Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Ultra App Kit 1.1 Released As New Cross-Platform UI Toolkit

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

  • #41
    Originally posted by Morty View Post
    That oiaohm is a red herring, it's a non issue.

    When you get into AAA titles, if they decide to use Qt, going for a commercial license would be obvious. So Qt LGPL would not be an issue, none of those perceived issues would be valid.
    That way, also developers can get paid and everyone can have good documentation, etc.

    Comment


    • #42
      This effectively solves the Linux user interface problem forever and provides us with a strong foundation on which to build
      Lol, what naivete and arrogance. "Let me write this few components for this limited usecase, and claim that it supercedes all of Qt, Gtk that have been developed for decades."

      It doesn't even come close. And it's limited to X11 which already makes it legacy and not worth my time.

      Comment


      • #43
        Originally posted by JackyLau View Post
        We don't need another C++ gui toolkit. Swift, Kotlin, C# is the better language for GUI toolkit and application today.
        Lol no. Language doesn't matter. You can build a good GUI toolkit on any of them. (I'm only partial to Kotlin because I use it already for Android development).

        Comment


        • #44
          Originally posted by Nth_man View Post
          That way, also developers can get paid and everyone can have good documentation, etc.
          Unfortunately this is not true and has not been true over the complete Qt history.
          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CPZkfYWp9uo
          One of the historic owners of Qt was Gamigo class company where their goal was profit ahead of development this did result in the open source KDE addons getting massive feature ahead of the core Qt leading to the contract agreements between KDE and Qt next owner. When you buy a commercial Qt license it does not say what percentage of your money will go back into development.

          https://github.com/ocornut/imgui/wik...IMGUI-paradigm
          Next is Qt is the wrong paradigm lots of commercial games. So round peg square hole. It one thing for a game development company to be paying for a game engine that happens to have a GUI that is compatible. its another thing to be paying for a GUI toolkit that is not game engine compatible.

          The reality here Qt cannot really afford to go out and buy every game engine that a game development company may decide to use. Dear IMGUI and other like it are highly permissive software license for key reasons.
          1) 100 Central development does not make sense the game market for a GUI because if the need of game to have some unique feel.
          2) Licenses of game engines that you would need to test you GUI against are cost prohibitive to buy just to develop a GUI.
          3) The game engines that are normally not cost prohibitive already include a GUI you have to compete against.
          4) Game market has a lot of companies like Gamigo would really don't care about the future of the project just the bottom line of their profit.

          There are advantages and disadvantages to the I will sell a commercial license.
          https://github.com/ocornut/imgui/wiki/Sponsors
          Dear imgui funding in part comes from game engine developers so the game engine for free and some money to make sure Dear Imgui works on it. Remember you sell a commercial license for your GUI in the game space you can expect those who sell commercial game engines not to give you the game engine for free as they will want a slice of your profits.
          Selling a commercial licence in the game space means some company like Gamigo will be looking at how many licenses you sell if I acquire that company for X dollars can I pump and dump it. Being permissive software license means companies like Gamigo look at what you are doing and say you we cannot profit here.

          The reality here the game market for GUI and engines has very hostile companies in the mix. Yes a game engine can be great today in 1 years time some horrible pump and dump company has bought it out and now you are paying money for a game engine that is no longer development and you don't source code to maintain it yourself.

          I am not saying the LGPL + commercial license cannot work as way to keep project funded but there are markets where it really does not work well. Yes there are markets where pure commercial only works even worse for you as a end user but does still work great as a developer. Why developer makes something gets enough commercial users and sells out to a company like Gamigo that sucks those poor users dry.

          With Qt it make sense to pay for the commercial to get access to new feature sooner and direct development but you still need your project to be able to work with the Qt LGPL version. if Qt get acquired by someone horrible who does not invest in development(this has in happened past with Qt) you need to be able to function with just the LGPL version and be able to divert the money you are paying for commercial support into the LGPL development.

          There is a big failure to learn from history in some of these case. Remember we have history here with Qt and other game toolkits(be this engines for games or UI for games) with the horrible companies acquiring them and worse in the game field being a fly by night. What about Ultra App Kit model say its safe to pay for. There are tones of open source options were you will not take a risk.

          Yes the fly by night in the game field will develop something like a game engine or a UI put this on a resume get employed by some company as internal staff then totally cease development so leaving end users totally screwed if it a total commercial only product.

          I don't get what this developer of Ultra App Kit is up to. The developer is either true person without the knowledge of the game development world and is doing a model that will not work well long term. Or this is another fly by night doing a project to pad out resume. Or this is going to go well at first with under experienced developers and then be another pump and dump. Or best this is truly tip of iceberg and this person is able to develop a full game engine to match up with their UI that has decent features(highly unlikely this).

          Lets just say I am not that trusting and with the number of people who have got burnt over the years it does not pay to be trusting of full commercial toolkits or toolkits for you usage case you have to pay for commercial license. You need to understand how financially safe a provide of a full commercial toolkit is to know how safe they are from being acquired by a hostile.

          Companies that only exist to make profit will always be part of the market and they will always be around software with a commercial license. Yes fly by nights well also always exist. Yes you will get fly by nights that release open source projects as well but at least in those case you do have the option of funding development to keep them going if you need them . It is a different matter if the fly by night turns out to be commercial license only this can be you screwed after like 12 months of development.

          My first experience with a fly by night problem was from Microsoft with Visual basic for DOS 1.0 yes that was the only version and Microsoft did promise that there would be extra features coming in 1.1 that never came because in 1995 they release windows 95 and everything is going windows so it development is dead. Everyone who has development long enough with commercial toolkits has a case where they have used a commercial toolkit and its turned out to be a fly by night that has left them hang.

          Comment


          • #45
            Originally posted by oiaohm View Post
            I don't get what this developer of Ultra App Kit is up to. The developer is either true person without the knowledge of the game development world and is doing a model that will not work well long term. Or this is another fly by night doing a project to pad out resume. Or this is going to go well at first with under experienced developers and then be another pump and dump. Or best this is truly tip of iceberg and this person is able to develop a full game engine to match up with their UI that has decent features(highly unlikely this).
            The game engine is nearly finished. Ultra App Kit is the first step in the rollout of this new technology. It has provided a chance to work out the new documentation, delivery system, website, and other features so that the final release of the game engine goes more smoothly.

            Writing an entire GUI toolkit from scratch was a pretty extreme step, but I really found that nothing out there would allow me to create the software I wanted. I used GTK for the Linux version of Leadwerks, and it was very frustrating to me that the user interface made the whole program look bad. I decided the only thing to do was take control over the entire GUI so I had complete control over the quality of the user experience.

            The new engine came about because few years ago I started working with NASA due to my previous game engine Leadwerks. The new engine I am working on focuses on performance, particularly for VR, which all VR developers I have spoken to have problems with. I plan to use it myself for VR projects in aerospace and defense. I am giving a talk at I/ITSEC 2021 in December about performance for VR and Vulkan:
            https://www.iitsec.org
            Last edited by JoshKlint; 21 July 2021, 02:48 PM.

            Comment


            • #46
              Originally posted by JoshKlint View Post
              The game engine is nearly finished. Ultra App Kit is the first step in the rollout of this new technology. It has provided a chance to work out the new documentation, delivery system, website, and other features so that the final release of the game engine goes more smoothly.
              Ok now it makes sense. This is the dry run before the game engine that will match up with the GUI. GUI toolkit by self being paid for just did not make sense in most cases.

              Originally posted by JoshKlint View Post
              Writing an entire GUI toolkit from scratch was a pretty extreme step, but I really found that nothing out there would allow me to create the software I wanted. I used GTK for the Linux version of Leadwerks, and it was very frustrating to me that the user interface made the whole program look bad. I decided the only thing to do was take control over the entire GUI so I had complete control over the quality of the user experience.
              What you wrote here is very much a common problem particularly when doing retained mode GUI. Yes GTK is a retained mode GUI.

              https://github.com/hoffstadt/DearPyGui
              Like as here shows it is possible to put your own version of retained mode GUI on top of Dear ImGui.

              The developer behind Dear ImGui in the first place hit the same kind of problems. He was also kind of smart enough to know that he could make new GUI toolkit but if he did it the same as the old ones the result would be the same problem where when you created the retained mode rendering loop you effectively make it hard for anyone else to modify the GUI system to suite their style needs or back-end engine needs.

              Reality here there have been hundreds of GUI toolkits made over the years due to the same set of problems. ImGui model has the developer of application write the render loop this allows lot more flexibility.

              Personally I would love to see a toolkit that sits in between imGUI and rmGUI( retained mode) as in able to do window using the same drawing elements in either mode. The imGUI is a lot more friendly when you need to do a custom widget as you are not forced to try to join to existing class or other wise to make it work because of direct control over the draw loop. Yes having to do the direct draw loop has it downside as well.

              Comment

              Working...
              X