Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Biggest Problem With GTK & What Qt Does Good

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #51
    That looks better than the bundled themes, but I wouldn't call it good-looking still. The fonts on the Ubuntu and Mac screenshots look terrible (the win7 screenshot is the only one where they look acceptable), though I admit that's not the theme's fault.

    Comment


    • #52
      Originally posted by curaga View Post
      That looks better than the bundled themes, but I wouldn't call it good-looking still. The fonts on the Ubuntu and Mac screenshots look terrible (the win7 screenshot is the only one where they look acceptable), though I admit that's not the theme's fault.
      So that's the thing people complain about fonts on GNU/Linux! That they are antialiased. Personally I like how they look, and think the windows ones are bad. Anyway - you can easily turn off font antialiasing in your desktop look settings and the fonts will look like on windows.

      Comment


      • #53
        My fonts do look good. I just question why the official bling screenshots are done with bad fonts.

        Comment


        • #54
          Originally posted by curaga View Post
          My fonts do look good. I just question why the official bling screenshots are done with bad fonts.
          For me, it is mostly a matter of DPI.

          On screens with DPI < 100 I HATE antialiasing, and every kind of LCD-font-enhancing technology like microsoft's ClearType, and I just like to see bitmap fonts.
          However, as DPI go bigger and bigger through the years, they become unreadable and horrible (because font makers don't make hi-dpi version of their bitmap fonts).

          But then you need antialiasing and cleartype and so on because we don't yet have DPIs big enough on computer monitors (I don't think it is needed on retina displays however because you can't see pixels anyway).

          Comment


          • #55
            Originally posted by frign View Post
            Doesn't change the fact Qt is a bloated pos.
            GTK+ is even more bloated.

            Comment


            • #56
              Originally posted by siavashserver View Post
              Qt 5 adds Fusion, a new (non-native) style to look same everywhere.
              Not bad, at least it doesn't look ugly as Java's Swing. Nor pretty either.

              Comment


              • #57
                Clementine is done is qt.

                http://www.clementine-player.org/screenshots

                Comment


                • #58
                  Wait... I can use QtCreator for non-qt C++ development? Never thought of this possibility before. Gonna give this a try for sure to see if it's any better than CodeBlocks.

                  Comment


                  • #59
                    Originally posted by sarmad View Post
                    Wait... I can use QtCreator for non-qt C++ development? Never thought of this possibility before. Gonna give this a try for sure to see if it's any better than CodeBlocks.
                    Of course. You don't even have to use qmake (which also works fine with non-Qt projects btw.). The IDE has plugins for cmake and autotools based projects.

                    Comment


                    • #60
                      Originally posted by Ancurio View Post
                      Of course. You don't even have to use qmake (which also works fine with non-Qt projects btw.). The IDE has plugins for cmake and autotools based projects.
                      I use cmake in my project. The way I do it right now is to have cmake generate the required project file for CodeBlocks (.cbp file), so CodeBlocks itself is not aware of cmake. How does QtCreator work with cmake files, does the cmake plugin understand cmake files? I don't remember seeing QtCreator as one of the options in the cmake-gui tool.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X