Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Ubuntu Finds New Love With Qt

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

  • #46
    Originally posted by pingufunkybeat View Post
    If you install a cross-toolkit theme, such as BlueCurve, Galaxy or (now) Oxygen, you have that exact same thing under Linux.
    I don't know how GTK+ works in Windows, but Qt GUI elements don't only look like Win32 GUI elements, they are Win32 GUI elements, just abstracted behind another API. And when running in Gnome, Qt GUI elements don't only look like GTK+ GUI elements, they are GTK+ GUI elements, abstracted behind another API. There is a big difference (or rather a lot of minor differences).

    For example, a Qt application don't need a cross-toolkit theme too look at home in Windows or GNOME, any Win32/GTK+ theme will work, because they theme the Win32/GTK+ GUI elements you actually see on the monitor.

    That being said, a cross-toolkit theme is way better than two different themes on the same desktop, so Oxygen-Gtk is better than nothing.

    Originally posted by Temar View Post
    That looks very promising. However the only thing which really annoys me when using GTK apps in KDE is the file dialog window. I think the KDE file dialog is way superior to the one in Gnome/GTK - but that's just my opinion. I guess this theme does not replace the file dialog window of GTK, does it?
    No it doesn't. This is one of those minor differences I mentioned above. Though personally I find the GTK+ print dialogue even worse...

    BTW, you can get the GTK+ file and print dialogues in Qt applications, by selecting the GTK+ backend for Qt (the default when running in GNOME)...

    Comment


    • #47
      Well, I suppose Gnome can only win from this. After all, it means that when running Gnome, most apps will look and work OK, since Gtk apps do well in Gnome (naturally) and Qt apps also. But not the other way around.

      Smells a bit like a Microsoft policy or something :P Turn your lack of features into an advantage.

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by mirv View Post
        Apparently there is, in portage main (oxygen-gtk). Assuming I read everything correctly and understand that you're after an Oxygen GTK+ theme.
        Yes, thank you both. I run KDE, but also need some GTK apps regularly, so this is exactly what I am looking for.

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by Jonno View Post
          I don't know how GTK+ works in Windows, but Qt GUI elements don't only look like Win32 GUI elements, they are Win32 GUI elements, just abstracted behind another API. And when running in Gnome, Qt GUI elements don't only look like GTK+ GUI elements, they are GTK+ GUI elements, abstracted behind another API. There is a big difference (or rather a lot of minor differences).
          Are you sure? Cause I don't think so.

          First of all, Qt draws itself on Linux. There is a hack where you can use GTK to paint Qt elements, and it was recently integrated into mainline Qt to help GNOME users. If you are not running a GNOME environment, Qt draws itself natively, which is faster and more stable.

          On MacOSX, Qt fakes the native look and feel by drawing it itself. Java programs do something similar.

          I'm not 100% about Qt on Windows, but Microsoft ITSELF uses more than two different toolkits on windows (or rather very different versions of the same toolkit, with slightly different look and feel), and Java fakes the look and feel too (badly), so this is a moot point.

          For example, a Qt application don't need a cross-toolkit theme too look at home in Windows or GNOME, any Win32/GTK+ theme will work, because they theme the Win32/GTK+ GUI elements you actually see on the monitor.
          This was a separate project which was merged into Qt 4.5.

          http://labs.qt.nokia.com/2008/09/05/...ow-part-of-qt/

          Essentially, it's a hack for GNOME users, and not the way Qt is supposed to work

          You can do the same thing for GTK apps.

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by pingufunkybeat View Post
            They work on Qt? On compiz?

            commit links, or it didn't happen!
            Canonical hired SmSpillaz back in October (linky). He is one of the main developers of Compiz.

            According to this very article, Canonical "is driving the development of dconf bindings for Qt". Confirmed on Mark's blog: they have contracted with Ryan Lortie to contribute to Qt.

            A quick search confirms that they are also funding or driving a number of other interesting projects.

            Comment


            • #51
              following is somewhat OT

              Originally posted by BlackStar View Post
              No, not really. A couple of people complained that Canonical is not contributing to the Linux kernel as much as Red Hat but w/e.
              It was Greg K-H, right?

              As far as I'm concerned, their work on accessibility, design/usability, compiz and qt is more important to the Linux community as a whole.
              Well, I admit that it somehow brought a lot of people to Linux based OS, or opened it to more people. (Though I think something like even old Suse 9 seemed quite good to handle, but anyway.)
              Yes more users is probably good to have more "force" in the market, but it also needs developers/development. Most Ubuntu users probably are not able to develop code (ok, basically this is likely true for any other distribution). And it needs a lot of coding to keep all these people with their different setups satisfied.
              So I hope that the user masses that *buntu attracted will just support developers with donations or something. Or write decent and helpful bugreports.
              But if Canonical makes money, more than to cover its own cost, it would be nice to see them putting some of that into kernel/userland development (as they showed here). So everyone will benefit from it.

              (I for my part am not a code developer, I'm a user contributing money (from what I can spare) and sometimes a bug report for one or the other project. Or give help to new users in my reach. I develop chemistry. So sadly no time for being a kernel or userland hacker.)

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by pingufunkybeat View Post
                I'm not 100% about Qt on Windows, but Microsoft ITSELF uses more than two different toolkits on windows (or rather very different versions of the same toolkit, with slightly different look and feel), and Java fakes the look and feel too (badly), so this is a moot point.
                The number is closer to 5, but probably more. Let's see:

                1. WinAPI (both 16- and 32bit versions)
                2. MFC
                3. WinForms
                4. WPF
                5. IE toolkit
                6. Office toolkit
                7. WMP toolkit (?)

                All of those touch WinAPI at some point but they look, feel and behave differently. Java, Delphi and GTK applications also draw their own widgets. No idea about Qt.

                Yeah, there's no rhythm or reason to this madness. Qt is the least of their worries.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by BlackStar View Post
                  Canonical hired SmSpillaz back in October (linky). He is one of the main developers of Compiz.
                  Thanks, I wasn't aware of this.

                  According to this very article, Canonical "is driving the development of dconf bindings for Qt". Confirmed on Mark's blog: they have contracted with Ryan Lortie to contribute to Qt.
                  Sorry, but I do not consider this a meaningful contribution to Qt. That's GNOME development, not Qt development.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by pingufunkybeat View Post
                    Sorry, but I do not consider this a meaningful contribution to Qt. That's GNOME development, not Qt development.
                    dconf, not gconf.

                    He is contributing code to improve the configuration system of Qt, so I fail to see how this can be called Gnome development. If someone improved Qt performance on, say, Mac OS X, would you legitimately call this Mac OS X development rather than Qt development?

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      I was under the impression that dconf was also a GNOME tech.

                      http://aseigo.blogspot.com/2005/04/s...-of-dconf.html

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by pingufunkybeat View Post
                        I was under the impression that dconf was also a GNOME tech.

                        http://aseigo.blogspot.com/2005/04/s...-of-dconf.html
                        I had the impression that dconf is meant as a cross-desktop technology. Otherwise, why wouldn't they just wire Qt to use gconf and be done with it?

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          I don't understand it either. But it was initiated by Havoc Pennington.

                          But I know that KDE does not use dconf, and they probably have no intention of doing so. It's only relevant for GNOME-centric distros.

                          So it's basically some work to have Qt apps integrate better into a GNOME desktop, not much more.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            I see that Waldo Bastian was also involved.

                            Anyway, just because something was designed to be desktop-agnostic does not mean that all desktops will use it. Look at Akonadi, for example.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              K3B > Brasero

                              Originally posted by BlackStar View Post
                              No, I'm 100% serious. I have both installed and I prefer Brasero by leaps and bounds. It's simple, clean and it works perfectly.
                              Brasero is still immature compared to K3B, and buggy (as of Ubuntu 10.10), especially with multisession handling. The "span multiple media" feature didn't seem to work last time Brasero offered it to me either. There are other things that I can't remember now, but K3B > Brasero for anything more than simple burning tasks.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                First Mono, now this Nokia shit.

                                Dammit. Where has my tin hat gone...

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X