Xamarin Live Player vs Gorilla Player

Can someone tell me what is better at the current moment? Xamarin Live Player is official, but still in development. Gorilla player seems more stable. Did you test them both so you can tell me the differences?

Posts

  • Liêm_NguyễnLiêm_Nguyễn USMember ✭✭✭✭

    @CptMcNugget said:
    Can someone tell me what is better at the current moment? Xamarin Live Player is official, but still in development. Gorilla player seems more stable. Did you test them both so you can tell me the differences?

    I have no use Xamarin Live, I'm using Gorilla Player. If you want to use Xamarin live you must turn on VS preview, I need stable so I don't do that

  • CptMcNuggetCptMcNugget PLMember ✭✭
    edited October 2017

    Tried it out. Was positive but after I figured it works only for XAML and whatever I do in C# doesn't show up and for simple custom controls I need Gorilla SDK or whatever it's not good.

    I hope Xamarin Live Player will do better, for now I think I will start the project with React Native even though I prefer C#

  • JohnTolleJohnTolle USMember ✭✭
    edited January 2018

    Short Version
    Xamarin Live Player is theoretically better than Gorilla Player because Live Player is fully interactive while Gorilla Player is just a XAML viewer, but Gorilla Player works well while Live Player is unstable.

    Long Version
    Xamarin Live Player is a great start and the fact that it's built into Visual Studio makes it very convenient. It is useful, but, since it's only a Preview version as I write this, it's fairly unstable and... well... kind of cranky. Testing only a very simple project, the Android Xamarin Live previewer app was crashing on me constantly, with very little useful information in the logs. Maybe it's just my particular setup (which is pretty vanilla, using the Visual Studio Android Emulator) but it was rather painful trying to get it to work consistently, even though it was really neat that I could actually interact with it very much like a full running app.

    GORILLA PLAYER ACTUALLY WORKS! Gorilla Player is what Xamarin.Forms XAML Previewer should have / could have been. Gorilla Player is stable and it has a lot more features relating to showing rendered XAML while designing, including the fact that changes are instantly displayed upon hitting Save. Live Player takes a few seconds to catch up after every change but doesn't require saving. Again, though, Gorilla Player is only a XAML viewer, which means you'll need to jump through some hoops to show sample data, etc., where the Live Player actually runs your code and shows data exactly like a real app would. Gorilla Player reminds me a lot of the old Windows XAML Design viewer, which also (usually) worked pretty well and also required you to jump through some hoops to display any data-bound stuff. Oh, and one last thing: Gorilla Player allows you to view your XAML on multiple devices simultaneously. So, for example, you can see what your app looks like on a phone emulator, tablet, real phone, etc. all at the same time, kept in sync every time you save your XAML file.

  • dinobdinob USUniversity ✭✭✭

    none work, short answer

  • alejob54alejob54 Member

    If you are working with some plugins to improve visual experience, or just to make your work easier (as I do), Gorilla Player will crash due it does not recognize their xaml syntax.

  • Anders_AAnders_A USMember ✭✭

    @dinob said:
    none work, short answer

    Just wondering..., (since I am in the same situation right now, trying to figure out which one works best or which third-party alternatives apart from these two players exist) what did you end up opting for instead?

    Compiling and building the real app each time to the cabled device...?

    Also curious what others in here use when developing real-time.

  • dinobdinob USUniversity ✭✭✭

    @Anders_A said:

    @dinob said:
    none work, short answer

    Just wondering..., (since I am in the same situation right now, trying to figure out which one works best or which third-party alternatives apart from these two players exist) what did you end up opting for instead?

    Compiling and building the real app each time to the cabled device...?

    Also curious what others in here use when developing real-time.

    In my experience (and I tried it with multiple code bases in multiple companies), no one works. Every of my ex and current coworkers have given up on this topic since evryone's conclusion was that it simply does not work (unless you use very simple hello world style app I guess).
    I do it to cabled device but that is time consuming if you have to build, deploy and step through app views to desired location just to find out if your layout is what you thought it will be. Comparing to react-native or flutter, where you get live update right away on your layout view with no need to build, deploy nor navigate to your view in the app to test your layout change, Xamarin is lagging seriously behind in this area.

  • Anders_AAnders_A USMember ✭✭

    @dinob said:
    In my experience (and I tried it with multiple code bases in multiple companies), no one works. Every of my ex and current coworkers have given up on this topic since evryone's conclusion was that it simply does not work (unless you use very simple hello world style app I guess).
    I do it to cabled device but that is time consuming if you have to build, deploy and step through app views to desired location just to find out if your layout is what you thought it will be. Comparing to react-native or flutter, where you get live update right away on your layout view with no need to build, deploy nor navigate to your view in the app to test your layout change, Xamarin is lagging seriously behind in this area.

    @dinob Thanks for getting back on the above topic and your input.

    It sounds rather interesting, that you opted for the cabled solution, considering the fact that Xamarin touts their Live Player as a tool, which speeds up the development process (as well as that the cabled solution takes an enormous amount of time to debug, which you also mentioned). In terms of making Gorilla work, I was able to deploy to the emulator on localhost, but cannot seem to get the apk on my phone connected to the server as it usually just reports that it 'Timed out'. I'm unsure as to whether this has to do with their app player no longer being supported or other reasons but neither was I able to find a guide on this topic (which is weird at best).

    I also read with great interest your comment on Flutter which I hadn't heard of yet. This tool appears to be well thought through and well-designed; ie. the creators even considered guides for developers, coming from varying platforms and technologies, explaining Flutter in their 'own natural developer style of thinking' by comparing the Flutter syntax to their native development background in those guides. Something, that I find ground-breaking and ingenious. In terms of the other framework, I assume that you were talking about 'React Native'. I had a good read on https://hackernoon.com/react-native-is-it-really-the-future-of-mobile-app-development-31cb2c531747 about React Native but gotta say, that I am not too keen on starting all over with a completely new technology (apart from, that I have recently worked a bit with Angular 7 and therefore would like to leave the 'javascript trail' for a while). Flutter seems nice but the same applies here as with React Native..., I am not really looking for a completely new tool which would require a lot of time to get accustomed to etc.

    I am looking at a possible job opportunity in a company in late summer or towards the end of this year. This company uses Xamarin in their daily development process and as such, I am trying to get used to working more efficiently with Xamarin for that very same reason. One of the challenges in that context is how to find a more efficient and faster development cycle. That was the reason for my asking on what others do in terms of their own development processes. I agree with you, that cabled would slow this whole process down and make it quite cumbersome an experience but I guess, that I would have to get used to living with that, just like you did. Alternatively, I am still trying to see if there is something better, more efficient and more reliable out there which would act just like Xamarin Live Player right now does on my Samsung device. I stumbled upon this solution https://livexaml.com/ which has been praised as a very effective and reliable tool for live reviews but a) the price is preposterous for a simple XAML viewer, no matter the subscription (and I'm not even sure if it only works with XAML or also with code-behind which the Xamarin Live Player does) and b) the 'free version' only allows you to use it with three XAML pages, which makes it useless as a tryout if one wants to get an impression of it and see whether or not it is a real alternative to the Xamarin Live Player.

    So I guess in the final analysis, I am still asking if there is something that could replace and work better than the Xamarin Live Player (though in the same way and with minimum the same features)...

    Looking forward to any reply.

  • AndreiMisiukevich_AndreiMisiukevich_ USMember ✭✭✭✭✭
  • Anders_AAnders_A USMember ✭✭

    @AndreiMisiukevich_ Hi Andrei and thanks for the heads up on your open source XAML viewer.

    This looks quite interesting. However, I am not really looking for yet another tool that runs on my local machine in the emulator but instead of for a replacement on par with the Xamarin Live Player app for my Samsung device. Maybe, I wasn't specific enough about this in my last posts. My bad and apologies for that.

    I have checked for such an app in your github link but couldn't find anything else but the emulator solution, running in conjunction with VS. However should you also have created an Android XAML viewer/app as well, I'd like to check that one out, too.

    Looking forward to your reply and thanks once again.

  • dinobdinob USUniversity ✭✭✭

    @Anders_A said:

    @dinob said:
    In my experience (and I tried it with multiple code bases in multiple companies), no one works. Every of my ex and current coworkers have given up on this topic since evryone's conclusion was that it simply does not work (unless you use very simple hello world style app I guess).
    I do it to cabled device but that is time consuming if you have to build, deploy and step through app views to desired location just to find out if your layout is what you thought it will be. Comparing to react-native or flutter, where you get live update right away on your layout view with no need to build, deploy nor navigate to your view in the app to test your layout change, Xamarin is lagging seriously behind in this area.

    @dinob Thanks for getting back on the above topic and your input.

    It sounds rather interesting, that you opted for the cabled solution, considering the fact that Xamarin touts their Live Player as a tool, which speeds up the development process (as well as that the cabled solution takes an enormous amount of time to debug, which you also mentioned). In terms of making Gorilla work, I was able to deploy to the emulator on localhost, but cannot seem to get the apk on my phone connected to the server as it usually just reports that it 'Timed out'. I'm unsure as to whether this has to do with their app player no longer being supported or other reasons but neither was I able to find a guide on this topic (which is weird at best).

    Last time I tried just a month or two ago, Live Player was useless. Every other time I tried it, it was also useless, nothing worked on it and in addition, they removed support for IOS officially. In terms of Gorilla, I tried it at the same time after everything I tried/read re LivePlayer failed. And same result, it only showed blank page and no other views on it at all. In addition, I did not like that I have to modify my views in order to get it to work. If I remember correctly, there was some setup required in code and sounded not good idea to me.

    I also read with great interest your comment on Flutter which I hadn't heard of yet. This tool appears to be well thought through and well-designed; ie. the creators even considered guides for developers, coming from varying platforms and technologies, explaining Flutter in their 'own natural developer style of thinking' by comparing the Flutter syntax to their native development background in those guides. Something, that I find ground-breaking and ingenious. In terms of the other framework, I assume that you were talking about 'React Native'. I had a good read on https://hackernoon.com/react-native-is-it-really-the-future-of-mobile-app-development-31cb2c531747 about React Native but gotta say, that I am not too keen on starting all over with a completely new technology (apart from, that I have recently worked a bit with Angular 7 and therefore would like to leave the 'javascript trail' for a while). Flutter seems nice but the same applies here as with React Native..., I am not really looking for a completely new tool which would require a lot of time to get accustomed to etc.

    Agree, both are great and I spent more time with ReactNative than Flutter. I find them both amazing especially ReactNative as it is older and has lots to offer and the hot reload is something Xamarin is missing. I will say this too and it pisses me off a lot about Microsoft. You will find lots of referneces, readings, demos about previewer working in Xamarin but I wish you good luck getting it to work and having anyone help you get it to work. It leaves impression as it was a buz word they throw out cpl years ago, figure out they cannot get it to work, then left it. Not impressive at all.
    On the other side, on RN / Flutter, it works great. So, why did I pick cabled device as my choice? Because it was THE ONLY way for me to be able to see if my view is actually what I think it will be. And yes, very slow process and no help from MS on that at all. I posted numerous questions in VS Dev forums and other places about this, they just ignore them, close them, or disable voting on them. Xamarin on itself is great, love it, but the missing xaml previewer is really annoying and if you are using Mac for your dev, it is even worse in terms of that.

    I am looking at a possible job opportunity in a company in late summer or towards the end of this year. This company uses Xamarin in their daily development process and as such, I am trying to get used to working more efficiently with Xamarin for that very same reason. One of the challenges in that context is how to find a more efficient and faster development cycle. That was the reason for my asking on what others do in terms of their own development processes. I agree with you, that cabled would slow this whole process down and make it quite cumbersome an experience but I guess, that I would have to get used to living with that, just like you did. Alternatively, I am still trying to see if there is something better, more efficient and more reliable out there which would act just like Xamarin Live Player right now does on my Samsung device. I stumbled upon this solution https://livexaml.com/ which has been praised as a very effective and reliable tool for live reviews but a) the price is preposterous for a simple XAML viewer, no matter the subscription (and I'm not even sure if it only works with XAML or also with code-behind which the Xamarin Live Player does) and b) the 'free version' only allows you to use it with three XAML pages, which makes it useless as a tryout if one wants to get an impression of it and see whether or not it is a real alternative to the Xamarin Live Player.

    I am in the same both, use it since I have to but for this reason, Xamarin is my 3rd recommended technology choice. In terms of LiveXaml, yes it is not free and I never tried it for that reason, tool like this should be part of the IDE, it is 21st century after all.

    So I guess in the final analysis, I am still asking if there is something that could replace and work better than the Xamarin Live Player (though in the same way and with minimum the same features)...

    If you find answer, please let me know. I and few of my colleagues, some of which very experienced and advanced with Xamarin, gave up on that.

    Looking forward to any reply.

  • JamesLaveryJamesLavery GBBeta, University ✭✭✭✭✭
    IMHO LiveXAML is worth the price.
  • AndreiMisiukevich_AndreiMisiukevich_ USMember ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Anders_A said:

    @AndreiMisiukevich_ Hi Andrei and thanks for the heads up on your open source XAML viewer.

    This looks quite interesting. However, I am not really looking for yet another tool that runs on my local machine in the emulator but instead of for a replacement on par with the Xamarin Live Player app for my Samsung device. Maybe, I wasn't specific enough about this in my last posts. My bad and apologies for that.

    I have checked for such an app in your github link but couldn't find anything else but the emulator solution, running in conjunction with VS. However should you also have created an Android XAML viewer/app as well, I'd like to check that one out, too.

    Looking forward to your reply and thanks once again.

    it isn't viewer. It is real hot reload. You run your application and change UI with real data.

  • AndreiMisiukevich_AndreiMisiukevich_ USMember ✭✭✭✭✭

    @JamesLavery said:
    IMHO LiveXAML is worth the price.

    Have you tried HotReload?
    It's interesting your opinion

    https://github.com/AndreiMisiukevich/HotReload

    Is there any sense to overpay ?)

  • Anders_AAnders_A USMember ✭✭
    edited March 29

    @JamesLavery said:
    IMHO LiveXAML is worth the price.

    @JamesLavery

    It might be a useful tool, but I think at 199€ for a permanent license and 19€ for a monthly subscription (which results in an annual price of a whopping 228€!) I find that - as mentioned earlier - preposterous, no matter how well it works and how much it helps in the development process. If they'd provide an annual license close to something like 50€ so one could try it out and see how well it performed or if it was worth further investment, I'd give it a shot, but 200€ is a mere rip-off.

    Also, I am not certain if I will actually end up getting the job opportunity, so a try-out offer instead of being forced to pay for expensive subscriptions, which are tantamount to usury, would be useful. For example, many students don't have the means to buy every single add-on or module while probing the various possibilities out there and that goes for many other 'poor' developers as well. A solution would be to raise the prices first when companies start using their XAML viewer professional or if the customer base and thereby production increases exponentially.

  • Anders_AAnders_A USMember ✭✭

    @AndreiMisiukevich_ said:

    @JamesLavery said:
    IMHO LiveXAML is worth the price.

    Have you tried HotReload?
    It's interesting your opinion

    https://github.com/AndreiMisiukevich/HotReload

    Is there any sense to overpay ?)

    @AndreiMisiukevich_

    Hi again Andrei! I haven't had the chance to try HotReload yet. You are right in that overpaying for a product doesn't make any sense, but I think you misunderstood my intention. I am looking for an app which resides on my device and that works just like or similar to the Xamarin Live Player. I am not so keen on working with emulators as they tend to be sluggish and cumbersome to work with. Thus my question to you earlier if you also have created an app that works that same way to be run on a physical device.

    Looking forward to hearing more about that part.

  • JohnHJohnH GBMember ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Anders_A said:

    @AndreiMisiukevich_ said:

    @JamesLavery said:
    IMHO LiveXAML is worth the price.

    Have you tried HotReload?
    It's interesting your opinion

    https://github.com/AndreiMisiukevich/HotReload

    Is there any sense to overpay ?)

    @AndreiMisiukevich_

    Hi again Andrei! I haven't had the chance to try HotReload yet. You are right in that overpaying for a product doesn't make any sense, but I think you misunderstood my intention. I am looking for an app which resides on my device and that works just like or similar to the Xamarin Live Player. I am not so keen on working with emulators as they tend to be sluggish and cumbersome to work with. Thus my question to you earlier if you also have created an app that works that same way to be run on a physical device.

    Looking forward to hearing more about that part.

    In my experience the sluggish emulators can be resolved using HyperV. Much MUCH quicker.

  • JamesLaveryJamesLavery GBBeta, University ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Anders_A said:

    @JamesLavery said:
    IMHO LiveXAML is worth the price.

    @JamesLavery

    It might be a useful tool, but I think at 199€ for a permanent license and 19€ for a monthly subscription (which results in an annual price of a whopping 228€!) I find that - as mentioned earlier - preposterous, no matter how well it works and how much it helps in the development process. If they'd provide an annual license close to something like 50€ so one could try it out and see how well it performed or if it was worth further investment, I'd give it a shot, but 200€ is a mere rip-off.

    Also, I am not certain if I will actually end up getting the job opportunity, so a try-out offer instead of being forced to pay for expensive subscriptions, which are tantamount to usury, would be useful. For example, many students don't have the means to buy every single add-on or module while probing the various possibilities out there and that goes for many other 'poor' developers as well. A solution would be to raise the prices first when companies start using their XAML viewer professional or if the customer base and thereby production increases exponentially.

    Huh? I don't know what you or your company's daily rate is, but 199€ for a permanent licence is not 'usury' (which is to do with lending money, not charging for a product). For most UK software houses, this is probably 1/2 a day's work.

    LiveXAML has a trial period - so you can try it out.

    Having said all that - a free tool like HotReload is better value (by definition)! I just haven't had a chance to try it out yet.

  • Anders_AAnders_A USMember ✭✭

    @dinob said:

    So I guess in the final analysis, I am still asking if there is something that could replace and work better than the Xamarin Live Player (though in the same way and with minimum the same features)...

    If you find answer, please let me know. I and few of my colleagues, some of which very experienced and advanced with Xamarin, gave up on that.

    Thanks for the valuable info about the Xamarin Live Player and other related issues.

    I guess it's either cabled device then (and living with the slow development process that goes with it) or to see if the Xamarin Live Player can somehow be made to work according to my needs. But I agree, that they did a lousy job, considering all the things you mentioned in your post.

    I'll let you know if I find an alternative that satisfies the needs.

    Thanks once again.

  • JamesLaveryJamesLavery GBBeta, University ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Anders_A said:

    I guess it's either cabled device then (and living with the slow development process that goes with it) or to see if the Xamarin Live Player can somehow be made to work according to my needs. But I agree, that they did a lousy job, considering all the things you mentioned in your post.

    That's something we do agree on! It's pretty disappointing that HotReload and LiveXAML - both are far better than the 'official' offering.

  • Anders_AAnders_A USMember ✭✭

    @JamesLavery said:
    Huh? I don't know what you or your company's daily rate is, but 199€ for a permanent licence is not 'usury' (which is to do with lending money, not charging for a product). For most UK software houses, this is probably 1/2 a day's work.

    LiveXAML has a trial period - so you can try it out.

    Having said all that - a free tool like HotReload is better value (by definition)! I just haven't had a chance to try it out yet.

    @JamesLavery

    I am not working in a company at the moment. I am looking at a job opportunity down the road. So my means are limited at the moment. As I need to raise the prospects of landing that job in the time up to where the company will look for developers once again, I have to find a more efficient way of dealing with the current slow and cumbersome development cycle. However, since there are no guarantees of landing said job, I am not interested in nor do I have the funds to throw 199€ at some tool today which I might have to do again in half a year because things might not work out the way I expect them to. So yes, it is definitely usury looking at the prices and being in that situation. In terms of try-outs I have not seen anything about a trial-period on their website. If you got a link or can point that out for me, I'd like to have a look. The only option of a 'trial' that I read about is - as mentioned before - that they allow you to work with three XAML pages at a time. Other than that, I am also not so interested in emulators as I had bad experiences with them being slow etc. I like the ease of deploying to the app over wifi from local machine. So, I'm still looking for something in that direction.

  • JamesLaveryJamesLavery GBBeta, University ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited March 29

    @Anders_A said:
    ...In terms of try-outs I have not seen anything about a trial-period on their website. If you got a link or can point that out for me, I'd like to have a look. The only option of a 'trial' that I read about is - as mentioned before - that they allow you to work with three XAML pages at a time. Other than that, I am also not so interested in emulators as I had bad experiences with them being slow etc. I like the ease of deploying to the app over wifi from local machine. So, I'm still looking for something in that direction.

    See here for the information on trial period:

    https://marketplace.visualstudio.com/items?itemName=ionoy.XamarinFormsLive-18843

    Not easy to find, and 2 weeks isn't that long.

    I absolutely take your point on cost if you're not currently working, and are engaged in skill development.

    LiveXAML and HotReload will both work with physical devices (Andrei, correct me if I'm wrong) - they 'just' need to be able to see the development IDE over the network. However I've found this to be a bit flaky, with poor wifi causing problems. But with good wifi, I get good live update of XAML on my physical Android device.

  • Anders_AAnders_A USMember ✭✭

    @JamesLavery

    @JamesLavery

    See here for the information on trial period:

    https://marketplace.visualstudio.com/items?itemName=ionoy.XamarinFormsLive-18843

    Not easy to find, and 2 weeks isn't that long.

    Thank you very much. Very kind of you, taking the time to find and post this information. Yes, you are right. Kind of hard to find that reference. I read about the three XAML pages option on their website but didn't stumble upon this link and paragraph back then.

    Also agree, that 2 weeks (or the three page option hereafter) isn't really much in order to see how it performs during an entire project cycle.

    I absolutely take your point on cost if you're not currently working, and are engaged in skill development.

    That is true. It's unfortunate and a bit of an obstacle. Would I be doing gigs already, I'd probably not even think about it but as it is now, those prices make it quite impossible. Basically, I'll have to make do with whatever is feasible for me right now and therefore, I'm willing to work a bit for things even if that might mean, having to invest some time and efforts into making things work in alternative ways.

    LiveXAML and HotReload will both work with physical devices (Andrei, correct me if I'm wrong) - they 'just' need to be able to see the development IDE over the network. However I've found this to be a bit flaky, with poor wifi causing problems. But with good wifi, I get good live update of XAML on my physical Android device.

    Now this sounds very interesting! But how exactly does that work? What's the setup and process to use a physical device with either LiveXAML or HotReload? How do you deploy to said device? Do you need to install a 'player app' or some sort of virtual machine?

    Looking forward to hearing more about the above.

    Thanks in advance.

  • batmacibatmaci DEMember ✭✭✭✭✭

    you can try this one also. in my opinion this is the best implementation so far and it is exactly same as Xamarin's discontinued livereload. https://github.com/vladhorby/Codexcite.Reloader

  • Anders_AAnders_A USMember ✭✭
    edited March 31

    @batmaci said:
    you can try this one also. in my opinion this is the best implementation so far and it is exactly same as Xamarin's discontinued livereload. https://github.com/vladhorby/Codexcite.Reloader

    Thanks for the tip. But is this yet another local machine emulator tool or does it provide an emulator app for a physical device as is the case with the Xamarin Live Player? And does it work only with XAML or does it also reflect real data/code-behind funcionality (which the Xamarin Live Player is said to be capable of)?

    What I am looking for is deploying to a physical device over wifi, not using the cabled development process (if avoidable).

  • JamesLaveryJamesLavery GBBeta, University ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Anders_A said:

    Now this sounds very interesting! But how exactly does that work? What's the setup and process to use a physical device with either LiveXAML or HotReload? How do you deploy to said device? Do you need to install a 'player app' or some sort of virtual machine?

    With LiveXAML (and I think HotReload) you add the appropriate NuGet package to your app, and just deploy your app to the device. That's it.

    The NuGet package monitors the IDE via HTTP and triggers a XAML runtime rebuild. There is nothing else to deploy to the app.

  • Anders_AAnders_A USMember ✭✭

    @JamesLavery said:

    With LiveXAML (and I think HotReload) you add the appropriate NuGet package to your app, and just deploy your app to the device. That's it.

    The NuGet package monitors the IDE via HTTP and triggers a XAML runtime rebuild. There is nothing else to deploy to the app.

    First of all, apologies for the late answer but I was bogged down with a multitude of unrelated tasks irl. Secondly, that sounds pretty straightforward, but I take it that that means another cabled deployment to the physical device. As in no previewer/emulator showing the XAML/code-behind over wifi but compiling/building the real app itself on the phone. Is that correctly understood?

    And if the above holds true, what about deployment time? Is there any difference in using LiveXAML/HotReload as to how efficient their deployment time is in comparison to the slow and cumbersome deployment process required when building the real app to the device in the 'old fashioned way'? Am I missing something here?

  • JamesLaveryJamesLavery GBBeta, University ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Anders_A said:

    First of all, apologies for the late answer but I was bogged down with a multitude of unrelated tasks irl. Secondly, that sounds pretty straightforward, but I take it that that means another cabled deployment to the physical device. As in no previewer/emulator showing the XAML/code-behind over wifi but compiling/building the real app itself on the phone. Is that correctly understood?

    And if the above holds true, what about deployment time? Is there any difference in using LiveXAML/HotReload as to how efficient their deployment time is in comparison to the slow and cumbersome deployment process required when building the real app to the device in the 'old fashioned way'? Am I missing something here?

    I can only speak with direct experience of LiveXAML but I think HotReload is similar:

    • Yes - it's the real app, just with an extra package compiled in.
    • You obviously have to deploy it to the device - this is via USB cable.
    • Deployment time is not affected (in my experience). It's just another normal deployment to the device. (I don't find deploying to a device cumbersome, by the way.)
    • Once it's deployed, you've got live refresh of the UI as you amend the XAML in the IDE, while debugging. There's an option to make the app connect even when not debugging, but I haven't used this yet myself.

    So you do a deployment of a build with LiveXAML, and then you can spend your time updating the XAML.

    Note that it's not perfect - I've found that LiveXAML can lose the connection between the device and the IDE, and so you need to restart the app.

  • JohnHJohnH GBMember ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Anders_A said:

    how efficient their deployment time is in comparison to the slow and cumbersome deployment process required when building the real app to the device in the 'old fashioned way'? Am I missing something here?

    I think you might be missing something here, deployment to droid simulators and devices is now reasonably fast. Certainly not cumbersome, at least not for us.

  • Anders_AAnders_A USMember ✭✭

    @JamesLavery said:

    I can only speak with direct experience of LiveXAML but I think HotReload is similar:

    • Yes - it's the real app, just with an extra package compiled in.
    • You obviously have to deploy it to the device - this is via USB cable.
    • Deployment time is not affected (in my experience). It's just another normal deployment to the device. (I don't find deploying to a device cumbersome, by the way.)
    • Once it's deployed, you've got live refresh of the UI as you amend the XAML in the IDE, while debugging. There's an option to make the app connect even when not debugging, but I haven't used this yet myself.

    So you do a deployment of a build with LiveXAML, and then you can spend your time updating the XAML.

    Note that it's not perfect - I've found that LiveXAML can lose the connection between the device and the IDE, and so you need to restart the app.

    Thanks. That makes things much clearer. I guess you can say then that it functions a bit like the Xamarin Live Player - just cabled (sometimes works, sometimes needs to be restarted to work -> sarcasm <- ;) ). When I said that things can be cumbersome, that refers to the deploy and build time, which I felt, took longer than the XAML update in the Xamarin Live player (when refreshing). Plus in that player, data is also updated as far as I read. I just hoped that there would have been some emulator app that worked just like the Xamarin Live Player but ah well..., nothing to do about it. I guess I'll try it out first and if that doesn't work or becomes too frustrating an experience, I'll go with one of the emulators that you recommended. Thanks for the heads up.

    Also thanks to everybody who took the time to respond and help out.

  • Anders_AAnders_A USMember ✭✭
    edited April 8

    @JohnH said:

    In my experience the sluggish emulators can be resolved using HyperV. Much MUCH quicker.

    Hi John! And my apologies for overlooking your earlier answer (above) which I first noted now. Thanks for your input. I had a look at HyperV but as stated under requirements in the following link...

    https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/virtualization/hyper-v-on-windows/quick-start/enable-hyper-v

    ...one either needs Windows 10 Enterprise, Pro, or Education before one can enable HyperV. Unfortunately, I got Windows 10 Home which makes this a no-go. Nevertheless, thanks for your input and the idea.

    I think you might be missing something here, deployment to droid simulators and devices is now reasonably fast. Certainly not cumbersome, at least not for us.

    When I mentioned that deployment was cumbersome, I was referring to the deploy and build time. I clearly remember, that when deploying to the Xamarin Live Player over wifi (when refreshing) it worked much faster than when using an emulator in a cabled environment. Plus, that the Xamarin Live Player will refresh XAML and data during that process.

    I sincerely doubt, that that should be somehow different for you or others. Just taking a quick look at SO you can find a whole array of posts that discuss that particular issue like this one...

    https://stackoverflow.com/questions/1554099/why-is-the-android-emulator-so-slow-how-can-we-speed-up-the-android-emulator?noredirect=1&lq=1

    ...for years now. So this is not only a complaint of mine. In essence, your first comment also defeats the point of your last one since you yourself pointed out, that the emulators work sluggishly. Just like my and many others' experience here.

    No matter what, I would like to thank you for your input and the time you took to help me out. As mentioned in my last post to James, I now am aware of the options and which route to follow in terms of emulators/apps and the possible development cycles.

    Thanks once again to everybody in here for their input.

  • JohnHJohnH GBMember ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Anders_A said:

    @JohnH said:

    In my experience the sluggish emulators can be resolved using HyperV. Much MUCH quicker.

    Hi John! And my apologies for overlooking your earlier answer (above) which I first noted now. Thanks for your input. I had a look at HyperV but as stated under requirements in the following link...

    https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/virtualization/hyper-v-on-windows/quick-start/enable-hyper-v

    ...one either needs Windows 10 Enterprise, Pro, or Education before one can enable HyperV. Unfortunately, I got Windows 10 Home which makes this a no-go. Nevertheless, thanks for your input and the idea.

    Yes, most developers are running Windows 10 Pro or above. You are limiting yourself if you aren't.

    I think you might be missing something here, deployment to droid simulators and devices is now reasonably fast. Certainly not cumbersome, at least not for us.

    When I mentioned that deployment was cumbersome, I was referring to the deploy and build time. I clearly remember, that when deploying to the Xamarin Live Player over wifi (when refreshing) it worked much faster than when using an emulator in a cabled environment. Plus, that the Xamarin Live Player will refresh XAML and data during that process.

    Of course, Live Player by definition will be quicker to rebuild XAML changes. But I was referring to your assertion that deployment is cumbersome.

    I sincerely doubt, that that should be somehow different for you or others. Just taking a quick look at SO you can find a whole array of posts that discuss that particular issue like this one...

    https://stackoverflow.com/questions/1554099/why-is-the-android-emulator-so-slow-how-can-we-speed-up-the-android-emulator?noredirect=1&lq=1

    ...for years now. So this is not only a complaint of mine. In essence, your first comment also defeats the point of your last one since you yourself pointed out, that the emulators work sluggishly. Just like my and many others' experience here.

    2 different subjects. sluggish running and debugging is one, building and deploying the other. The resolutions for those are separate, don't confuse them as being the same issue.
    The sluggishness can be largely resolved with HAXM/HyperV. You do of course require the proper tools to support that.
    The build and deployment times have improved over time and in our experience not cumbersome at all. So I stand by my comments based on actual experience with the tools we use every day.

Sign In or Register to comment.