What's the fundamental difference between MFC and ATL?

Question

Assuming I am only using them for \"normal\" GUI programs (no COM, no ActiveX, nothing fancy), what is the fundamental difference I will see between ATL and

Answer 1

I have been told by many people who have used both that their programming experience was less painful with ATL than with MFC. Your compiled executable will also be much smaller with ATL.

I recommend you take a look at WTL, as it builds upon ATL.

What is that "extra functionality" they keep mentioning? Do I need it?

If you define your requirements, it might be easier to answer if you can avoid using MFC. Unfortunately "nothing fancy" isn't exclusive enough. Being inclusive as to which features you intend to use might be more helpful (which controls, which frameworks/technologies/existing libraries you want to use, etc).

But here's an article that describes some features in MFC that aren't directly supported by WTL/ATL.

MFC also has evolved to the point it supports a great many desirable features, such as MAPI, support for the other Windows logo requirements, sockets, documents (if you like and/or use that pattern), and compound document files. WTL has its share of cool features, but MFC is the clear feature champ. Both environments support framed main window architectures (frame window with separate view window), SDI and MDI applications, split windows, dialog-based applications, and various COM-based classes for COM support.