Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Qt's Lars Knoll: "It's Really Sad To See This Happen"

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

  • Qt's Lars Knoll: "It's Really Sad To See This Happen"

    Phoronix: Qt's Lars Knoll: "It's Really Sad To See This Happen"

    Lars Knoll, the current Qt Chief Architect at Nokia and responsible for leading the Qt 5.0 development, has commented on the shutting down of Nokia's Qt Australia office...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTE1MjU

  • texaswriter1983
    replied
    Originally posted by n3wu53r View Post
    You're saying programmers _live_ in gui tookits.
    That is not the case, you certainly need to use one gui toolkit or another but it isn't the majority of your application by any means. The gui is only a small part.
    When someone says toolkit it usually refers to "gui toolkit".
    Maybe I was simply misinterpreting your post if this was not your meaning.
    You are taking my example and applying it to the whole post. This is not supported by what I said.

    QT is far more than a GUI toolkit. I think I said something like this in my post (audio, video, etc). Perhaps you didn't read my post.

    Reading this page can familiarize you with what "toolkits" are available in QT, not just GUI toolkit
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qt_%28framework%29#Modules

    Leave a comment:


  • n3wu53r
    replied
    Originally posted by texaswriter1983 View Post
    You can't tell me I'm mistaken and then agree with me at the same time. Your post is diddling with semantics.

    If you attempt to say that programming is just using a language, try writing a simple GUI program in C, C++, C#, or even assembly. Even with your frameworks, it would be an extreme pain. What QT does, framework or toolkit, is make this process very easy within the context of a language.

    Also, by the way, I'm sure there is some significant difference between framework or toolkit, calling QT something broader means that you agree with me even more. QT has audio toolkits, video toolkits, etc etc. This doesn't make me mistaken or wrong.

    ALSO, your entire post is a red herring.

    To bring this back to the original meaning, I'll restate the previous post. Here, I'll even use your word, since you've demonstrated that you care about semantics more than actuality.

    QT is a framework containing many toolkits that programmers can use to create a different programming environment or "world". It embodies easily creating programs that seamlessly and effortlessly work on multiple platforms. There is no single framework encompassing so many programming elements (toolkits) that allows such cross-platform programming to be undertaken so easily.

    FOr the trolls, I am not saying there are no cross-platform frameworks or toolkits.
    You're saying programmers _live_ in gui tookits.
    That is not the case, you certainly need to use one gui toolkit or another but it isn't the majority of your application by any means. The gui is only a small part.
    When someone says toolkit it usually refers to "gui toolkit".
    Maybe I was simply misinterpreting your post if this was not your meaning.

    Leave a comment:


  • texaswriter1983
    replied
    You can't tell me I'm mistaken and then agree with me at the same time. Your post is diddling with semantics.

    If you attempt to say that programming is just using a language, try writing a simple GUI program in C, C++, C#, or even assembly. Even with your frameworks, it would be an extreme pain. What QT does, framework or toolkit, is make this process very easy within the context of a language.

    Also, by the way, I'm sure there is some significant difference between framework or toolkit, calling QT something broader means that you agree with me even more. QT has audio toolkits, video toolkits, etc etc. This doesn't make me mistaken or wrong.

    ALSO, your entire post is a red herring.

    To bring this back to the original meaning, I'll restate the previous post. Here, I'll even use your word, since you've demonstrated that you care about semantics more than actuality.

    QT is a framework containing many toolkits that programmers can use to create a different programming environment or "world". It embodies easily creating programs that seamlessly and effortlessly work on multiple platforms. There is no single framework encompassing so many programming elements (toolkits) that allows such cross-platform programming to be undertaken so easily.

    FOr the trolls, I am not saying there are no cross-platform frameworks or toolkits.

    Originally posted by n3wu53r View Post
    You are mistaken.
    I don't think you have ever developed software, really.
    Toolkits are but a small part, besides Qt is not a toolkit like GTK is. Qt is a framework, it has tons and tons of things that aren't related to GUIs at all. It's like calling all of .NET a toolkit.
    Either way, the "world" were software developers make software is called a language. There are many applications that do all their logic in a language like C++, and that code is the same for every platform. They then just redo the GUI using the platform's native GUI toolkit, such as Cocoa or Gtk ect.

    Either way, I hope a good company buys Qt as it is amazing. Either way Qt won't die as there are too many big corporations invested into it which would have clauses in their contracts to ensure continued development of Qt. Combine that with the KDE agreement and Qt's future is pretty secure.

    What I think, Nokia well sell of Qt and other assets not related to their mobile business, and then get bought out by Microsoft.

    Leave a comment:


  • n3wu53r
    replied
    Originally posted by texaswriter1983 View Post
    Actually toolkits are everything. They are the "worlds" that programmers live in to make software. Developers for Windows software have lived and died in those toolkits as you can see from the original wordperfect developers. LIVED AND DIED.

    QT is a very complete toolkit, covering many aspects of programming and coding for an operating system. Then, they go overboard by it actually being cross-platform.

    QT is a "world" that programmers can live in to make software for ALL PLATFORMS. QT is a "world" that programmers have been living in to make software for ALL PLATFORMS.




    On a side note, it is really sad to see the number of trollfests when the facts are so obvious. If MS had been legally required to NOT commit vendor lock-in and if MS had been legally required to REVEAL compatibility details about its platform toolkits, everything else about MS Windows would be irrelevant. There would be no noticeable difference in application performance, complete binary compatibility. Plenty of choice. So when people say toolkits are small and unimportant, this couldn't be further from the truth. And whoever is saying that is either VERY IGNORANT or PURPOSELY OBSCURING THE TRUTH.
    You are mistaken.
    I don't think you have ever developed software, really.
    Toolkits are but a small part, besides Qt is not a toolkit like GTK is. Qt is a framework, it has tons and tons of things that aren't related to GUIs at all. It's like calling all of .NET a toolkit.
    Either way, the "world" were software developers make software is called a language. There are many applications that do all their logic in a language like C++, and that code is the same for every platform. They then just redo the GUI using the platform's native GUI toolkit, such as Cocoa or Gtk ect.

    Either way, I hope a good company buys Qt as it is amazing. Either way Qt won't die as there are too many big corporations invested into it which would have clauses in their contracts to ensure continued development of Qt. Combine that with the KDE agreement and Qt's future is pretty secure.

    What I think, Nokia well sell of Qt and other assets not related to their mobile business, and then get bought out by Microsoft.

    Leave a comment:


  • texaswriter1983
    replied
    Toolkits are the crux

    Actually toolkits are everything. They are the "worlds" that programmers live in to make software. Developers for Windows software have lived and died in those toolkits as you can see from the original wordperfect developers. LIVED AND DIED.

    QT is a very complete toolkit, covering many aspects of programming and coding for an operating system. Then, they go overboard by it actually being cross-platform.

    QT is a "world" that programmers can live in to make software for ALL PLATFORMS. QT is a "world" that programmers have been living in to make software for ALL PLATFORMS.




    On a side note, it is really sad to see the number of trollfests when the facts are so obvious. If MS had been legally required to NOT commit vendor lock-in and if MS had been legally required to REVEAL compatibility details about its platform toolkits, everything else about MS Windows would be irrelevant. There would be no noticeable difference in application performance, complete binary compatibility. Plenty of choice. So when people say toolkits are small and unimportant, this couldn't be further from the truth. And whoever is saying that is either VERY IGNORANT or PURPOSELY OBSCURING THE TRUTH.

    Leave a comment:


  • spstarr
    replied
    BlackBerry 10 uses Qt

    Originally posted by liam View Post
    Are you joking? Microsoft fears Apple, Google, Oracle, and IBM, not some toolkit. As I said in a different thread, Qt was a flea squished between titans shaking hands. It wasn't even on the agenda.
    Seriously, why would you expect otherwise? Doesn't WP7 run Qt? Does ios allow Qt?
    Some people have this really inflated opinion of the importance of a toolkit...
    Some people don't do enough research :-)

    Leave a comment:


  • liam
    replied
    Originally posted by frantaylor View Post
    Nokia signs deal with Microsoft

    Nokia allows Qt to disintigrate

    Microsoft publishes tools and guidelines for porting Qt applications to Windows

    Anyone see the pattern here???

    All these years and NOTHING EVER CHANGES

    Clearly Qt 5.0 is considered a THREAT to Microsoft

    Why else would they extend their resources to snuff it out?
    Are you joking? Microsoft fears Apple, Google, Oracle, and IBM, not some toolkit. As I said in a different thread, Qt was a flea squished between titans shaking hands. It wasn't even on the agenda.
    Seriously, why would you expect otherwise? Doesn't WP7 run Qt? Does ios allow Qt?
    Some people have this really inflated opinion of the importance of a toolkit...

    Leave a comment:


  • Ex-Cyber
    replied
    Originally posted by frantaylor View Post
    exposing OpenGL to web code is a frightening security mess
    Not substantially more so than exposing JavaScript, except that too many drivers have crashy code in them (which is often a problem even for trusted code that happens to be buggy or unusual).

    Leave a comment:


  • Kamikaze
    replied
    Originally posted by kraftman View Post
    Exactly, but trolls like Elanthis will keep spreading FUD about Linux and praise M$.
    Maybe I missed out on some fun forum threads, but while I don't agree with everything elanthis says I wouldn't go around labelling him as a troll and MS shill.

    And regarding the topic - I think as soon as Nokia jumped in bed with MS that this was inevitable. qt will be sold off - hopefully to a company that relies on it for part of their core infrastructure (as has already been said many times). You never know, if we're lucky this could end up being a good thing for qt.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X