Blazor United needs to crush it, but also having MAUI + Blazor for desktop, iOS, Android will help the odds. To be honest, i think one of the issues facing better adoption is that there are so many hosting models and the identity templates we currently have with their identityserver licensing issues are going to be a stumbling block for new developers. We should have a JWT identity template using Microsoft Identity - maybe there is one, not sure.
I got into blazor because im a 15+ years desktop developer who wants to get into web but do not want to learn the other web technologies where I can so blazor just makes sense for me. That’s how I also found your channel, keep up the good work 👍🏾
Similar here. I wanted to be able to make web apps, and Blazor was the closest thing to desktop development. It is really well engineered, I only struggled/stuggling a bit with the Identity stuff and with the deployment. Actually the deployment itself is super simple, but the deviations between the dev environment behaviours and the production IIS server environment is really getting on my nerves (certification for exemple, still does not work for me.)
Microsoft dropping Silverlight was very difficult time for teams who had dedicated a lot of resources to it. I personally like the idea of language consistency across the tiers. I'm very impressed with Blazor (and your videos) so far, and hoping that MS put the proper support behind it when United comes out.
@@verfranc for what I saw on the video presentation, at least for SPA, there will be, I think it wants to mimic Next or Nuxt where some route routes are SSR and other are SPA
As a winforms desktop developer, it’s a big shift to go from a drag and drop environment to a hand coded XAML style environment. It’s just not intuitive nor rapid. If a WYSIWYG layer was added to XAML then that would make things easier and quicker. Closest I’ve found for the Winforms paradigm is Wisej. I’m surprised Microsoft haven’t bought the company yet.
I'm am old school dev and I've stuck to api development for several years now simply because using html, js & css frustrates the hell out of me, it's all just so fiddly. Too many moving parts. Having watched a bunch of videos over a few days, I sat down one Saturday morning and after 8hrs had 90% of our dynamic public side survey form working. The css wasn't perfect as I'm a bit rusty but everything else works. That to me, is the sign of a good platform. It does have great potential, but Silverlight. I think you're right in that there are few to no examples of this being used in anger, which leaves a lot of possible bugs and security issues to be found by early adopters and you can't have that in a customer facing application.
To me, the real revolutionary thing about Blazor wasn't being able to use the same language everywhere (although, that is nice), it's that everything can be done on the server. WASM feels to me like a bit of a sidetrack for Blazor. I wonder if MS is emphasizing WASM because they consider it a transitional tech for those currently working with JS framework stacks. Using WASM, however, you lose out on a lot of the productivity enhancements you can achieve with strictly server side architectures. I think Unity will allow a lot of WASM devs to get a chance to see how easy, productive, and secure server side development can be. Also, hosting and latency issues will continue to improve worldwide. The future is server-side!
There are requirements where server-side rendering can't provide, it's not the only thing in the future. I don't know how this Blazor United unfolds, but i'm I bit excited and can't wait to know how it handles stream rendering, and etc. I still think it will not be as fast as Qwik but this does not mean it is a deal breaker since not all web apps demands insane fast load times.
Server side was past to be honest. Today with plethora of device types, not leveraging their compute power is inefficient. JavaScript is like English language. It’s popular because you can bend it. It’s not the best but it’s too prevalent and available. The only company that can kill JavaScript is Oracle because they own it. I believe WASM is a great alternative as it is available where you can run a browser and more. Markup + code/IL combination is extremely useful pattern for cross platform app development.
Microsoft devs actually talked about this, they were already planning to move to react before Blazor was even conceived, they already had a multi-year plan to improve Microsoft Teams, so Blazor was out of the question because it did not even exist.
@@PticostaricaGS I also get that they wouldnt just pivot to Blazor right away, thats a massive process and more than likely they would start with new simpler projects they might have. Anyways, you gotta stop click-baiting me with your thumbnails, i expected a nice, girl to be talking to me then i hear your manly man voice and then im like, 'aw cmon'. Lol jk your videos are good.
Their decision to use React was made years ago when Blazor was still finding its feet. I’m willing to bet they would choose differently if they were starting from scratch today.
After some projects in Balzor I think It's good for dashboards but not for client side because of latency issues, I hope in future it will be enhanced , and we still need Javascript to be used easily ,Now in blazor there is a big problem when we use javascript so in most my projects I switched to angular waiting United to be released then I will see
There are a lot of issues with Blazor. First - you can't build components without JavaScript - so Interop injection, IDisposable etc makes code not concise. There are not much UI frameworks for Blazor available, but everyone has React option (including MS). I had issues with google maps if I switch the pages, loading times, debugging WASM. So, there are a lot of issues not solved. I think we would be better Typescript for frontend and C# / Typescript Backend. Framework could have both.
See the whole point was to get away from javascript, and all typescript does is transpile into js. I can see the argument here, however if you are going to go down this route then you are better off going with React and then having a .net backend. But ya i agree Blazor has problems and a lack of good common packages for the most popular items developers would use that are open-source or at least close to free is among them.
Your take on Silverlight is completely off. It was never even CLOSE to being the "dominating force when it comes to web application development". That 64% penetration rate in the wiki refers to the percentage of browser that were CAPABLE of running Silverlight applications - i.e. that had the Silverlight plugin installed. Compare that to Adobe Flash which was installed in 95% of browsers. When it comes to just those two, Flash was lightyears ahead of Silverlight when it came to the actual number of websites that we DEVELOPED using either of those two technologies. I don't have numbers but but I can tell you the number of website that were actually developed using Silverlight is laughably low. It was never even close to being a dominant player by any stretch of the imagination. Also, the reason it died did not really have anything to do with "other browsers not supporting" it. The only one - and the one that turned out to matter the most - was Safari on iOS. Steve Jobs made it clear that no browser plugins like Adobe Flash would be allowed on iOS. Adobe Flash was always his main target as they were - as opposed to Silverlight - quite a big player in web development and Steve Jobs did not like the fact that it was a proprietary technology - he wanted open web standards to be supported. Silverlight was simply colatteral damage in Steve Jobs' fight with Adobe.
I tried using Blazor for my next project but since I can't EASILY integrate it with client-side javascript, it's a no-go for me! There is like absolutely ZERO libraries I can use with Blazor leaving me to reinvent the wheel with many things I want/need to do! That's a HUGE NO-GO!!!
Just wait for Blazor united in November 2023! That's a whole new ball game! Organizations are cautious. Blazor is a phenomenal framework and I for one use it exclusively for all my projects!
I think this video is a bit pessimistic. You can find in reddit very nice comments on changing to Blazor in production. People seems to love it in production.
Im not pessimistic about Blazor, i do think there are some hurdles for it to be adopted more. I do know it is in an upward trajectory when it comes to usage so thats always a good sign especially when other frameworks have a negative one.
And to make things worse, Microsoft used React to implement their latest release of Microsoft Teams. Facebook uses React in its flagship product while Microsoft does not use Blazor in any of its products
Nobody liked Silverlight. It was MS attempt to compete with Flash and had the same problems with performance and security that Flash did. Good riddance. When I say nobody liked, I mean NOBODY. Developers hated it because the plug in wasn't equally performant between browsers and there were a ton of support issues with end users. End users hated it because they didn't understand it and there were a lot of issues with compatibility with different versions of Windows and different browser versions. Many businesses in that time period would build their tech stack and only supported one set of development standards (MS, Netscape and derivatives, etc). Silverlight was actually a huge issue for MS because they put all of their web development energy into it (Steve Ballmer REALLY wanted it to work because it would tie everyone to Windows permanently) and completely missed the growth of JavaScript as a key language. MS only changed when they brought in new senior leadership who was willing to embrace web standards. They are desperately trying now to figure out how to make money out of this, but Blazor is the key to everything that MS is doing with web development for the immediate future.
5 years and Blazor still has a lot of work to be done. I don't think it's going to make it. I know I've abandoned all projects I've started with Blazor simply because it's too convoluted when you have to use JSInterop to access the DOM all over the place. It's just not a good framework. It has good parts, but the bad parts are bad. If they haven't figured it out in 5 years, I don't think they ever will. SignalR shouldn't be needed in every application. It should only be used where you really need it for realtime communication. Your web framework shouldn't require it for a simple CRUD app.
I can see that, Razor is built on having everything be built on the server side and i see that server side connection as a vestige of the past but i do also see some merit to it especially in terms of security. Blazor WASM seems to be the main hosting model people will be using, and if they get United to work then the load issue will be resolved because you will just use a bit of that signalr for the very beginning parts of your app. Again compared to angular or react this is an extra step to achieve similar results but it is viable for those who just dont want to use javascript to the degree we need to use it now. Hence why i mentioned its for those who come from .net who would be the prime target for it.
i was searching for a way to get rid of JS one and for all , so i started look to TypeScript but it was hard to share class form C# to Typescript and then Blazor came
This video is trash, blazor is just a wasm framework, as such it is limited by the wasm standard so no dom manipulation etc. It will take time for the wasm standard v2 to be dry, in the meantime the work continue on blazor with net8
