Qt 4.8 Draws In Platform Abstraction, New WebKit

[TheBlackCat]

LOL. Nokia was no way forced to make an agreement with Digia! No one is forcing anything on Nokia, they decide for them self.

It was either that or continue to support it themselves. They had contracts with groups to support the closed-source version. They couldn't abandon them without violating their contracts.

[funkSTAR]

LOL

It was either that or continue to support it themselves. They had contracts with groups to support the closed-source version. They couldn't abandon them without violating their contracts.

What a great excuse! "We're sorry for having commercial obligations on our so called "free software". Therefore we hired yet another commercial company to whom we now have a new bunch of obligations."

Reality is no-one at Nokia and the former Trolltech cared about free software. Yeah they like the free advertisement from being a formal KDE dependency. But that's about it. Please leave your state of full denial. Qt is a bastard which can never be free unless it is forked.

[Teho]

Qt is a bastard which can never be free unless it is forked.

Fortunately the actual free software developers have enough common sense not to fork a toolkit that has hundreds of developers and that's used by thousands of applications only to create incompatible and resource consuming beast to annoy packagers and original developers in name of CLA that even though is bit annoying doesn't restrict the use Qt toolkit nor the possibility to fork the it when it actually makes sense.

[funkSTAR]

LOL

It is not lack of common sense. It is the lack og balls and brains. It is evident that a project seeking maximum freedom wont let it self get chained by commercial interests of a single company. Realizing this and acting on this requires more than couch-sitters with interests in keeping their commercial jobs.

Linux is doing perfectly fine without a commercial entity to grab all the freedom an neutrality. So please stop your nonsense. Unless your another paid-by from the commercial license?

[kraftman]

It is not lack of common sense. It is the lack og balls and brains. It is evident that a project seeking maximum freedom wont let it self get chained by commercial interests of a single company. Realizing this and acting on this requires more than couch-sitters with interests in keeping their commercial jobs.

While companies work on Qt and we just benefit from their work there's no sense to fork Qt now. It will make sense if they start hurting Linux somehow. Right now they simply serve the community.

Linux is doing perfectly fine without a commercial entity to grab all the freedom an neutrality. So please stop your nonsense. Unless your another paid-by from the commercial license?

There's simply no way someone can grab Linux freedom in this case, because we can always fork Qt. I don't believe in neutrality, though.

[Luke_Wolf]

Linux is doing perfectly fine without a commercial entity to grab all the freedom an neutrality. So please stop your nonsense. Unless your another paid-by from the commercial license?

Are you so blind with Marxist Rage that you fail to see the balance that commercial entities provide ontop of the community itself?

Community Provides Innovation, but companies provide the drudgery work nobody really cares to do. We need both rather than trying to exclude either side.

The Simple fact of the matter is that there are thousands of companies that work on the linux kernel, here let me list a few big names:

Red Hat
Novell (Now Attachmate)
AMD
Intel
HP
IBM
Google
(and here in this list just for you) Microsoft

And oh guess what? the Linux Kernel is as free as it's ever been, and is much better off for all of their contributions. I for one say thank you to all the businesses and individual contributors who've added to the kernel and applaud their work.

If you want to go off and play in your company-less land you can go use HURD oh wait no... their Microkernel has been contributed to by a company, BSD? nope, uh... Plan 9? nope that's a development from a company.. QNX? oh wait.. another company created one, L4? nope IBM... well have fun writing your own kernel, with your own display server, and your own toolkit, and such because you're pretty much SOL otherwise.

[funkSTAR]

While companies work on Qt and we just benefit from their work there's no sense to fork Qt now. It will make sense if they start hurting Linux somehow.

NEWSFLASH. The Qt owners are already hurting linux phone producers.

[funkSTAR]

The Simple fact of the matter is that there are thousands of companies that work on the linux kernel, here let me list a few big names:

Red Hat
Novell (Now Attachmate)
AMD
Intel
HP
IBM
Google
(and here in this list just for you) Microsoft

Do you know why? Because Linux is truly free. Free from having an antilinux owner like Nokia who will scare alot of contributors away. I never said companies shouldnt og couldnt contribute. I hope they will. But not in the form of CLAing rights to Microsoft strategic partner. Having Nokia own a toolkit is as stupid as having Oracle own OOo. And now we even have seen the star om the open core business model through Digia.

Sorry but no piece of sofware is worth that.

[Teho]

Free from having an antilinux owner like Nokia who will scare alot of contributors away.

Now how exactly is Nokia anti-linux? They have been developing Linux based phones since 2003 and Qt toolkit is probably supported best on Linux.

And now we even have seen the star om the open core business model through Digia.

Because few patches didn't make to Qt in time? You gotta to be fucking kidding me. I doubt that Digia even has right to do that as it would be harmful to Nokia and Qt in general.

[Luke_Wolf]

NEWSFLASH. The Qt owners are already hurting linux phone producers.

NEWSFLASH, All Phone Producers are suing each other

see:

http://www.technewsdaily.com/images/i/1128/i02/phone-lawsuits-chart-02.jpg?1317327615

Do you know why? Because Linux is truly free. Free from having an antilinux owner like Nokia who will scare alot of contributors away. I never said companies shouldnt og couldnt contribute. I hope they will. But not in the form of CLAing rights to Microsoft strategic partner. Having Nokia own a toolkit is as stupid as having Oracle own OOo. And now we even have seen the star om the open core business model through Digia.

Sorry but no piece of sofware is worth that.

I'm against CLAs too, however at this point in time they are under contractual obligations and having been working on becoming more open. They went for being primarily LGPL on it under Nokia, as opposed to segmenting it into the commercial and free software segments. They then recently established the Qt-Project which largely has governance over the toolkit. In all likelihood the CLA will end up being removed within the next few years if not at the Qt 5.0 release.

Digia itself from my perusing of their site makes their money the same way Red Hat does which is to say support contracts.