Page 2 of 12 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 111

Thread: OpenShot Switches From GTK+ To Qt

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    120

    Default Re

    Smart move moving to Qt. But the developer should really think about his decision of using PyQt instead of Qt/C++.
    If he writes it in Qt/C++, it will be very easy to port it to mobile platforms... And we want an open-source mobile application

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    276

    Default

    I've heard of OpenShot just a few times; I've heard of Pitivi far more, but...everytime I've heard Pitivi mentioned, it was to complain about it.

    No Qt vs GTK+ flamewars yet?
    /me ducks

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ibidem View Post
    I've heard of OpenShot just a few times; I've heard of Pitivi far more, but...everytime I've heard Pitivi mentioned, it was to complain about it.

    No Qt vs GTK+ flamewars yet?
    /me ducks
    I think everyone realizes that gtk+ is not as suitable for cross platform apps.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    353

    Default

    i'm not a developer, but as far as I understand gtk+ is technologically inferior to Qt. Other than ideological reasons, does gtk have any technical benefits over Qt?

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    SuperUserLand
    Posts
    538

    Default

    smart move

    EVERYONE should switch to QT


    btw out of those 45k I bet 99% came from linux users


    why the fuck would os x or win users need ANOTHER editor?

    why not focus development in linux ??? that's fucked up

    get 45k from linux users, give mac and win users another editor for free

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    122

    Default huh

    I don't get how some of you feel OpenShot is "Stable" when the number one complaint is it's lack of Stability. Generally you can't edit more than a few minutes of Video without a complete crash. Anyway, I only do some basic cutting and encoding and have found that Avidemux suits my needs for reliability since VirtualDub isn't available on Linux.

    Exactly Pallidus, why Mac and Win need another Editor out of the hundreds already available is beyond me. What he should of done was just ask the Linux community to donate, I'm sure we would've been happy to do so. Now there is a huge burden on him to support three platforms, and I'm sure Linux will not be his top priority anymore.
    Last edited by Mike Frett; 04-26-2013 at 04:28 AM.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    524

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by garegin View Post
    i'm not a developer, but as far as I understand gtk+ is technologically inferior to Qt. Other than ideological reasons, does gtk have any technical benefits over Qt?
    Well, apparently it is simpler to write GTK bindings for other languages, which is why you'll find dozens of them (Ruby, Lua, Python, Perl, PHP, JS ...),
    whereas the only supported binding for Qt is PyQt AFAIK.
    Also, once you write the necessary GObject binding, a large range of libraries are at your disposal without any further glue code needed.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    1,150

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ericg View Post
    OpenShot does NOT use MLT (See the blog post linked in the article, the developer addresses it).
    Learn grammar, please. OpenShot uses MLT (present tense). OpenShot 2.0 will not use MLT (future). OpenShot 2.0 currently does not exist.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    1,150

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ancurio View Post
    Well, apparently it is simpler to write GTK bindings for other languages, which is why you'll find dozens of them (Ruby, Lua, Python, Perl, PHP, JS ...),
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qt_%28...rk%29#Bindings


    Quote Originally Posted by Ancurio View Post
    whereas the only supported binding for Qt is PyQt AFAIK.
    Depends on your definition of “supported”. If by that you mean you can go to a company and hire it to offer support, then yes, the choices are limited because most bindings are community-developed.
    Qt 5 is also still young. Many bindings are still not ported to Qt 5. Qt 5 comes with JavaScript bindings out of the box, obviously.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    200

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Awesomeness View Post
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qt_%28...rk%29#Bindings



    Depends on your definition of “supported”. If by that you mean you can go to a company and hire it to offer support, then yes, the choices are limited because most bindings are community-developed.
    Qt 5 is also still young. Many bindings are still not ported to Qt 5. Qt 5 comes with JavaScript bindings out of the box, obviously.
    The difference is that using GObject Introspection the language bindings come more or less for free. No one has to actively develop specific library bindings. The language you use just need an implementation of GI.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •