan – Thanks for correction, I need to learn more before posting :-).. BTW! That shows my interest in MS technologies 🙂

  • For me it matters if it’s:

    – open source (firefox wins)
    – easy development (apollo wins)
    – cross-platform (firefox wins)
    – installation (wpf wins because it’s already bundled with windows)

    There will be a Apollo runtime for Linux, making it cross platform, so Apollo is for my projects the best choice, although there might be other and better open source solutions of course..

  • Ganesh

    I have a flash website posted at http://www.vsrnet.com. All I need is to take the flash code for the site and move it to WPF. Also I need a price estimate for doing this.

  • arrianna

    Mozilla Firefox is a fast, full-featured Web browser. Firefox includes pop-up blocking, tab-browsing, integrated Google search, simplified privacy controls, a streamlined browser window that shows you more of the page than any other browser and a number of additional features that work with you to help you get the most out of your time online.masini de inchiriat