Comet VS ASP.NET Core

> the first, MVP-style, attempt will be using Electron.

Good choice.

If you want to stick to HTML...WebView2 is suppose to replace it, but it assumes your backend code is .NET or C++, instead of JS/Node.js. Microsoft Teams is using it.

If you want to use native Windows UI components from JS code, then React Native for Windows is recommended. Facebook Messenger is using it.

All approaches require C# or C++ modules to be used to interact with the Windows Platform. Or there is: https://github.com/tjanczuk/edge.

The recommended approach is WinUI 3 which would involve C#/C++ and XAML.

To SwiftUI/React/JetPack are called module-view-update (MVU). There is an MVU for C# called Comet. https://github.com/dotnet/Comet#key-concepts

The benefit at least with the approach instead of embedding Avalonia inside Maui is you could potentially use non xaml frameworks for ui as long as they support Maui as a target. Stuff like Comet or Blazor mobile bindings would be possible aside from xaml. Especially if they're coming from Blazor web or code based ui frameworks like flutter which makes it appealing.

That was using the experimental Comet extension and lib, based on .NET MAUI. You can find instructions here: https://github.com/dotnet/Comet

There are also experimental libraries for .NET MAUI, which let's you create UI only with C#: Comet, MauiReactor

The MVU library is called Comet. The lead developer recently left Microsoft but im still seeing commits on the repo which is a good sign!

Yeah the hybrid blazor stuff is interesting. So is https://github.com/dotnet/Comet.

The XAML API is definitely more compact overall which is unfortunate, mostly because a lot of the devs prefer XAML. I've always preferred code-based UI though. Theres some 2ndish/3rd party options with Comet, which changes the UI pattern to MVU and C# Markup, which might not be updated for MAUI yet.

All the C# parts for Hybrid (including the components themselves) are running natively. Only the UI part (e.g. html, css) under the Web View is running web tech (html, css) under a native webview of the platform. But you can also add native MAUI controls if you wanted to (either via XAML, or Comet) and mix and match as that webview control that Blazor uses is just a MAUI control.

There is an alternative using MAUI .Net Comet

This approach to organizing middleware enhances code readability, maintainability, and reusability. By following this encapsulation pattern, you're adhering to best practices in ASP.NET Core development, ensuring your application remains well-organized and scalable.

🌟.NET 9 Preview 2 ➡️.NET 9 Preview 2 Discussion ➡️ASP.NET Core updates in .NET 9 Preview 2 ➡️ASP.NET Core updates in .NET 9 Preview 2 Release Notes ➡️EF Core updates in .NET 9 Preview 2 ➡️.NET Aspire preview 4 - .NET Aspire

https://github.com/dotnet/aspnetcore/issues/50643

Even if you look at Microsoft’s by far most popular GitHub project, they’re still only half as big as SupaBase. If you believe “the SupaBase story”, SupaBase grew and became twice as large as Microsoft in 3 years. Below is their likes over time if you’re curious, together with a couple of additional “too good to be true” Silicon Valley projects.

https://github.com/dotnet/aspnetcore/issues/10117

To achieve these objectives, we will take inspiration from ASP.NET Core Identity's PasswordHasher class. It incorporates a concept of hash versioning, allowing only the number of iterations to be modified.

yes I watched several courses, may be aim not getting clearly. but i worked with asp.net which uses http call and firebase cloud function also which uses socket connection, for socket connection its makes sense to use observable bcoz there streams of data we can observe once the connection establish ,but for http it need to be call every time.

As I'm not utilizing ASP.NET, despite its resource-intensive nature and occasional unpredictability, I prefer the cost-free option. I'm hesitant to invest in EPPlus or engage in trials, and moreover, I am more proficient with Interop. Given the limited volume of records in my department, there's a preference for utilizing tools covered by our existing license. This avoids the need for navigating through layers of approval within the chain of command and ensures compliance with our contractual agreements and Microsoft's patch management, ultimately aligning with a cost-saving mindset.