Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 31

Thread: Ubuntu SDK To Look At Ports To Windows, OS X

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    527

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jayrulez View Post
    They simply made the Ubuntu plugins for Linux. Now that they are confident that it works, they can port it to Mac and Windows.

    That is the very same method that Sailfish took. Their SDK was initially only available for Linux, then they made it available to Windows and Mac. Why weren't you raving and ranting about Sailfish then?
    No doubt we'll hear him rant on about how evil copyright assignment is and how Ubuntu and its users and developers will be going to hell for using them, even though several popular FOSS projects do exactly the same thing.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Hillsboro, Oregon
    Posts
    138

    Default

    Personally, I appreciate the efforts from the established open source communities to get applications running on Windows. Although I very rarely use Windows, it's nice to have many of the same high quality programs available when I do. When stuck on Windows, I've used VLC, Evince, Gimp, and X-Chat. I've used AbiWord in the past as well, and I'd hands down pick Pidgin for instant messaging. More recently, the KDE on Windows efforts look interesting. If I had to do it again, I'd get Okular running (I don't know how I ever lived without it), and seriously consider trying Amarok. All of these are open source, so I trust them, unlike a lot of Windows freeware.

    I don't know of any applications that use the Ubuntu SDK, so it's hard for me to get excited about it. Frankly, I don't think I even use any such applications on Linux at present...

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Cologne, Germany
    Posts
    308

    Question Who's shitty?

    Quote Originally Posted by nll_a View Post
    Is there anything that can kill more brain cells than reading Phoronix forum comments for Ubuntu news? I can't think of anything right now.

    You know who's really shitty? 1337 hax0rs.
    You know what could die? Your hatred.
    You know what's Linux's cancer? Distro wars.
    If 1337 hax0rs were really shitty, I'd be proud to be shitty!

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    46

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by talvik View Post
    Thanks. Yes, I meant a layer of shit, crap, poo, fecal matter, stool or feces.

    I'm not lying. Here is Qt SDK avaiable for Linux, Mac, Win http://qt-project.org/downloads.
    And when they bundled Qt SDK with their shit, it's Ubuntu only. Here is a slogan:
    "Qt with Shit™, only on Ubuntu."
    excuse me but you sir are a moron...
    you have NO idea of wjat your are talking about.
    go back to your distro and leave ubuntu alone fanboy, better yet leave the internet and die alone...

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Cologne, Germany
    Posts
    308

    Cool You're the moron

    Quote Originally Posted by MrTheSoulz View Post
    excuse me but you sir are a moron...
    you have NO idea of wjat your are talking about.
    go back to your distro and leave ubuntu alone fanboy, better yet leave the internet and die alone...
    His words may be harsh, but he's right: When Canonical develops software, it usually doesn't work well on other distributions.
    Unity for instance required months of porting work by an _independent_ community to run it on other distributions. Even today, Unity is still not well-functioning and has some serious issues.

    Another example are Ubuntu-.deps: They used to work under Debian, too, but over the years, Ubuntu's .dep-packages became distribution-dependent.

    I don't expect the Ubuntu SDK to be an exception from the rule, except, when a bunch of people volunteer to "port" it to other distributions.

    Generally spoken, it is expected that a company only cares about its own distribution to minimise costs. But it isn't good for the GNU/Linux-community in general, because it has to iron out the proprietary programming-paradigms to use the company's software.
    Last edited by frign; 08-29-2013 at 07:37 AM.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    1

    Default

    The video and discussion for me isn't very confidence inspiring.

    They do not seem to have put much effort in doing research of how other people use Qt SDK for mobile development (with multiple host OS-es supported).
    Nokia used Qt Creator for the Debian based Maemo 5, MeeGo-Harmattan and their MeeGo platform ( that included a "simulator" and emulator targets using MADDE ).

    The Android port of Qt and Qt Creator Necessitas also supported OS X, Windows and Linux. I haven't looked at the recent Qt SDK, but according to the site there is official support for Android and iOS now, and I know that Blackberry 10 you can also use Qt Creator. Don't know what host OS is supported in these cases.
    They really seem to be trying to re-invent the wheel.

    Just providing a Ubuntu VM seems hacky. In 2009 Nokia choose that route.
    They made a Ubuntu VM with Scratchbox and two targets for Maemo 5: a x86 target that could run and actually display itself using Xepher in the VM and an ARM target that was used to compile the same code for the Nokia N900. You could run the applications on the actual device over a (USB) network connections with SBRSH (scratchbox remote shell), but that was rather slow and didn't always work that well. The IDE used in this VM was eclipse.
    The solution Nokia made later with Qt Creator also had problems, but worked much, much better for a lot of cases. For most application development it really increased the speed of code and run, code and run.

    But it is a good question: how much people will be using Windows and/or OS X to develop for Ubuntu touch? Is it worth the extra effort to implement, test and support those OS-es as a development environment?

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    141

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by frign View Post
    If 1337 hax0rs were really shitty, I'd be proud to be shitty!
    Good for you.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    379

    Default

    Hopefully they also make it usable on other linux dists. If the result is it works on Windows, OSX and ubuntu, ubuntu get even more framed from the rest of the linux ecosystem.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    118

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by talvik View Post
    Thanks. Yes, I meant a layer of shit, crap, poo, fecal matter, stool or feces.

    I'm not lying. Here is Qt SDK avaiable for Linux, Mac, Win http://qt-project.org/downloads.
    And when they bundled Qt SDK with their shit, it's Ubuntu only. Here is a slogan:
    "Qt with Shit™, only on Ubuntu."
    You ought to perhaps consider going outside instead of effing and blinding over computer software.

    Oh, pardon me. I'm forgetting that in order to be a true Linux user (tm) you have to spend all your free time mocking Ubuntu and its users.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    117

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MrTheSoulz View Post
    excuse me but you sir are a moron...
    you have NO idea of wjat your are talking about.
    go back to your distro and leave ubuntu alone fanboy, better yet leave the internet and die alone...
    I only use Ubuntu and I use it extensively(products, server and development). If I'm a fanboy, I'm an Ubuntu fanboy.
    But Ubuntu is changing to fast, it's always unstable and buggy, and it's diverging from the common Linux stack.

    I'm ranting because eventually I'll have to ditch Ubuntu.

Posting Permissions

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