xaml island Ask if Embarcadero will integrate UWP & WinUI in comming Version of Radstudio

[bravesofts 25]

hello every one

my question is :

 

Will Embarcadero Integrate UWP & WinUI in the Upcoming RAD Studio Versions?

For years, Embarcadero has been a leader in wrapping and integrating native APIs seamlessly into RAD Studio, allowing Delphi and C++Builder developers to interact with platform-specific features with minimal effort. From Win32 to FireMonkey, from VCL to the FMX framework, RAD Studio has consistently evolved to support modern development needs.

However, as we move further into the Windows 11 era, one question remains: Why hasn’t Embarcadero fully embraced UWP (Universal Windows Platform) and WinUI , despite the fact that it has successfully wrapped almost every other aspect of Windows development?

A History of Embarcadero’s API Wrapping Success

Embarcadero has a proven track record of abstracting complex platform-specific technologies into developer-friendly interfaces. A perfect example is how they handled Android development—by implementing a powerful JNI bridge, they successfully enabled Delphi developers to access and use Android native libraries in a fluent, object-oriented manner.

The TImport<T> generic approach allowed Delphi developers to seamlessly bind Java static class methods to their object or instance methods, making Android development feel natural and productive inside Delphi. This was a massive success, removing the usual pain points of dealing with JNI manually.

The Case for UWP and WinUI

Now, let’s talk about Windows.

Microsoft’s WinUI 3, the latest iteration of its modern Windows UI framework, is positioned as the future of Windows desktop applications. While VCL remains the most powerful and native way to develop Win32/Win64 applications, many developers are looking toward modern UI frameworks like WinUI to future-proof their applications.

Delphi already provides built-in support for WinRT, offering low-level access to Windows Runtime APIs. However, full-fledged support for WinUI controls inside the VCL/FMX framework is still missing. While developers can manually use XAML Islands, the process is cumbersome and lacks true design-time integration inside the Delphi IDE.

What Could Embarcadero Do?

1. Introduce Direct WinUI Controls Support in VCL and FMX:
   • Embarcadero could wrap WinUI 2 & WinUI 3 &+ controls in a native VCL/FMX layer, similar to how TEdgeBrowser integrates WebView2.
2. Provide XAML Island Support with Design-Time Integration:
   • Currently, manually embedding XAML Islands is complex. RAD Studio could add native support for hosting XAML controls inside TForm with a corresponding manifest key to make XAML Island design-time integration seamless.
3. Enhance the Windows Runtime (WinRT) API Integration:
   • While Delphi has WinRT bindings, they could be extended to support higher-level abstractions, making them easier to use within VCL and FMX applications.

A Golden Opportunity for Embarcadero

Many of the requested features could be easily implemented with the Universal Windows Platform. However, the application is complex, and it's the outcome of many years of development by different teams. As such, rewriting it from scratch with a new technology like FMX or (VCL + TDirect2DCanvas or StyleControls ThirdParty Lib or Fake Windows10 Controls like TSplitView, TSearchEdit, TRelativePanel, TToggleSwitch, TActivityIndicator, TNumberBox, TDatePicker and so on ?)   isn't an option on the table!!.

Embarcadero has always been at the forefront of making complex API interactions simple. It was true when Borland embraced Win32 in its golden age, and it remains true today with the success of FireMonkey and the JNI Bridge.

With built-in support for WinRT already in place, the next logical step is to wrap WinUI 2 & 3 &+ controls and integrate them into the Delphi IDE. This would bring native, modern UI capabilities to RAD Studio while maintaining Delphi’s ease of use and productivity.

While Embarcadero still hasn’t embedded XAML Islands into the IDE, Delphi developers are logically losing access to a wealth of golden libraries that could otherwise be leveraged in Delphi desktop applications. The longer this remains unsupported, the more opportunities are missed to modernize Windows application development in Delphi.

Final Thoughts: The Future of Delphi & RAD Studio

With Windows 11 pushing developers toward WinUI 2 & 3 &+ and modern app architectures, it’s time for Embarcadero to take the next step. The same ingenuity that led to the powerful Win32 wrapped controls by Borland before and the successful WinRT Bridge units should now be applied to WinUI 2 & 3 &+, allowing Delphi developers to build truly modern Windows applications while keeping the performance and simplicity they love.

So, the big question remains: Will we see a WinUI integration in the next version of RAD Studio? We certainly hope so! 🚀

 

Edited yesterday at 03:58 AM by bravesofts

[pyscripter 735]

28 minutes ago, bravesofts said:

Microsoft’s WinUI 3, the latest iteration of its modern Windows UI framework

Not quite.   See for instance Ohh...WinUI3 is really dead! - When can we expect the announcement? · microsoft/microsoft-ui-xaml · Discussion #9417

 

The Microsoft strategy for GUI App development is utterly messed up:

• WinForms
• WPF
• Xamarin Forms
• UWP
• WinUI3
• MAUI

And there is no longer a GUI designer.  You have to develop XAML in a text editor.  Discussion: WinUI 3.0 XAML Designer · Issue #5917 · microsoft/microsoft-ui-xaml

Edited Saturday at 11:26 PM by pyscripter

[bravesofts 25]

14 minutes ago, pyscripter said:

And there is no longer a GUI designer.

That's a valid concern, and I agree that Microsoft's UI strategy has been quite fragmented over the years.

However, while WinUI 3 may not have gained the traction Microsoft initially hoped for, it is still the underlying UI framework for Windows App SDK. Many of Microsoft's own apps, like the new Windows Settings app, use WinUI. Even if WinUI 3 itself doesn’t evolve into the dominant framework, its components and architecture are still part of the modern Windows development ecosystem.

Also, XAML Islands are still actively maintained, allowing WinUI 3 controls to be embedded into existing Win32/VCL apps. This presents a great opportunity for RAD Studio to bridge the gap rather than requiring developers to migrate to Microsoft's inconsistent ecosystem.

Regarding the lack of a GUI designer—yes, it's a drawback, but that’s exactly where Embarcadero could step in. RAD Studio has always excelled in visual design, and integrating WinUI 3 with Delphi’s existing design-time capabilities could provide a much better experience than Microsoft’s current tools.

Even if WinUI 3 fades, the demand for modern, fluid UI in Windows applications won’t disappear. The question is: Will Embarcadero seize the opportunity to offer an elegant solution for Delphi developers?

[Anders Melander 1944]

I think your arguments are all over the place but ignoring that, IMO they will not, and should not, waste resources on WinUI3. It's DOA and has no 3rd party support.

Move on.

 

2 hours ago, bravesofts said:

For years, Embarcadero has been a leader in wrapping and integrating native APIs

LOL. Compared to what? Clipper?

[bravesofts 25]

30 minutes ago, Anders Melander said:

WinUI3. It's DOA and has no 3rd party support

"If WinUI 3 has 'no 3rd party support,' why does Microsoft itself list Delphi and Java as third-party technologies in their official documentation?

GitHub link: Microsoft Windows-AppConsult-XAMLIslandsLab

Seems like Microsoft disagrees with your claim. Move on. 😉"

[bravesofts 25]

The fact that Microsoft includes Delphi and Java as third-party tech in official XAML Islands documentation shows that they acknowledge these technologies in modern Windows UI development. If WinUI 3 had 'no third-party support,' Microsoft wouldn't even bother addressing interoperability at all !!.

 

XAML Islands and WinUI 3 are different, but both serve to integrate modern Windows UI with existing technologies. If anything, XAML Islands proves there's demand for bridging WinUI with third-party tools like Delphi."*

[bravesofts 25]

1 hour ago, Anders Melander said:

LOL. Compared to what? Clipper?

You're too fixated on the idea that WinUI 3 is 'dead.' Regardless of its status, we need to catch up after our long absence from modern UI development. Whether WinUI 3 is thriving or struggling, the fact remains: it's a framework that allows for modern, sleek UI, smooth animations, and seamless access to WinRT APIs. Can you achieve the same level of design and fluidity as others using only native Windows libraries?

 

Right now, we don’t even have proper documentation on how to use bindings for WinRT.

It pains me to browse GitHub and see people with other Programming languages building stunning applications using nothing but Windows libraries, while in the Pascal section, searching for anything related to WinRT feels like a joke!!.

 

Even if we classified HTML as a programming language, it would still have better access to advanced WinRT libraries than what we currently have in Pascal. That alone should tell you something...

Clipper or else .. Since Delphi community still focus on bad ideas like WinUI is DOA !!

-------------

Clipper or else…? That’s an interesting comparison. Meanwhile, other developer communities are pushing forward, integrating modern Windows APIs, and making the most of what’s available.

If the Delphi community keeps clinging to outdated ideas—like insisting WinUI 3 is DOA instead of actually exploring its capabilities—we’ll just keep falling further behind.

Whether WinUI 3 thrives or not, at least others are building modern UI, leveraging WinRT with ease, and creating stunning applications. Meanwhile, we're still debating if we should even try. That’s the real issue.

Edited yesterday at 02:46 AM by bravesofts

[Anders Melander 1944]

By "3rd party" I mean 3rd party libraries. They seem to have all abandoned WinUI3. Likely because there isn't any demand from their customers.

 

32 minutes ago, bravesofts said:

why does Microsoft itself list Delphi and Java as third-party technologies in their official documentation?

GitHub link: Microsoft Windows-AppConsult-XAMLIslandsLab

Come on. That document is 6 years old but even if it was written yesterday it wouldn't make WinUI3 any more relevant. Try harder.

 

29 minutes ago, bravesofts said:

If anything, XAML Islands proves there's demand [...]

How does the existence of XAML Islands "prove" a demand? Do you understand that "prove" implies that "proof" exists?

 

11 minutes ago, bravesofts said:

You're too fixated on the idea that WinUI 3 is 'dead.'

My mention of Clipper was in reference to your hyperbolic claim that "Embarcadero has been a leader in wrapping and integrating native APIs".

If anything they have been known for lacking behind their peers, such as C++, C# and Java in this regard, so how can they be a leader?

 

Delphi is very good at wrapping native APIs but the potential future existence of these wrappings doesn't make it a leader. They have to actually exist.

 

Anyway, I've already spent more time on this topic than I care. Peace Out.

[bravesofts 25]

You keep shifting the goalposts. First, it was 'no third-party support,' then it became 'no third-party libraries,' then 'no proof of demand,' and finally, a critique of Embarcadero.

WinUI 3 may not be mainstream, but dismissing it entirely while ignoring its capabilities is shortsighted. The real issue isn't whether WinUI 3 is 'dead'—it's that Delphi developers are often late to adopt modern Windows technologies, which only widens the gap.

If you truly believe Delphi lags behind, maybe it's because of this very mindset. Instead of dismissing everything outright, we should be pushing for better integration and innovation.

Anyway, if you're done, that's fine. Some of us will keep exploring new tech instead of writing it off. Cheers.

Edited yesterday at 03:32 AM by bravesofts

[Fred Ahrens 63]

A while ago we used this blog post https://blogs.embarcadero.com/delphi-winui-3-demo/ for our own tests with WinUI 3. 

After some days we decided it might be easier and better to switch to MS dev tools as they could/should have better dev support - all with the background that MS promised WinUI 3 support also for Win32 applications. But whatever we have tried, every related document and support article was pushing to .Net frameworks for WinUI 3 implementation. Let's just ignore here the unbelievable complexity of creating WinUI3 UIs.

Doing some assessment about what we want and could achieve with WinUI 3, it came down to UI design - we couldn't find any other technical advantages that would benefit our projects. After seeing a Delphi demo showcasing an almost perfect UI mockup of the Windows Settings app that used standard components, it became clear to us, the interesting part of WinUI 3 apps is just the UI design - and this can be achieved in Delphi as well. This Settings app even started on Windows XP.
This mockup of course wasn't 100% perfect (e.g. transparency effects didn't look like in WinUI3 apps) - but even here some clever programmers deliver some "render magic" for FMX apps that even replicate those transparency effects perfectly. 
All this without inheriting the platform and framework dependency that you get with WinUI 3.

 

BTW: This discussion feels similar like the discussion some years ago about Embarcadero should support Windows Phone as target. At the end it was the right decision to wait for Windows Phone getting some more traction before bigger investments will be done.

[bravesofts 25]

36 minutes ago, Fred Ahrens said:

BTW: This discussion feels similar like the discussion some years ago about Embarcadero should support Windows Phone as target

I completely disagree with your statement. You have oversimplified and diminished the significance of WinRT & WinUI by reducing them to mere "UI design," which is a common but outdated misconception. The reality is very different—those who can seamlessly and efficiently leverage these system libraries are the true masters of desktop programming, whether people like it or not.

Let’s be honest with ourselves: by relying entirely on FireMonkey as a one-size-fits-all solution, we are pushing ourselves toward obsolescence. If we keep treating FireMonkey like some kind of ultimate tool or a magical fix for everything, we will soon find ourselves irrelevant in the world of professional software development.

Desktop Development is More Than Just Beautiful UI

Building desktop applications isn’t just about fancy interfaces—it requires deep system-level control. The real power of WinRT & WinUI lies in their tight integration with the Windows ecosystem, offering native system services, APIs, and deep OS interactions that simply cannot be replicated by a cross-platform framework like FireMonkey.

I challenge anyone to effortlessly call and manage WinRT services using Delphi’s built-in bindings and interop features without hitting major roadblocks. If you think WinUI is just about UI aesthetics, you are missing the bigger picture.

The False "Lack of Demand" Argument

Another common misconception is that there is no demand for native system libraries from customers or major software vendors like Embarcadero. This argument is flawed because how can developers reject something they haven’t even had the chance to experience? It makes no sense to assume that programmers wouldn’t want direct access to powerful, built-in Windows features without relying on third-party libraries.

The Real Reason Behind Delphi's Lack of Focus on WinRT & WinUI

The truth is, third-party component vendors have a vested interest in keeping Embarcadero away from fully embracing native Windows APIs. Why? Because if Delphi had first-class support for WinRT & WinUI, developers wouldn’t need to buy so many external, expensive third-party components to achieve what should be standard functionality in a professional development environment.

Final Thoughts

If Delphi continues to ignore the power of native Windows development in favor of an all-in-one cross-platform approach, it will gradually lose its place in the desktop programming world. True desktop developers need full control over the operating system—not just a nice-looking UI.

It’s time we stop fooling ourselves and start recognizing the real value of native system libraries before it’s too late.

[Fred Ahrens 63]

2 hours ago, bravesofts said:

I completely disagree with your statement. You have oversimplified and diminished the significance of WinRT & WinUI by reducing them to mere "UI design," which is a common but outdated misconception. The reality is very different ...

I just wanted to provide a real-world example why developers decide against implementing WinUI 3. We found easier and (for us) more robust paths for implementing technology that we (=our customers) need in our applications. At the end we have a business to run - WinUI 3 won't put more money in our pockets. - I'm still talking about our little world here and not Delphi in general. But I should also add that I see desktop apps in general as a dying species and expect more transition to web based apps.

 

Your demand for new technology seems to be completely different compared to ours. And that's of course absolutely fine.

[eivindbakkestuen 52]

The above posts make a perfect case for why Ctrl+B should be used sparingly.

[bravesofts 25]

11 minutes ago, eivindbakkestuen said:

The above posts make a perfect case for why Ctrl+B should be used sparingly.

Bold ideas deserve bold formatting...

If the argument is strong, the formatting shouldn't matter, Formatting aside, do you have any thoughts on the actual argument?

or should i switch to italics next time !!—just for variety😉

Edited 8 hours ago by bravesofts

[Der schöne Günther 328]

Embarcadero has been having too many coals in the fire for years now. Instead of opening the next can of worms, they should be fixing basics like code completion.

 

I remember being in the Microsoft Technology Adoption Program where you got Teams meetings with the developers behind WinUI and other Windows components, got shown not yet released roadmaps and got to ask questions. Back then, it was basically impossible to properly use WinUI outside of Microsoft's Visual Studio (not sure if it was WinUI2 or 3). At that time, they openly replied to me that they had no plans to change that.

 

On 3/22/2025 at 11:50 PM, bravesofts said:

Embarcadero could wrap WinUI 2 & WinUI 3 &+ controls in a native VCL/FMX layer, similar to how TEdgeBrowser integrates WebView2.

Except WebView2 has been usable for basically everybody from everywhere, and it's actually good. You can see it being used in a lot  of software, not just Microsoft's own products. 

Just look at how much stuff Microsoft has abandoned in the last couple of years, how much of the "Universal Windows" approach has been dialled down or completely removed already. Not to mention that new GUI stuff has been highly dependant on the most current Windows version. WebView2 even works in Windows 7.

 

I honestly was interested in WinUI around 2018 to 2020 or so, but it certainly never took off. I firmly believe it is not relevant anymore.

[MichaelT 8]

On 3/23/2025 at 2:35 AM, Anders Melander said:

I think your arguments are all over the place but ignoring that, IMO they will not, and should not, waste resources on WinUI3. It's DOA and has no 3rd party support.

Move on.

 

LOL. Compared to what? Clipper?

xHarbour Builder Rulez:)

[MichaelT 8]

On 3/22/2025 at 11:50 PM, bravesofts said:

hello every one

my question is :

 

Will Embarcadero Integrate UWP & WinUI in the Upcoming RAD Studio Versions?

 

A Golden Opportunity for Embarcadero

 

So, the big question remains: Will we see a WinUI integration in the next version of RAD Studio? We certainly hope so! 🚀

 

Yet another Microsoft frontend technology? Microsoft do have a capability to provide the technology, the tool chain, the tools and the IDE or their 'Community' does.

 

The Delphi approach matters for mid-sized applications as result of Microsoft or Apple denying the necessity for dialog based applications in the 1990s, which have been covered by various web technologies later on. I doubt that it makes lots of sense to integrate another GUI technology in anything else but a development environment pretty similar to PyScripter.

 

For different reasons the have always been small applications in a Win 3.x tradition (utilities with GUI) and the real big/complex ones. For the latter C/C++ setting up bigger teams paid. In both cases no one ever needed a GUI designer and for the first the shortcomings of MS GUI technologies concerning GUI in case of Visual C/C++ didn't hurt. VW was the solution for the dialog based applications and those were mid-sized. VB suffered from the OLE and/or early COM approach to let the business developers design the GUI and the business logic and the controls and such stuff should have been implemented  in C/C++. Remember Microsoft touting the return to one development language and that was the C language and C++ later on.

 

The golden opportunity these days arose wtih so called Y2k Bug and companies investing in replacing the IBM Mainframe/Host and the growing of the finance industry in the 1990s.

 

The VCL approach is lean enough and still does it's job pretty well, but for most of us. 

 

For the last decade or longer developer face/experience a certain kind of meta programming, in a different sense but the original one, by JetBrains or special development environment aiming at a certain technology. PyCharm vs. Wing and 20 other alternatives. PyScripter shows in lists of the 10 top Python development environments, while the Wing IDE requires a top 20 list in order to show up. A few years ago, Wing was ranked number 2 or 3 and fell back year by year. If people want a Thonny on steroids there is nothing EMB could do against. Have a look at VS Code or the new JetBrains IDEs. Since the shift to this century we see strong trend into direction of 'terminal style' development combined with more sophisticated and specialized technological underlying. So we can just say, GUI driven development found it's place, but has been a tiny rabbit-shit on the long time-line in which GUI focused programming in addition had it's decade in the 1990s.

 

Third-party does not mean, not being in the position to implement your own widget-set, it means that writing ones own widget set is simply to expensive in a sense of time consuming. Even in case of WPF the controls shipped can be regarded as a sound proof of concept of the underlying technology.

The idea of 'the GUI technology' is a very Microsoftish thing. To mimic the GUI is by far an/the approach enjoying broader acceptance on even on a mid-term already. 

 

...

 

Heavy rings on fingers wave
Another star denies the grave
See the nowhere crowd, cry the nowhere cheers of honor
Like twisted vines that grow
Hide and swallow mansions whole
Dim the light of an already faded primadonna

(Metallica, The Memory Remains)

 

Love the title of the song :)

 

Beside all your valid thoughts and arguments from a technical perspective, let's say it that way, 'If you are still developing VB-style at the age of 30, you must have done something wrong and using RAD Studio for that changes nothing concerning this remark' - not talking about you.