Related
I'm planning on doing an interactive AR application that will use a laser sensor (for distances), GPS technology to get a location, and then use compass/gyroscope for tracking 6DOF viewfinder
movements. The user can choose from a number of ready-made 3D-models, and should be able to place them by selecting the desired location on the screen.
My target platform will be a 8"-handheld-device, running on windows8.
Any hints what would be the best AR-SDK or 3D-viewer to work with?
thanks in advance!
There are quite a few 3D viewers that are working in the browsers. But most recently and most notably: va3C viewer
It is webgl based app and doesnt require a server, so if your handheld device supports webgl, then you are good to go, however, whether it works on IE or not is questionable ;).
Although based on my experience and your usecase, I believe client side JS libraries do not provide enough access to the device's hardware. So you might have to serve the information like GPS, Gyroscope, from the server side, then gather this on the client using something like socket.io and then mash it up alongside the geometry.
I am trying to do something similar, although havent quite done it yet. Will keep you posted.
Another approach I am exploring is X3DOM, which gives the ability to write 3D data like XML alongside HTML, which is quite declarative and simple to pickup. X3DOM derives from X3D.
Tell me if you need more info.
Also, worth exploring for its motion abilities, is Robot Studio, which is a desktop app with SDK.
I'm now with a idea to start the development of a bare bones Qt/GTK+-like framework, but I want to know some things before I start the creation of this project:
What is the structure of GTK+ and Qt?
Do I need to develop a window manager to build my own framework?
Some resources to start?
Developing a GUI/Application framework is a significant undertaking. You might want to be very clear about why you need to write yet an other framework.
Both projects you mention are open source. Why not start there?
GTK: git clone git://git.gnome.org/gtk+
Qt: git clone git://gitorious.org/qt/qt.git
Ed You ask what the structure of GTK and Qt are, whether you need to write your own widow manager (answer: no) and how to get started. Answers to at least the first two are in the source code. Don't forget, great practitioners in any field learn by watching others. Reading code is no different.
Writing a GUI/app framework would be a great learning experience, but even a fairly small app framework would be a very big job, and not something you really should tackle until you're fairly expert in writing applications using several other frameworks and widget toolkits.
I did something like this once, back in the early years of this decade. That was after I'd been programming for the Mac for over 15 years, Windows over 10, and had programmed both directly to their native graphics, event, and widget APIs, as well as various object-oriented toolkits for them including PowerPlant, MFC, and MacApp. When I started working on a PalmOS application, I spent a couple of weeks writing a very small app framework modeled on PowerPlant. But I could not have succeeded at all without those decades of broad and deep experience with so many GUI systems.
Doing this for Linux/X11 is even more work. That's because, unlike Mac OS and Windows, neither X11 nor Linux supply built-in user interface widgets, or much in the way of graphics primitives or text layout capabilities. GTK+ is part of the GNOME ecosystem; it provides the widgets, gets its message queue and internal communications from GObject, relies on GDK to abstract and simplify its graphics and event communications with X11, and uses Pango and Cairo for text rendering and layout. I work all through that system, and it probably represents many dozens of person-years of hard work by a lot of really smart people. And I'm sure Qt is very similar.
So if you really want to do this, I would recommend you:
Write programs with a lot of different app and widget toolkits, on multiple operating systems. That will help you learn not just how such systems work, but why they are designed as they are. And it will give you some feeling for what works well, and what works poorly.
Contribute bug fixes or new features to one or more of the various open-source frameworks. GTK+ has a list of tasks for beginners to work on. Another great open-source framework is wxWidgets.
Become an expert-level C/C++ programmer.
When you've done that for a few years, you will have the expertise suitable for tackling your own framework.
That sounds like a major undertaking, at least as a starting project.
Not sure what you mean by "the structure" of e.g. GTK+. You can see the object hierarchy for GTK+, that tells you at least how the implemented objects (GTK+ is an object-oriented API) relate to each other. You can guess how the code can be structured, from that information.
And no, you don't need to write your own window manager; the toolkits mainly concern themselves with what happens inside windows, not with the window management itself. Of course you could decide that your "platform" should have a wider scope, and include a WM.
I think some of the answers here might exaggerate a bit. Obviously making something of the same quality, width and depth as Qt and Gtk is a huge untertaking. But you can make simpler stuff and still learn a lot about how it works. I suggest doing like I did in university. Use OpenGL with Glut. Then you got basic drawing functionality and event system in place already. You then need to create classes for buttons, text fields etc.
If you want to make it really simple then each component just needs to know where it is drawn and have some sort of bounding box where you check whether mouse click are inside or not. You also needs to create some system which makes it possible for buttons, check boxes etc to tell the rest of your code that they were clicked.
This isn't really the rocket science people here make it out to be. Games have made their own very simple GUI toolkits for years. You can try that approach as well. I have modeled a simple GUI tookit on top of a game engine before. Your buttons and textfield could be simply be sprites.
But yeah, if you want to make something that will compete with Gtk+ and Qt, forget about it. That is a team effort over many years.
There are many more technologies and tools available to build the front end for an application.
Which is the best technology/tool/platform available using which I can build a better GUI, by which I'll be able to build a nice looking as well as an efficient GUI?
Definition of "better" includes factors such as efficiency,user friendliness,better content control mechanism, navigation and many more.
I know this is a question about which GUI toolkit you should use, but your first technology for producing a user-friendly UI is pen and paper. Sketch out some mock-ups. Draw buttons and menus on construction paper, cut them out, and glue them together. Then try your mockups on about a half-dozen people. You'll quickly find out what makes a good UI.
It doesn't matter how good the UI looks or whether it uses the latest snazzy effects -- if your users can't figure out how to use it, they'll go elsewhere. You need to learn what works for your target audience before you write a single line of code.
Read Don't Make Me Think to learn how to make mock-ups and do user testing.
If' you're tracking an IP address, you'll definitely want to create your GUI Interface in Visual Basic.
Use the .NET framework in Visual Studio 2005/2008/2010 Studio. I haven't developed in any other environment, but I have been able to create nice looking apps in this IDE / Framework.
"Best" depends on what your evaluation function is.
For ease of development, and high quality UI, in a non-web based app it's hard to beat C#/VB or any other .NET language and environment for a windows-based app. Depending on the quality of the UI, MPF will give you greater flexibility and control, whereas windows form will make it easier to develop.
Having used Windows Presentation Foundation for a while now i would highly recommend it. There is a pretty big learning curve and, to be honest, MSFT should have included some controls (the datagrid being the biggest one) that were not included by default (but will be in .NET 4.0). Where WPF and XAML exceed is providing a foundation from which you can build just about anything. You can style ANY part of ANY control and build your own composite controls from scratch. A lot of thought went into binding and value converters and once you get used to the declarative nature of XAML you wont want to turn back. The company I work for has been using it for a couple of years now and the difference between the GUIs we used to develop (mainly winforms and asp.net) and what we develop now are night and day in terms of both look-and-feel and functionality. My two cents anyway...
It depends.
What device will the GUI be used on, hand held, PC, Mac?
What platform Windows, Linux, Web?
What kind of application will it be, accounting, email client, web application?
What audience will be using the application (a GUI aimed at a child may be different than one aimed at an adult)?
All of these things must be taken into account before even starting to formulate an answer to your question.
You have several choices for developing a GUI.
first, if cross platform is an issue consider using Java or Python.
you can also use Adobe AIR and develop the gui in Flex.
If you direct the product to windows only users .NET WPF is the best solution, with a very rich set of control and examples.
You can also use .NET with mono for cross platform compatibility, but WPF isn't currently supported.
Desktop, Mobile, Windows, Linux, Database, OpenGL: Nokia Qt. Wiht Python - PyQt development process is shortest and easy. Application containing all required python & qt libraries and modules is around 30MB with Inno Setup installation is 8MB and will work on Windows 2000 and newer for Python 2.6.x, Python 2.5.x based application will run from Windows 95 to Windows 7.
I think all the attributes you list -- efficiency, user friendliness, etc -- are attributes of a good design rather than a good toolkit. Just about any toolkit can be used to meet those goals. I think the question might be different if you were asking about eye candy, fancy multi-media, etc. There are definitely some toolkits that do that better than others.
If you're interested in usability first (and it sounds like you are), focus on the design then pick whatever toolkit meets your current abilities and can handle your design. For example, if you require 3D images that might narrow your choices; likewise if you need to show videos, that will influence which toolkits you can choose from.
So, start with a good design. From that, create a list of requires for the toolkit -- rich editing controls, video, 3D, etc. And then look for a toolkit that provides what you need.
The best toolkit in the world won't make up for poor design.
Personally after having used Win32, Forms and WPF then going to Mac/iPhone GUI development, I very much prefer the flexibility and high quality of visuals in the Mac/iPhone GUI.
One of the most useful examples is the fact that in NSTable/UITable controls (ListViews or similar in Windows), every cell is a fully customisable View (a Control in Windows).
Where in a ListView you have very little customisation for each cell/item in the view since you only provide details, not an actual control, an NSTable/UITable asks you for a table cell which you can add anything to, such as buttons, switches and image views.
Mac OS GUI development to me is a LOT more flexible and more consistently flexible in that regard. Everything is a View so I can my own contents to anything.
Have you considered Silverlight?
It can be used to create internet applications, but it can also be run out of browser to create desktop applications. It's has significant overlap with WPF though there are differences which might catch you out when swapping from one to the other.
Expression Blend 3 is a very good visual designer and the code it produces is quite efficient.
I'm starting a hobby game project on Windows that will make heavy use of 3D graphics effects. It will most likely be written in C++.
Should I use OpenGL or Direct3D for my graphics backend? Why?
Or should I use a ready-made graphics engine such as OGRE 3D? Which one?
Some "how to get started" links would be useful. (On either technology, or both.)
Edit - Yes I really meant Direct3D, not DirectX, thanks to graham.reeds for clarification
Edit - Mihai Lazar pointed out that I could also use a graphics engine such OGRE 3D. Edited the question to reflect this alternative.
Start with OpenGL because there are good textbooks and other online references on it. Once you get the hang of writing 3D game, you would be able to make the judgment for yourself.
Finishing a game, even if it's really stupid and simple just to get you going, is more important than picking the right library. With glut, you can get some 3D object to show up on your screen in a day. Start with NeHe's tutorials.
If you're willing to consider C#, take a good look at XNA. For hobby projects, assuming what you want is to actually get a game up and running instead of tinkering with complex API code, I cannot recommend it highly enough. It is increasingly mature, well-documented, and, compared to D3D/OpenGL, very quick and easy to use. As a bonus, with a $100/year Creators Club membership, you can even use it to develop games for the Xbox 360.
You could also base your work on ogre they provide the abstraction themselves and they have really nice tools. Since this is a projects that's been around for over 6 years I think. The base library is not really for beginners since you need to know a bit about software design, but I found a lot of people that have written games using it.
It would be safer and quicker than learning the heavier stuff since it's already been abstracted. Plus after a couple of month you'll be talking 3D jargon anyways. There is also a book to get you started with Ogre, I think it's kinda old by now but a starting point anyways.
You must remember that DirectX is a collection of technologies - Input, Audio and Graphics. However to most people DX is synonymous with the renderer.
In my opinion D3D (or DirectGraphics) has not really been that hard since DX8. I have not tried DX9 or DX10.
Bernard is right - try to abstract as much as possible. Try to keep DX or OGL calls outside your object classes.
I have no previous OpenGL, DirectX or videogame experience and i have made have an open source race videogame with Ogre3d. Is a very good framework to start in videogames: well done code, plenty of docs and info in the net and very good starting tutorials.
The rendering engine is DirectX/OpenGl agnostic, you can later select to render your game with OpenGL or DirectX (withouth changes in your code)
I did my dissertation at uni on a comparison of OpenGL vs Direct3D. The real benefits of Direct3D are that it has a regular release schedule - it's always being updated to take advantage of the latest advances in graphics hardware. How long has it taken between the OpenGL 2.0 and 3.0 releases? Also, a lot of work has been done in extensions for OpenGL, which means only some rendering will work on some cards.
Having said that, OpenGL will be easier to start programming with. As Direct3D is based heavily in COM, it has a steep learning curve.
If it were me, I would be choosing DirectX over OpenGL. That's at the cost of non-platform independance.
Best thing to do would be to abstract over your renderer as much as possible, to make porting to the other technology as painless as possible.
For the situation that you describe, I would recommend Direct3D.
The primary reason to use Direct3D instead of OpenGL is that often video card vendors only do a good job on the OpenGL drivers for their "high end" cards.
The low end game type cards tend to get poor and generally buggy drivers, causing problems on your end user's machines.
If portability is important, then that would be a big reason to look at OpenGL or Ogre instead.
But if you never plan to port, then focus on Direct3D since it is a more widely stable platform with better IHV driver support.
The thing you should consider is the decision of platform independence. Do you want to tie your game to Windows, or would you like to release it to Mac OS X or Linux at some point. If you decide that you want to support Linux, OS X in the future, you will need to use OpenGL.
There seems to be a lot of goodwill by the Linux community if the game is at least semi-released for Linux.
To answer this question well requires more information about you:
what is your programming ability?
If it's high, I would probably start with Ogre (the best strictly rendering open source engine, IMHO) or another open source game engine, such as Delta3D, if you want additional features (sound, physics, etc.) that a game engine brings.
If you don't want to go with an engine, I would go with Direct3D, because it's being updated much quicker than OpenGL. I don't want to get into all the issues, but version 3.0 of OpenGL was announced during SIGGRAPH and most in the community were very disappointed with it. Direct3D puts you in a much better position to take advantage of shaders and other uses of the programmable pipeline.
If your programming ability is not too high, and you are doing this to learn programming, I would start with OpenGL, because it is easier to learn and there are more resources on the web (see http://nehe.gamedev.net for example).
It is my understanding that in Direct3D you must handle all resource allocation and management yourself, whereas the OpenGL specification leaves this to the driver/implementation rather than the application.
This allows Direct3D developers to use the best allocation and management methods suitable to the application, but is also extra work.
I have done the typical "Hello World" applications in each, and I prefer OpenGL over Direct3D, but that is just my opinion. You should try out both, spend a day or two learning and playing around with each, and decide for yourself.
I really agree with those telling you to learn Ogre3D. You said you'd use C++, so Ogre3D is a great choice. XNA uses C# and you'd have to learn the differences between it and C++, apart from learning the very XNA. Also XNA is neither Open Source nor cross platform, so if you wanna have a wider knowledge about game development, I'd suggest first learning SDL, and then Ogre3D.
To start with, we've got the Wikipedia comparison of OpenGL and Direct3D.
But I'd really like to hear some practical viewpoints, especially in the light of recent developments of OpenGL 3.0 and DirectX 10.
The suggestions for abstraction of an engine are good, assuming that you know what you are doing. It's difficult to write a good abstraction layer for graphics without having done it already.
I would suggest that you just pick one. You will pick up the concepts from either easily enough -- enough so that you can potentially work on an abstraction layer, or the other library easy enough. But just do it. I really wouldn't worry so much about which is the right one. They are both good, solid performers. DX10 (if you have Vista) may have the slight advantage of more up to date shader models, but for someone starting now, that is pretty irrelevant I think. GL has the advantage that some of the nigglier matrix/vector math operations are either hidden from you, or provided for you (although I think DX has some of these as well.)
While OpenGL is by far easy to start with and as some people already wrote - getting a triangle to show on screen and from there move to textures, particles and more can be done within a day.
I do however think that a good question to ask is what is your final goal.
If it is a simple game, no skeletal animation, and simple 3D - OpenGL is definitely the answer. If you aim way higher and don't want to put the time in developing all the technology from scratch (or go hunting for free libraries and putting all together) then DX is a good choice, I would go for DX9c until DX11 comes out.
If you don't mind messing with other languages other than C++ you should also take a look at the XNA development environment - it became quite mature and good.
Just as well, using an already existing engine is good if you know that it'll give you most of what you need, for the right price and will save you the time to develop it yourself, the main problem is that you'd need to go over several game engines (Ogre, Game Studio, Torque, etc..) and then make your choice based on limited experience - read as many reviews from casual developers as you can before you proceed, and try to take a look at the code if you intend to change it.
Hope it helped.
You have to think about what you want out of it, as it's a hobby project I'm assuming that "learning stuff" will be a major part of the experience so avoid picking up something that hides things from you and does stuff behind the scenes as this will only give you a fraction of the picture.
I'd go with Direct3D because it's got the better support, I find the docs easy to read and there are decent samples that come with the SDK. You can even use these samples as the base to build on if you want to get a kick start without the initial steep learning curve of getting things set up.
I started with OpenGL for the record, and after about a month went onto Direct3d (version 7 at the time). I found Direct3D forced me to be more aware of what I was wanting to do and how I was setting things up but I preferred this level of understanding.
Importantly IMO, whichever way you choose, take it step by step and get things on screen regularly. There's all sorts of reasons why something isn't on screen (it's transparent, the camera's inside the object, etc...) so by taking baby steps and getting stuff to display regularly you're both verifying things are still moving along and getting a little visual reward.
Don't start with Ogre.
Start with OpenGL GLUT (Win32), and a tutorial or two.
As soon as you can move to Win32 and take a look at this site, which is pretty old now, but still, quite good.
Clearly from the responses you've been getting, you can reasonably start with either D3D or OpenGL for your 3D graphics API. Triple-A gaming titles have been developed using both technologies, and they both have their strengths and weaknesses.
If you're already reasonably proficient in C++, either one will serve, however there's a number of other considerations to make in your selection:
Portability: OpenGL (and OpenGL ES) is available on Windows, Linux, OS X, iOS, Android, and other systems. D3D/DirectX locks you into MS platforms only.
Game Input: In DirectX, the DirectInput API gives you access to controllers. OpenGL doesn't have an equivalent here.
Sounds: DirectAudio supports sounds, OpenGL has no equivalent (however OpenAL is often used)
Physics: Depending on your game needs, you may need some advanced physics simulation
Typically the actual "gameplay" focus is on the AIs, combat, storyline, etc.
If you're still climbing the C++ learning curve (worthwhile, but takes some time), you might instead use C# and OpenTK. This would provide you with the benefits of a "gaming framework" like Ogre, reasonably direct access to OpenGL, and the significant benefits of using managed code (and IDE) for the game logic. OpenTK is cross-platform via Mono, so your code can run on OS X and Linux as well.
Have fun!
Ogre3D is great if you want to do cross platform coding and if you want to leave all the rendering to the engine. OpenGL is also great for cross platform coding, but it also makes you do all the boring parts -- however it provides greater control.
I would avoid DirectX in case you want to port your game to other platforms. Plan for the future. DirectX 10 may provide some advantages compared to OpenGL, but I really don't think you'll feel them unless you're a professional development. Otherwise, if you're pro-Microsoft, you should use XNA anyway, since as an amateur developer you won't need control provided by DirectX.
I'm coding with OpenGL for quite some time now and with Ogre3D for a few months now and I can't say I want anything else. I recently got a book on DirectX 7 and I consider it messy. Perhaps things changed, but from what I observed I don't find DirectX, and by extrapolation Direct3D, attractive.
My opinion is that OpenGL is best.
OpenGL SuperBible: Comprehensive Tutorial and Reference is a good reference.
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 5 years ago.
Improve this question
I have experience writing console and network client/server applications in C and C++, but I know next to nothing about using the win32 visual API, MFC, Qt, wxWidgets, etc. Where is a good place to start, and what method should I specialize in, so as to be future ready and robust?
This is a rather broad question, as programming GUI applications in Windows can be done in so many ways.
There are two main parts to developing any GUI app: the language and the API/framework. Considering you're interested in learning to build Windows GUI apps, the language isn't really a point of focus for you. Hence, you should pick a language you already know and work with a framework or API that can be harnessed by your chosen language.
If you want to use C you're pretty much restricted to dealing with the Win32 API yourself, in which case reading Petzold or Richter would be great places to start. The Win32 API can be quite daunting, but it's well worth the effort to learn (imho). There are plenty of tutorials on Win32 on the web, and there's always MSDN, with a complete reference/guide to the Win32 API. Make sure you cover not just the API, but other areas such as resources/dialogs as they are building blocks for your Win32 application.
If you want to use C++ you have all of the options that you have when using C plus a few others. I'd recommend going with the Win32 API directly, and then moving on to a known framework such as MFC, Qt, wxWindows or GTK so that you can spend less time working with boilerplate code and instead focus on writing your application logic. The last 3 options I just listed have the added benefit of being cross-platform, so you don't have to worry too much about platform-specific issues. Given that you said you want to work with Windows, I'll assume you're keen to focus on that rather than cross-platform -- so go with MFC, but spend some time with the Win32 API first to get familiar with some of the concepts.
When dealing with MFC and the Win32 API, it's a good idea to try and get a solid understanding of the terminology prior to writing code. For example, you need to understand what the message pump is, and how it works. You need to know about concepts such as "owner-drawn controls", and subclassing. When you understand these things (and more), you'll find it easier to work with MFC because it uses similar terminology in its class interfaces (eg. you need to know what "translate messages" means before you can understand how and when to use PreTranslateMessage).
You could also use Managed C++ to write .NET GUI applications, but I've read in a few places that Managed C++ wasn't really intended to be used in this manner. Instead it should be used as a gateway between native/unmanaged code and managed code. If you're using .NET it's best to use a .NET language such as VB.NET or C# to build your GUIs.
So if you are going to use .NET, you currently have the choice of the WinForms library, or WPF. I personally feel that you'd be wasting time learning to build WinForms applications given that WPF is designed to replace it. Over time WPF will become more prevelant and Winforms will most likely die off. WPF has a much richer API set, and doesn't suffer from many of the limitations that Winforms does. If you do choose this route, however, you'll no doubt have to learn XAML, which is a markup language that drives WPF applications. This technology is coming of age, and there are many great places to learn about it. First, there are sites such as LearnWPF, and DrWPF which have some really great articles. Secondly, there are plenty of quality books on the topic.
So, to sum up, once you've picked your language and tech, the path is actually quite easy. Just pick up a book or two, read some blogs, get into some code samples.. and most importantly ... write code. Keep writing, keep making mistakes, and keep learning from them.
As a final note...
In other words, Silverlight. If you don't want to go the MS route you might give Adobe's Flash/Flex a look see. Both Silverlight and Flash/Flex build RIA's. Which I think is where we are headed. They days of Office like apps are numbered
I don't agree at all. Silverlight is not the same as WPF. Silverlight is web-specific, and only has a subset of WPF's features. Given that the question asks for Windows GUI apps, Flash/Flex Rich Internet Apps are not really a fitting suggestion. I also don't agree that the days of Rich Client Applications (such as office) are numbered at all.
I hope that helps. Good luck :)
I don't know if I'd call it a good place to start, but if you want to be future ready, take a look at the windows presentation foundation which is built entirely for the purpose of programming GUI's for windows
My first experience writing simple GUI applications for Windows was with C# and Visual Studio. The GUI-building interface is a simple drag and drop deal that generates skeleton methods based on potential user actions. I only did fairly basic programming with this, but I imagine it would be an excellent place to start to learn the basics and extend into the more advanced capabilities as you go.
There are plenty of online Win32 tutorials:
http://www.zeusedit.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1218
There are plenty of compilers to choose from:
http://www.zeusedit.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=238
I would also recommend getting the Borland Win32 SDK documentation in WinHelp file format:
http://www.zeusedit.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=7
It only covers the bare basics of the Win32, but when starting, this can be helpful as it is less daunting and less bloated than the MSDN.
I'd never go down the Silverlight, Flash/Flex or any similar route. It does look nice, but the main problem is that the code of the engine that runs it is completely closed-box and controlled by a single company. Take, for example 64bit versions of both of those. If some new platform emerges, you won't be able to migrate your existing code to it.
For business apps, Windows Forms is very mature. It provides a gentle path from auto-generating a lot for you into allowing fine-grained control and rolling your own. There are tons of high-quality third party controls and a large body of examples, docs, etc out there. It's hard to run into a problem that someone else hasn't solved. I highly recommend acquiring some background Win32 knowledge (e.g. Petzold) as the WinForms framework lives on top of it.
I have no WPF experience, but from the sample apps I've seen it looks like a good choice for apps whose interfaces would benefit from more graphical metaphors. So if you're doing a banking app, probably not worth the extra design overhead. But if you're doing, say, a warehouse management app it could be improved by dropping pretty boxes into pretty bins.
#StephenCox: wrong answer to the wrong question. OP is asking about desktop client apps, and moreover, WPF != Silverlight.
For a simple starting point to get your head around the "event-driven" nature basically all frameworks are created around look at FLTK.
Here are some quick starting videos Link
For professional use I'd recommend Qt, expensive but often worth it in commercial situations.
Since you are already familiar with C and C++ I would recommend learning how to write a simple Windows GUI app using Charles Petzold's book. It will give you the fundamental understanding of how Windows works. It's good to understand that most everything that you see is a window (a button is a window for example) and that these windows respond to messages. I wouldnt' spend a lot of time on this though and you don't necessarily need to do this first if you are going to chose WPF. I just think it's good to have a basic understanding of this.
There was a good podcast recently on .Net Rocks called "Kate Gregory Develops in C++ for Vista!" on there she recommends that someone starting out now should not use/learn MFC (even though it has been recently updated).
As far as getting ready for the future you need to learn WPF, but it isn't complete yet, so depending on the kinds of client side apps you want to create, you will probably need to learn WinForms. The majority of people aren't using WPF yet, so it's a good time to start learning. I think you will find it easier using C# to learn it instead of doing managed code with C++.
Get your basics right first. Best tutorial I've found is: http://winprog.org/tutorial/start.html
After that, although the homepage is hatefully distasteful, the tutorial pages are good in content and aesthetics: http://www.tenouk.com/cplusmfcdotnet.html
Then of course there's MSDN.