I don't want to be negative, I could post dozens of items like this that show how *UNINTUITIVE* the UltraToolbarsManager and related controls are when using Designer view in Visual Studio.
I can't attach the PNGs to illustrate this:
1. They don't follow typical conventions tools do, like poinit-and-click-for-context: see attached "Name mismatch.png". NO MATTER WHAT I CLICK ON VISUALLY, I CAN'T GET A TOOL CONTROL TO DISPLAY ITS CONTEXT VIA ***STANDARD*** VISUAL EDITING CONVENTIONS.
2. If I use Infragistics own "Selected Object" button in the Properties window, it still does not display the control I highlighted in the form Designer.
3. ANY CHILD CONTROLS OF ULTRATOOLBARSMANAGER DO NOT EVEN SHOW UP IN THE DOCUMENT VIEW WINDOW!!! See attached, "Document View - No Control Specified.PNG"
and, I could post MANY MORE.
IF YOU CLICK ON A CONTROL, IT SHOULD BE WHAT IS DISPLAYED VISUALLY, AND ALL/ANY CONTEXT WINDOWS LIKE PROPERTIES SHOULD BE DISPLAYED. YOU HAVE USERS DIGGING THROUGH OOD LEARNING CURVE TO DO THE MOST SIMPLE THINGS A CONVENTIONAL DESIGN WOULD ELIMINATE.
What is the logic/reasoning behind this unintuitive, unconventional approach?
The *ADD*/Update for attachments overwrote the previous attachment so that only the last attachment was displayed in the above post.
Here are the other PNGs illustrating the above...
And, the last/third.
In short, all three show VISUAL EDITING IS ***POORLY*** DESIGNED with UltraToolBarsManager.
The tools and groups used in the UltraToolbarsManager do not derive from Component or Control. While this has its benefits, it also has some drawbacks as you have mentioned. Unfortunately, a lot of designer enhancements for VS have been tightly coupled with Component or Control-derived types. The Document Explorer and the type drop down above the Property Grid are two of the aspects of the design surface which could not be modified to allow the selected tool or group to be highlighted. However, we were able to show the selected object in the Property Grid with the Selected Object button, as you have also mentioned.
The ability to drag groups is also something that can be added to the design-time experience. This does not require Control-derived types. You can submit a feature request for this: http://devcenter.infragistics.com/Protected/RequestFeature.aspx.
Also, I'm not quite sure what you mean about synchronizing your code with the designer code or manually synchronizing tabs with the control pages. If you can elaborate on these problems you are having, I might be able to offer solutions or workarounds to help you develop your application faster.
And I have not yet seen the problem you have mentioned about the toolbox unloading controls and components. This sounds like a bug and I would recommend submitting the issue to the support group: http://ko.infragistics.com/gethelp.
It is very disappointing to see how convoluted the UltraToolsBarManager is for design-time ease-of-use, it's OOD, and the ridiculous coding required to get functionality with waaay less effort...
Infragistics should compare their design-time ease-of-use with something like this: http://www.componentone.com/SuperProducts/RibbonWinForms/
I knew ZERO about UltraToolsBarManager and the C1Ribbon when I started. WITHOUT READING A SINGLE LINE OF DOCUMENTATION I was able to imitate my UltraToolsBarManager application that took TWO DAYS. I had a complete copy of my U-T-B-Manager app with ComponentOne's C1Ribbon using **conventional visual approaches*** in a Visual Studio Designer.
- I can *visually* drag my ribbon groups in the order I want them,
- I can display ANY ribbon control's Properties by clicking on it, ...
- I do not have to synchronize my code with Designer code to avoid exceptions, manually synchronize tabs with the control pages. (This is so ridiculous. I could do the same, if not more, with ZERO learning curve and Panels). Zero Designer/code synchronization, or making sure *I* make the right calls to keep initialization exceptions from happening with U-T-B-Mgr).
It took SECONDS to get five tabs with their controls I wanted with C1Ribbon vs. the "Ribbon at Runtime CS" example. That example (a) shows a total lack of understanding how VISUAL editing is the standard today, (b) is so overly-complex in OOD, APIs, necessary calls to make vs. the options to do the same another way, the example should be thrown out)...
I don't have to sift through eleventy-teen different classes to figure out how they all work together.
Lastly, my Infragistics Visual Studio Toolbox tab keeps unloading itself, as doc'd elsewhere on this site. What kind of solution is that, to suggest we keep manually re-adding it back to the Toolbox?
I'm not trying to be negative in the least bit. I REALLY like the app styles stuff and a number of the controls. It all looked so slick via presentation, but it totally sucks to experience this.
Infragistics U-T-B-Mgr software architects and use case designers, download the above and check it out. (No, I don't work for C1, never even used anything by them before).