Pros of MAUI

• Stronger official support from Microsoft, ensuring long-term stability and updates
• Seamless integration with existing .NET ecosystem and tools
• More mature documentation and learning resources

Cons of MAUI

• Limited support for non-mobile platforms (e.g., web)
• Steeper learning curve for developers new to .NET
• Less flexibility in UI customization compared to Uno Platform

Code Comparison

MAUI:

<ContentPage xmlns="http://schemas.microsoft.com/dotnet/2021/maui"
             xmlns:x="http://schemas.microsoft.com/winfx/2009/xaml"
             x:Class="MyApp.MainPage">
    <StackLayout>
        <Label Text="Welcome to .NET MAUI!" />
    </StackLayout>
</ContentPage>

Uno Platform:

<Page x:Class="MyApp.MainPage"
      xmlns="http://schemas.microsoft.com/winfx/2006/xaml/presentation"
      xmlns:x="http://schemas.microsoft.com/winfx/2006/xaml">
    <Grid>
        <TextBlock Text="Welcome to Uno Platform!" />
    </Grid>
</Page>

Both MAUI and Uno Platform offer cross-platform development capabilities, but they have different strengths and target audiences. MAUI is more focused on mobile development with official Microsoft backing, while Uno Platform provides broader platform support, including web applications. The choice between them depends on specific project requirements and developer preferences.

Pros of Xamarin.Forms

• More mature and established ecosystem with extensive documentation and community support
• Native UI controls for each platform, resulting in a more native look and feel
• Wider range of third-party libraries and plugins available

Cons of Xamarin.Forms

• Limited support for desktop platforms (Windows and macOS)
• Performance can be slower compared to native development, especially for complex UIs
• Steeper learning curve for developers new to mobile development

Code Comparison

Xamarin.Forms:

<ContentPage xmlns="http://xamarin.com/schemas/2014/forms"
             xmlns:x="http://schemas.microsoft.com/winfx/2009/xaml">
    <StackLayout>
        <Label Text="Welcome to Xamarin.Forms!" />
    </StackLayout>
</ContentPage>

Uno:

<Page x:Class="MyApp.MainPage"
      xmlns="http://schemas.microsoft.com/winfx/2006/xaml/presentation"
      xmlns:x="http://schemas.microsoft.com/winfx/2006/xaml">
    <Grid>
        <TextBlock Text="Welcome to Uno Platform!" />
    </Grid>
</Page>

Both frameworks use XAML for UI definition, but Uno follows the UWP XAML syntax more closely, while Xamarin.Forms has its own XAML vocabulary. Uno provides a more consistent development experience across platforms, including web and desktop, while Xamarin.Forms focuses primarily on mobile platforms with limited desktop support.

Pros of Avalonia

• Native-like performance across all platforms
• Extensive and customizable UI controls
• Strong community support and active development

Cons of Avalonia

• Steeper learning curve for developers new to XAML
• Limited mobile platform support compared to Uno
• Smaller ecosystem of third-party libraries and controls

Code Comparison

Avalonia XAML:

<Window xmlns="https://github.com/avaloniaui"
        xmlns:x="http://schemas.microsoft.com/winfx/2006/xaml"
        Title="Avalonia Example">
    <Button Content="Click me!" />
</Window>

Uno XAML:

<Page
    x:Class="UnoApp.MainPage"
    xmlns="http://schemas.microsoft.com/winfx/2006/xaml/presentation"
    xmlns:x="http://schemas.microsoft.com/winfx/2006/xaml">
    <Button Content="Click me!" />
</Page>

Both frameworks use XAML for UI definition, but Avalonia has its own namespace and slightly different syntax. Uno follows the UWP XAML structure more closely, which may be more familiar to Windows developers. Avalonia offers more flexibility in styling and custom controls, while Uno provides better integration with existing UWP code and resources.

Pros of ReactiveUI

• Mature and well-established framework with a large community and extensive documentation
• Supports a wide range of platforms, including mobile, desktop, and web
• Powerful reactive programming model for handling complex UI interactions and data flows

Cons of ReactiveUI

• Steeper learning curve, especially for developers new to reactive programming
• Can be overkill for simpler applications with less complex state management needs
• Limited cross-platform UI capabilities compared to Uno Platform

Code Comparison

ReactiveUI:

this.WhenAnyValue(x => x.SearchTerm)
    .Throttle(TimeSpan.FromSeconds(0.8))
    .SelectMany(term => SearchService.Search(term))
    .ObserveOn(RxApp.MainThreadScheduler)
    .ToProperty(this, x => x.SearchResults, out _searchResults);

Uno Platform:

private void SearchBox_TextChanged(object sender, TextChangedEventArgs e)
{
    var searchTerm = ((TextBox)sender).Text;
    SearchResults = await SearchService.Search(searchTerm);
}

The ReactiveUI example showcases its reactive approach, while the Uno Platform example demonstrates a more traditional event-driven pattern. ReactiveUI offers more sophisticated state management, while Uno Platform focuses on cross-platform UI development with a familiar programming model.

Pros of awesome-xamarin-forms

• Comprehensive collection of resources, libraries, and tools for Xamarin.Forms development
• Community-driven project with frequent updates and contributions
• Serves as a valuable reference guide for both beginners and experienced developers

Cons of awesome-xamarin-forms

• Not an actual framework or development platform, just a curated list
• Lacks direct code implementation or examples
• May include outdated or deprecated resources if not regularly maintained

Code Comparison

As awesome-xamarin-forms is a curated list and not a development framework, a direct code comparison with Uno is not applicable. However, here's an example of how you might use a library listed in awesome-xamarin-forms compared to Uno:

awesome-xamarin-forms (using a listed library):

using Xamarin.Forms;
using Rg.Plugins.Popup;

public partial class MainPage : ContentPage
{
    async void OnButtonClicked(object sender, EventArgs e)
    {
        await Navigation.PushPopupAsync(new MyPopupPage());
    }
}

Uno:

using Windows.UI.Xaml.Controls;

public sealed partial class MainPage : Page
{
    private void OnButtonClick(object sender, RoutedEventArgs e)
    {
        Frame.Navigate(typeof(MyPopupPage));
    }
}

Note that the Uno example uses UWP-style navigation, while the awesome-xamarin-forms example uses a third-party popup library listed in the repository.