Take the 2-minute tour ×
SharePoint Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for SharePoint enthusiasts. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Does SharePoint 2013 support Web Parts or only new Apps?

share|improve this question
add comment

3 Answers 3

up vote 8 down vote accepted

In addition to traditional web parts still being supported (in either full-trust or sandboxed solutions) as Simon mentions, you can develop new app parts in an app for SharePoint 2013.

An app part is like a web part, and in fact is also made available to users in a host web's web part gallery. Users add app parts to pages the same way they would add web parts. One fundamental difference between an app part and a web part is that an app part uses an IFRAME to load the app part's content.

App parts, like web parts, can also have custom properties that users can set. More information about this, and app part development in general, may be found here.

share|improve this answer
    
Thanks, very helpful answer and link. I have resolved all questions, related to Web Parts and Apps. –  Warlock Feb 1 '13 at 11:42
add comment

SharePoint 2013 Introduced App Model Because of Software Market tends And Manage Solution without disturbing other tenants Especially in Online or Cloud scenarios. To meet this goal Microsoft Provide Great App Model for Developer to Build Apps on top of the SharePoint 2013. But mostly developer is used to develop their solution for Cloud by using visual WebPart in sandbox solution and farm based solution with visual webpart for on permission online sharepoint. App Model quit bit similar from sandbox solution. But still are few recitations and changes between SharePoint WebPart and SharePoint Apps. As a Developer feel bit restricted in this Model.As I like same felt same previously when 2010 sandbox . But it more secure as well because of any developer mistake it will not going to damage my SharePoint Site or Farm.

Difference between WebPart and SharePoint App.

  1. OFFICE 356 AND MOST LIKE OTHER ONLINE SOLUTION FOR SharePoint would not allow Farm based Solution for web-Parts.

  2. Web Part has capability to use SharePoint Core Object by using code behind.

  3. There is no code behind in SharePoint Apps. Especially for office 356 you create your solution without disturbing other tenant.

  4. You can create lists, libraries and other SharePoint Component.

  5. App have its own site-collection Site-Collection where app stores its list and data.

  6. SharePoint 2013 we have App Parts like Web Parts. App Part runs in IFrame by using the click jack technique.

  7. The app runs in IFrame that why they cannot assess DOM. ITS HTML restriction. But it's really very cool feature if you app has some bed it will not disturb your site.

  8. If your app required any Service like the BCS. YOU HAVE TO ALLOW PERMISSION IN VS ON DEPLOYMENT TIME. WHEN USER WILL ADD APP. IT REQUIRED PERMISSION FROM USER TO ALLOW HIM TO ASSESS. THAT components OF SERVICE. LIKE books, stoical, taxonomy, Project, Reporting, List and Manage Rights Full Control., Read, Write, Managed. Give Specific Permissions for your apps. ReadMore

  9. SharePoint App has Page which Asp.net ASPX page where app actually start-up page for the app.

  10. SharePoint also keeps its Assets with it. Like JavaScript and Images.

  11. SharePoint 2013 App Features have only Web-scoped only for deployment.

  12. SharePoint 2013 Web templates are available .But not site definitions.

Reference: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/fp179930.aspx

Source

share|improve this answer
1  
Thank you! Your answer is a extremely helpful in combination with Simon's clarification. –  Warlock Feb 1 '13 at 11:29
add comment

SharePoint 2013 still supports Web Parts.

share|improve this answer
4  
I'm not sure this adds much to the previous answer (other than a little clarity). –  Stuart Pegg Feb 1 '13 at 10:43
    
The second answer doesnt actually answer the question. –  Simon Doy Feb 1 '13 at 15:08
1  
It does in a roundabout way. The fact that web parts are still supported is mentioned indirectly by the quote, but is admittedly a bit of a dense read. Personally (and this is a personal preference) I would have either commented on the previous answer or added a bit more detail to my own, such as an external reference. –  Stuart Pegg Feb 1 '13 at 17:37
    
Fair enough, I just thought simple question, simple answer ;) –  Simon Doy Feb 3 '13 at 21:03
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.