Pros of ScottPlot

• More extensive documentation and examples
• Supports a wider range of plot types and customization options
• Better performance for large datasets

Cons of ScottPlot

• Less focus on real-time/live charting capabilities
• Steeper learning curve for beginners

Code Comparison

ScottPlot:

var plt = new ScottPlot.Plot(600, 400);
plt.AddScatter(xs, ys);
plt.SaveFig("scatter.png");

LiveCharts2:

var chart = new CartesianChart
{
    Series = new ISeries[] { new LineSeries<double> { Values = new double[] { 3, 5, 2, 6, 1 } } }
};

Summary

ScottPlot offers more comprehensive plotting capabilities and better performance for large datasets, while LiveCharts2 excels in real-time charting and has a simpler API for basic use cases. ScottPlot's extensive documentation and examples make it easier to learn advanced features, but it may have a steeper initial learning curve. LiveCharts2 focuses on providing a straightforward API for common charting scenarios, particularly for live data visualization.

Pros of OxyPlot

• More mature and established project with a larger community
• Supports a wider range of platforms, including Xamarin and UWP
• Offers more advanced and customizable plotting options

Cons of OxyPlot

• Less frequent updates and slower development cycle
• Steeper learning curve for beginners
• Limited real-time data visualization capabilities

Code Comparison

OxyPlot:

var model = new PlotModel { Title = "Example" };
var series = new LineSeries();
series.Points.Add(new DataPoint(0, 0));
series.Points.Add(new DataPoint(10, 10));
model.Series.Add(series);

LiveCharts2:

var series = new LineSeries<double>
{
    Values = new double[] { 0, 10 }
};
var chart = new CartesianChart
{
    Series = { series }
};

Summary

OxyPlot is a more established and feature-rich charting library with support for various platforms. It offers advanced customization options but may have a steeper learning curve. LiveCharts2, on the other hand, is designed for simplicity and real-time data visualization, making it more accessible for beginners. The choice between the two depends on the specific requirements of your project and your familiarity with charting libraries.

Pros of Live-Charts

• More established project with longer history and larger community
• Supports older .NET Framework versions, offering broader compatibility
• Provides more extensive documentation and examples

Cons of Live-Charts

• Less actively maintained, with fewer recent updates
• May have performance limitations compared to LiveCharts2
• Lacks some modern features and optimizations present in LiveCharts2

Code Comparison

LiveCharts:

var chart = new LiveCharts.Wpf.CartesianChart();
chart.Series = new SeriesCollection
{
    new LineSeries
    {
        Values = new ChartValues<double> { 3, 5, 7, 4 }
    }
};

LiveCharts2:

var chart = new LiveChartsCore.SkiaSharpView.WPF.CartesianChart();
chart.Series = new ISeries[]
{
    new LineSeries<double> { Values = new double[] { 3, 5, 7, 4 } }
};

Both libraries offer similar syntax for creating charts, but LiveCharts2 uses more modern C# features and has a slightly different structure for defining series and values.

LiveCharts2 is a complete rewrite of the original LiveCharts, aiming to address performance issues and provide a more flexible and maintainable codebase. It leverages SkiaSharp for rendering, which can lead to improved performance, especially for larger datasets or more complex visualizations.

While LiveCharts has a larger existing user base and more comprehensive documentation, LiveCharts2 is actively developed and offers potential advantages in terms of performance and future support.

Pros of MaterialDesignInXamlToolkit

• Comprehensive UI component library with a wide range of controls and styles
• Follows Material Design guidelines, providing a modern and consistent look
• Active community and frequent updates

Cons of MaterialDesignInXamlToolkit

• Focused on UI components, not specialized for data visualization
• May require additional customization for specific charting needs
• Larger footprint due to its comprehensive nature

Code Comparison

MaterialDesignInXamlToolkit (XAML):

<materialDesign:Card Padding="32" Margin="16">
    <TextBlock Style="{DynamicResource MaterialDesignHeadline6TextBlock}">
        Hello World
    </TextBlock>
</materialDesign:Card>

LiveCharts2 (C#):

var chart = new CartesianChart
{
    Series = new ISeries[] { new LineSeries<double> { Values = new[] { 2.0, 1.0, 3.0 } } }
};

Summary

MaterialDesignInXamlToolkit is a comprehensive UI toolkit following Material Design principles, offering a wide range of components and styles. It's ideal for creating modern, consistent UIs across WPF applications. However, it's not specialized for data visualization like LiveCharts2.

LiveCharts2, on the other hand, focuses specifically on creating interactive and customizable charts. It provides a more targeted solution for data visualization needs but doesn't offer the broad UI component library that MaterialDesignInXamlToolkit does.

Choose MaterialDesignInXamlToolkit for overall UI design and LiveCharts2 for specialized charting capabilities. They can be used together in a project to leverage the strengths of both libraries.