The Qt Company Announces Its New High-Level 3D API - Qt Quick 3D

[eydee]

I can't tell if you like that or not, but I consider that to be a good thing. One way to manage the low level, one way to manage the desktop. I know I can't be the only one that "really liked" having to learn all the different ways to manage various daemon on boot or "still really likes" configuring three or four GUI toolkits to try to look similar enough so the desktop doesn't look like a fustercluck.

I'm actually not a fan of having to bundle 147 libraries with a Hello World program. Just look at something like RPCS3, 99% of the download is just Qt libs.

[Mark625]

The problem is you need to be a lawyer or have deep pockets to use it with peace of mind (unlike GTK).

This turns out not to be the case.

If you are developing non-open-source software, the simplest solution is to purchase a commercial license. The Qt Company constantly pushes for this using scary ambiguous language on their website (as seen here). They need to make a living, after all. That gives you rights to all of the licensed components without having to release any of your precious source code.

Which is not to say that their commercial licensing regime is anywhere near reasonable, but that's a whole 'nother subject.

However, for free use of the Qt toolkit, most of Qt is licensed as LGPLv3. You can use the Qt toolkit for your open-source project, or for your proprietary project. Simple. The LGPL only requires you to release the source code to any changes you make to the licensed code, not the program that links to it. Thus it is perfectly safe to use for open-source and proprietary software, regardless of any FUD spread by proponents of non-copyleft licenses (or the Qt Company itself!).

Some components are licensed as GPL instead of LGPL, such as Qt Charts. This is done to encourage you to purchase a license, in the case where you want to use the component and not release your source code. But that should not be a hindrance for your open-source projects, as long as you comply with the GPL.

Some components and runtimes are proprietary only. Those are mostly for the embedded and automotive fields. But since you can't even get these tools without a license, that should not be factor when deciding what to use for desktop or mobile applications.

Cheers!

[kpedersen]

Why not going Vulkan only? For Metal there is already MoltenVK and for OpenGL ES there is Angle.

Probably for one of its markets (POS sale systems, incar entertainment / satnavs). These machines (typically 32-bit x86) have OpenGL ES 1.x support and not much more. Qt has to show some restraint in the dependencies so that non-gamer professionals can do their jobs effectively.

[skeevy420]

I'm actually not a fan of having to bundle 147 libraries with a Hello World program. Just look at something like RPCS3, 99% of the download is just Qt libs.

Really? That's your complaint? I have to install a graphical toolkit to run a graphical program? Really now.

For me it's a moot point since I run a QT based desktop and already have all of those installed. Still, it's like me complaining that I have to install some GTK libraries so I can use PulseEffects or Steam or SC Controller.

Don't get me wrong, I get where you're coming from. Unnecessary bloat sucks and I really hate GTK. Headerbars make me want to smash my head with a bar so I can make myself retarded enough to try to understand why Gnome and GTK folks seem to like them. Still, we need those 147 libraries if we want our hello world program to have a window with spiffy rendering effects; the ability to use keyboards, mice, game controllers; use system themes and look native; etc.

But complaining about having to install QT to use a QT-based program in a thread about a new QT API...you're taking the cake buddy.

[eydee]

Really? That's your complaint? I have to install a graphical toolkit to run a graphical program? Really now.

For me it's a moot point since I run a QT based desktop and already have all of those installed. Still, it's like me complaining that I have to install some GTK libraries so I can use PulseEffects or Steam or SC Controller.

Don't get me wrong, I get where you're coming from. Unnecessary bloat sucks and I really hate GTK. Headerbars make me want to smash my head with a bar so I can make myself retarded enough to try to understand why Gnome and GTK folks seem to like them. Still, we need those 147 libraries if we want our hello world program to have a window with spiffy rendering effects; the ability to use keyboards, mice, game controllers; use system themes and look native; etc.

But complaining about having to install QT to use a QT-based program in a thread about a new QT API...you're taking the cake buddy.

Having some libraries and having and entire directory tree bundled are an entirely different thing.

[log0]

Some of those screenshots make me wonder how well the QT framework would work to make games without using Godot, etc.

Nope. It is a very simplistic APi that allows you to load and display 3d objects. It is more about having 3d objects in your user interface. Because 3d is cool you know.

[coder]

Some of those screenshots make me wonder how well the QT framework would work to make games without using Godot, etc.

Specifically which screen shots? Because the “San Miguel” test scene reminds me of stuff from like 15 - 20 years ago. The rest of the stuff I see is just like generic CAD renders. Are we looking at the same page?

https://blog.qt.io/blog/2019/08/14/introducing-qt-quick-3d-high-level-3d-api-qt-quick/

[skeevy420]

Specifically which screen shots? Because the “San Miguel” test scene reminds me of stuff from like 15 - 20 years ago. The rest of the stuff I see is just like generic CAD renders. Are we looking at the same page?

https://blog.qt.io/blog/2019/08/14/introducing-qt-quick-3d-high-level-3d-api-qt-quick/

This one reminds me of racing games back on the SNES...with much better lighting and the same ass level of AA. I suppose all the car renderings put my brain in racing game mode.

[3diStan]

BAAAAD news: GPL or Commercial only:
It seems that unlike the normal (2D) Qt Quick, which is available under LGPL license… well, Qt Quick 3D is not, but GPL or commercial (the latter being enormously expensive). See the newer Qt Quick 3D related article on Phoronix (Qt 3D Will Still Be Improved On Alongside Qt Quick 3D) and the link to the Qt Blog page (The Future of Qt 3D) there. It even lists among the use cases for still using Qt 3D rather than the newer Qt Quick 3D the following: "for those who cannot use GPL or commercial licensing".