Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
KDE GUI

Trolltech Spills Beans On Qt 3.0 130

Posted by Hemos from the looking-at-new-stuff dept.
Gord.ca writes: "Linuxprogramming has a preview of Qt 3.0. New goodies include database integration, multiple monitor, 64-bit support, their own component model an improved Qt Designer & international text display. Doesn't seem to be any reference to 3.0 on the Trolltech website, nor guestimates of release date." Update: 04/09 11:18 PM by T : Here's something on the Trolltech site about the new release -- sounds nice.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Trolltech Spills Beans On Qt 3.0 More

Trolltech Spills Beans On Qt 3.0

Comments Filter:

  • Re:QT3 should deviate from windows. (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward
    lowest UID troll?

  • Re:Why KDE.. (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward
    > Why the heck should I choose KDE? Both Sun and
    > HP have announced the replacement of CDE with
    > Gnome. RedHat (the largest distributor, at least
    > in the US??) favors Gnome as well, though they
    > do ship KDE.

    In general KDE gives you an environment in which you can be more productive, both as a user as well as a developer. A lot of people find that important and that's one of the reasons they use KDE.

    I have no idea why companies like Sun, HP and RedHat favor gnome, I do know that RedHat lost a lot of its customers to Mandrake in the time they didn't include KDE in their distro.

    Due to market pressure they started to include KDE despite their previous claims that they couldn't do that. I guess HP and Sun currently lack that kind of pressure (why else would they be able to sell CDE for so many years?)

    Cheers,
    Waldo

  • QT Preview (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Wait a sec...

    How are database integration and 64-bit support supposed to make my pr0n files smaller and better quality?

    Oh...we're not talking about the same QT, are we?

  • Re:improvements? (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Well, it will let the average user run the new nice database-using applications in his local language, on his 64-bit computer, diplsyaing on his several monitors.

  • Re:What does QT3 ADD though? (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward
    I'm guessing you don't program. The idea that 'all those concepts' can be applied to C is simply stupid. A typical gtk widget source code consists to about 50% of boilerplate code and hides the code which really makes up the implementation. In C++, you can subclass a widget in two lines, and it's easy to immediately see what's going on, which methods are reimplemented, which methods are added and so on.

    As for the other comments:

    • rich: Motif has an extraordinary restricted widget set. No tree widget, no table widget, no usable rich text widget. Gtk has no table widget, no Unicode support, and no rich text widget yet. Neither of them has network-transparent file dialogs. I could continue the list.
    • clean: Everyone who has used Qt and Motif or gtk can tell the difference.
    • object-oriented: The win32 api and Tk are the most obvious examples. I'm surprised that you don't know about them.
    • portable: Qt runs on Windows and on any relevant Unix. Of course Solaris could use Qt, thousands of people use Qt on Solaris. Most importantly, Qt adopts to the platform-specific look and feel on every platform. gtk on windows just looks like shit. Also, gtk programs won't even work on windows out of the box because gtk lacks a portability layer for non-gui stuff, like file system access (e.g. directory separators) and network protocols.

  • Why does QT need to access databases, instead of programs doing it themselves?

    Perhaps for the embedded people.

    X does multi-monitor. Tell me why QT needs to

    For the embedded people.

    No, you're definitely right on this one. Add support for .0001 % of the linux population so they can run X a little quicker. Good usage of time

    Actually I think it's called future-proofing. You might want to look into it. Cleaning up the code and ensuring it works on 64 bit platforms is a good thing to do.

    I can see this more then the others, but I still believe it can be implemented outside of QT.

    As another poster already stated, the toolkit needs to know about this for obvious reasons. Every international-ready toolkit I can think of has this.

    Anyway I can see exactly why they're doing SQL and further distancing themselves from X. As an embedded programmer I'd love for QT to be able to give me a backend-independent SQL interface. DBI rox muh sox but Perl is a pig. That's important when your processor gets a whole 4 bogoMIPS.

  • I always figured it came down to C or C++ Qt/KDE is C++ where as Gnome supports C. The last I saw, some while back, Gnome had C++ wrappers but they were a long ways off from being documented as well as Qt.

    So, if you want to write in C, use Gnome, if you want C++ the choice is yours.

    Personally I like the C++ route with Qt.
  • Why the heck should I choose KDE? Both Sun and HP have announced the replacement of CDE with Gnome

    They were using CDE for crying out loud! That should be warning enough to not follow their lead! :-)

    Personally I use KDE2 because it actually works and adds value to my desktop. I've tried GNOME dozens of time, only to remove it from my X session the next day. KDE is much more integrated, or at least, it feels like it's more integrated. And it seems to be improving at a much faster rate than GNOME. Part of GNOME's handicap is perhaps the fact that it's based on a toolkit where designing a new widget requires copying an existing widget's source and modifying it, duplicating much of the mechanisms you get for free, in an object oriented language.

    -adnans
  • Because of glade! Glade enabled me to get an interface going quickly without messing too much with gtk+. And at the time Qt was not free enough. I'm working on abstracting the GUI though since the current interface is pathetic :-)

    -adnans
  • Please demonstrate :)
  • "Database Programming: Qt 3.0 will include a platform- and database-independent API for accessing SQL databases": KDE already has put significant resources towards a uniform Database model, as has the GNOME project and even specific languages (DBI for perl, f.e.). Why do we need or want, yet another splinter in the market?

    I think I can take a stab at this by saying that they're possibly trying to compete with, or fill the diminishing market of, RogueWave DBTools. Before STL was a big part of C++, RogueWave was one of the primary distributors of 'STL-like' libraries and classes for C++. One of the packages they sell is DBTools, which provides a uniform interface to arbitrary SQL databses. It is a very helpful tool.

    Ok, so KDE has some of this stuff in it. Not every user of Qt uses KDE. On my SPARC Solaris box, I don't use KDE, but I do have a few Qt apps.

    --

  • I like the idea of the database-aware widgets and using an API supporting ODBC, but there really needs to be more native-mode drivers. Leaving out a few biggies like MS SQL Server and DB2 will really slow down adoption of Qt3.0 in companies using those environments. I'm sure that if they worked with IBM, they'd get a DB2 drivers PDQ. As for Microsoft, *somebody* needs to write it. There are so many people out there running SQL Server it's just not funny, and being able to drop in a Qt-based desktop environment in a primarily Microsoft shop would really help establish an outpost to prepare for invasion of Microsoft's turf. I don't know if they have any plans for it, but supporting SOAP would be great, too. The more MS protocols that are supported, the better, allowing nearly 'Drag & Drop' replacement of MS Desktops with more acceptable ones.
  • You know, even though I am primarily a KDE user... and have had nothing but trouble with Gnome as a desktop... I really do see your point.

    Well, I develop GNOME applications and I have no idea what he's talking about. KDE is a very nice desktop with a very nice API (it leaves GNOME behind in many regards -- as does GNOME in other areas do the reverse). All I heard from both your post and the parent was: "Whine whine whine whine. Whine whine, Windows, whine.". Sorry, but this is open source, and if you want to change something then feel free to do so.

    The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.

  • how will database integration, multiple monitor, 64-bit support, and international text display help an average user? answer - they won't.

    Is it Moron Day on Slashdot? Should we change the name to "Slashdot: News for Whiners. Stuff for the clueless". Go read C-NET if you want to hear about how coddled you'll be with the next release of consumption-ware goodies from people who want your money. I won't even bother addressing your post because it's beyond help; if you can't see the benefits for what they are then please spare us the public display of ignorance.

    Have a nice day.

    The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.

  • International text display: If I am not mistaken...not everyone reads/writes English...
  • Well, I think work wouldn't care much for me asking "sure, I'm running a 'rogue' operating system, but could you please get me more RAM so I can run my bloated desktop-of-choice?"
  • I like KDE because of the look and feel of it. It just feels right to me.
  • I was under the impression that you just needed to license Qt if you were developing non-free software. I don't think sun would have to pay a license fee for every copy of the OS shipped.

    It is a per-developer license, not per end user.


    -- Thrakkerzog
  • a whole slew of stable, fast and good wordprocessor will become available for UNIX

    A slew? I'd settle for Kword not crashing every 5 minutes. Koffice has a great design (lifted straight from M$, but hey, go with what works), and in terms of control over layout and embedding pictures, graphs or tables, kword is lightyears ahead of Abiword, but it's just not stable enough.
  • This is going to sound like I'm just a wxFanboy, but I really recommend wxPython for this project. wxWindows can act as a wrapper for GTK (wxGTK) and should give you most of the widget set you need. I agree though, Tkinter pretty much sucks for GUI :)

    Hope this helps.

    ObJectBridge [sourceforge.net] (GPL'd Java ODMG) needs volunteers.

  • X does multi-monitor. Tell me why QT needs to

    Because Qt is a cross-platform library! There isn't necessarily X underneath.

    No, you're definitely right on this one. Add support for .0001 % of the linux population so they can run X a little quicker. Good usage of time

    You know, instead of being a prick just because someone adds a software feature you don't need, try writing some software of your own.

    All in all, you seem to believe Qt == KDE == Linux. Go play with sharp objects instead of trying to understand anything.

  • If you're a student and cannot afford a BMW then tell me how can you afford a Caddy or a Vette? Last time I've checked they were selling for about the same amount of dough...

    And dunno why, but in terms of reliability I tend to trust a bimmer more than any american car. (don't get me wrong, I own a Cougar... and I could have afforded an entry level bimmer, but they just don't appeal to me aesthetically -- matter of taste)
  • Hrmmm...you may be mis-understanding me a bit...

    I did not mean to say that Sun would make a commercial product out of KDE...obviously that would violate the GPL

    What I meant was that they could now ship KDE with thier commercial product, (Solaris). This of course assumes that they follow the conditions of the GPL and provide source, etc.

    Before ranting, maybe try to understand a comment before assuming it is just wrong.

  • While database API encapsulation is usefull and welcomed, another attempt to integrate GUI and database will surely fail. I love Borland Delphi to death, but data-aware controls suck even there. It looked like a good idea, but I wish it would just die. Problem with them is that they buy you some productivity upfront, but then you just gonna hit the wall of limitations, with no way out. And at this point you are stuck too deep in a project to change every QtDbWhatever to QtWhatever.

    My advice to TrollTech: if you are going to do something simular to Delphi, don't even bother!
  • "I have heard MANY people saying that Qt is fully GPL. If this means that it can be used for free in a commercial product, Sun, HP, et al may have more decisions to make."
    Excuse me, but just _who_ is moderating this? Since when exactly has the GPL allowed its use in commercial products? LGPL, maybe, but it's being deprecated as we speak...
  • Glad you cleared the matter :)
  • The 'American Balanced Purity' is some fat fuck stuffing a Big Mac in his greasy hole.

    You obviously have zero knowledge of design, and you're also a fucking idiot.

  • > Trolltech is in Norway. I don't think it is fair to pick on English,

    OK, I forgive them. I don't forgive the journalists who cut&pasted thier press-release without proofreading it.
  • Both articles say data-aware widgets that provide automotive synchronization between the GUI and the underlying database\

    Shouldn't that be Automatic? Is this some nuance of American English that I was unaware of, or are the widgets synchronised by little volvos? Or does no one in the place know how to use English.

  • I disagree!

    Having read the fine print at trolltech, my guess is that Qt can use the funtionalities of the underlying architecture. Don't forget that Qt is cross-platform and while multi-head (for example) might be available for X, it might not be for MacOS. I guess that's the biggest challenge for the Trolls: keep everything consistent on every platform.

    Cheers,

    Matt
  • If you like pizza, eat it.

    Why would anyone eat pizza? It so incredibly lame, not to mention it's frequent stability problems! People that eat pizza obviously do not want any real food.

    I prefer hamburgers. If you haven't tried one lately, I suggest you go get yesterday's or today's version. Very nice!

    --
  • You must smoke some serious crack! QT looks like windows widgets, not GTK. GTK looks nothing like windows, so how the hell can it feel like a broken windows machine? QT feels that way to me, because it's so windows like.

  • Nowhere in the GPL does it state you cannot make a commercial product with GPL'd software. The GPL simply says that if you ship binaries of your software, you must also make the source readily available if someone asks for it.

    That's pretty much it. No, no more. All the rest of it is legal embellishment to classify what software falls under what jurisdiction, etc. Also, (because this is a major peeve of mine) commercial software does not mean "closed source"! Get that through your heads people. QT is commercial software, Linux distros are commercial software, Eazel is/will be commercial software. Any software that brings in money is by definition "commercial software". Nowhere in the definition of commercial does it say you cannot release your source, or that if you do, you cease to become commercial. Just like it doesn't state in the GPL that if you sell open source software, it ceases to be open source.

    -----
    "People who bite the hand that feeds them usually lick the boot that kicks them"
  • I did not mean to say that Sun would make a commercial product out of KDE...obviously that would violate the GPL

    No it wouldn't. God I hate it when people say this. See my other post [slashdot.org] in this thread.

    -----
    "People who bite the hand that feeds them usually lick the boot that kicks them"

  • Why the heck should I choose KDE?

    The neat thing is that you don't have to. KDE apps will run fine in a Gnome environment (and vice versa). As long as you have all the proper libraries, they coexist quite nicely. So if you're hooked on Gnome but find a KDE app you can't live without, you don't have to abandon Gnome.

  • From the perspective of a KDE developer (the primary uses of QT fwik) ...

    Don't be stupid. QT is a portable GUI toolkit. It's not part of the KDE project and it's use is not limited to KDE. You could have saved yourself a lot of time by simply noting that most users of Qt aren't from the KDE camp and that Qt should not be saddled by its increasing popularity because of KDE. Arguing that a cross-platform GUI toolkit should be restricted in its functionality by the existence of similar tools provided by a platform-specific client of the library is inherently flawed and incalculably short-sighted.

  • Pretty much off topic. But I have over the last week I've been writing, in python using pyGTK, python-gnome and libglade a little application for leeching files from FTP sites (getting only one file from a site at once, delaying between retries, getting recursive directory listings for selecting the files you want), it's multi-threaded but otherwise a fairly simple program.

    Now, I hadn't coded Python at all before this, and similarly I hadn't coded GTK in any language before either.

    Learning Python was a snap - nice language by the way. But working out how to use pyGTK, python-gnome and libglade in a nice OO way - what a joke !

    There is basically no documentation on how to do this, the documentation that came with pyGTK et all basically said "look in the examples", but the examples were non-oo basically using the C gtk functions. If I was using an OO language I wanted to code in an OO way - it would make things simpler from my multi-threaded perspective anyway.

    I ended up doing a search through the net to find a starting point for using libglade with python in a more OO way and using some posts I found to a mailing list converted that method to being truely OO (so I make classes that contain initialisation code to load up the XML, display the appropriate widgets, connect up the signals to handlers defined within the class (within the object instance) an anything else specific to that class, then when I want to make a `mainWindow' I can just do myMainWindow = mainWindow() and I have a self contained mainWindow object.

    Even now I still have a guess half the time at what calling format I should be using for functions - which you have to `translate' from the GTK C reference documentation.

    Now that I know roughly what I am doing, it is pretty straightforward (even if I am just hacking it togethor (design ?! who needs that :-))), but it would have been much simpler with some even basic documentation about how to write a nice OO way for using libglade in python.

    NB : the reason I wanted to code in pyGTK/python-gnome was that TkInter didn't have the widgets that I wanted, whereas GTK does, and as a nice advantage it looks nice on my desktop :-)

    ---
    James Sleeman

  • I'll bite.

    Okay, so they seem to have cloned some of the capabilities of KDevelop and others. My question is WHY? So they can sell it to windows users?: have you fired up KDevelop? It actually uses this tollkit allready. They must have made some improvements--which is good for everyone. I think the big advantage to having a gui builder is being able to play with your UI while you're figuring it out. It's important to get right, and difficult to do from the source.

    I agree that http and SQL support don't really belong in QT, and are probably better fit for KDE. However, remember Trolltech's market is people who want to write platform-indepent apps, and since KDE doesn't exist on Windows, this move makes sense for them.

    Maybe that's what's really upseting you: Trolltech's trying to make it easy to write cross-platform apps, and they're encroaching on KDE's current territory. But, I don't believe they can port KDE to windows without GPLing QT/windows. To do this the `right way' without duplicating KDE's efforts, they would have to coordinate with KDE, and maybe even GPL some more code.

    Remember, KDE doesn't have to use QT 3.0's extra features if it doesn't want them. Also, thanks to the GPL, anyone is free to branch development at any time.

  • > Non-english speaking Linux users? Nah
    hmm, most of the world doesn't have english as native language.
  • Konqueror [konqueror.org]. Konqueror is THE web browser for Linux, ever since Netscape dropped the ball.

    You should really check this baby out.

  • or am I confused again?

    Yes. This is the infamous "viral" nature of the GPL. GPLed software may not be distributed as a composite work with non-GPLed software without a special exception being written into the license. That's where the "But when you distribute the same sections as part of a whole which is a work based on the Program, the distribution of the whole must be on the terms of this License," come into play. Since the core of KDE, including Qt, is distributed as a coherent unit (and simply breaking Qt off into a separate tarball isn't enough) then the whole needs to be GPLed. As an alternative, though, you may include a special exception saying that it's OK to distribute the GPLed stuff with this specific non-GPLed stuff- and RMS did say that he felt that this was implied by the original authors distributing it that way- but that only applies if you have the right to change the licensing terms, i.e. you own the copyright. If you've incorporated somebody else's GPLed code, you'll have to get their permission to add the permission to distribute with the non-GPLed stuff. Of course this is now rather academic, since Qt is now available under the GPL.

  • Since when exactly has the GPL allowed its use in commercial products?

    Always. Think about commercial products like RedHat, Mandrake, etc. They're selling GPLed code and nobody even blinks. The GPL specifies only that source must be made available for the program and derived works. IOW, as long Sun, HP, etc. are willing to send the source, they're free to redistribute Gnome or KDE, and charge whatever they damn well feel like for it, to their hearts' content.

    My general impression is that the big limitation is when you talk about linking to a shared library. If the library is narrowly enough shared that it must be distributed with the program that depends on it, then the program must be GPLed if the library is. If the library is LGPLed, though, then programs that depend on it and are distributed with it can be released under any license. There's some uncertainty, though, primarily as a result of this bit of section 2 of the GPL:

    These requirements apply to the modified work as a whole. If identifiable sections of that work are not derived from the Program, and can be reasonably considered independent and separate works in themselves, then this License, and its terms, do not apply to those sections when you distribute them as separate works. But when you distribute the same sections as part of a whole which is a work based on the Program, the distribution of the whole must be on the terms of this License, whose permissions for other licensees extend to the entire whole, and thus to each and every part regardless of who wrote it.

    There's obviously some wriggle room there, but my general impression is that this means that the whole core of Gnome or KDE must be licensed under the GPL if any part of it is; this is why RMS had problems with the GPLed KDE depending on a non-GPLed Qt. OTOH, other packages that are not distributed as part of the core but assume that it's already running on your machine need not be GPLed. This is a big win for a company like Sun or HP, since it means that they can distribute separate optional commercial software packages that depend on GPLed packages that are part of the base OS (like GTK or Qt). Equally important is this other bit of section 2:

    In addition, mere aggregation of another work not based on the Program with the Program (or with a work based on the Program) on a volume of a storage or distribution medium does not bring the other work under the scope of this License.

    IOW, it's perfectly OK to put a GPLed program onto a CD containing Solaris, HPUX, etc. so long as it's clearly a separate program and you offer the source. There's no need to distribute GPLed chunks of your code separately from non-GPLed sections, just so long as it's clear what things fall under which license.

  • While some things sound nice.... Shouldn't things like multi-head monitor support be in X. Any why is ODBC like functionality now in my GUI toolkit????? Quick someone get the Midol to relieve the bloat.
  • Enjoy having 2 good things around. I don't think "one desktop environment" world domination whould be fun. A Gnome Monopoly. Ridiculous. A KDE monopoly, sounds even weirder :)
  • Do you talk about dev versions of 0.17? Did you read http://www.ca.us.rasterman.com/pages/e.html ? Enligthenment has kept its habbits of improving :)
  • Well what's your point? "We don't need advanced features"? It's good to have them around.
  • self promoted

    with what?

  • what if it's:
    CmdrTaco |-|4x0|23|) |\/|Y 31337 server to first post
    microsoft [goatse.cx] got taken over by RMS inc. [boriswebworks.com]
    Is that better?

  • First off, being any kind of zealot is usually due to uninformed opinions.

    While you are quick to point out that a Dodge Neon and win95 are american, you're also forgetting that so are:

    intel

    Corvettes

    cadiallacs

    *BSD
    So, your 'pro-european' claim of superiority is rather short sided. What hardware has europe produced lately? What kind of cars have they produced that *I* can afford (I'm a college student on a limited budget, I cant afford a BMW or Benz, sorry). You're assuming that the most expensive (cost, and effort) is always the best, when that's not necessarily the case. Windows takes NO work to use, that makes it GREAT for older people who havent been using computers their whole lives, and young people who dont know how to hack shell scripts to make their lives easier.

    There is nothing wrong with something being 'american,' the overall appearance can help familiarize a new program to smooth out the learning curve. Your pro-Euro, pro-linux zealot behavior isnt needed. Go hang out in kuro5hin.

  • I agree with you for the most part, but I take issue in the fact that KDE is significantly more stable than Gnome. I feel for the most part, the instablilities in Gnome come from the applications used by individuals. Most of the Gnome crashes I have endured have come when running BETA quality third party apps, and very rarely do I have problems when running final releases.

  • How about you SHUT THE FUCK UP?
  • Yes, Sun, HP and others are rushing to dump the CDE (which they developed and mismanaged) to back development of GNOME. I'm not scared that they'll do to GNOME what they did to CDE, are you? So indeed. Why use KDE? :)
  • Yes, I'm sure you'll never use the text translation abilities of Qt. But then the Chinese guy who tries to port your app over will appreciate it. Linux is not US/English central. It's mulicultural, and it's nice that some people are keeping ease of coding for everyone in mind.
  • So anti-aliased fonts aside, what's the justification for KDE when it seems like major players in the Unix world are going to Gnome?

    This is funny, because it sounds like the old "Why use Linux, b/c the major players have gone with XYZ ?" argument.

    The answer is because it does what you want it to do, because you like it.

  • ...aparently, when all seems lost, the voice of reason returns to Slashdot

    Thank you, ink

    ------
    C'mon, flame me!

  • Now, what does it mean to be soulless AND teutonic? I am just dying to know.

    You asked for it:

    Word UpBy: Cameo

    Ow
    Ow

    Yo, pretty ladies around the world
    Got a weird thing to show you so tell all the boys and girls
    Tell your brother, your sister and your mama too
    'Cause we're about to go down and you know just what to do
    Wave your hands in the air like you don't care
    Glide by the people as they start to look and stare
    Do your dance, do your dance, do your dance quick, mama
    Come on baby, tell me what's the word
    Word up (up, up), everybody say
    When you hear the call you've got to get it underway
    Word up (up, up), it's the code word
    No matter where you say it you know that you'll be heard
    Now all you sucker DJ's who think you're fly
    There's got to be a reason and we know the reason why
    You try to put on those airs and act real cool
    But you got to realize that you're acting like fools
    If there's music we can use it, we're free to dance
    We don't have the time for psychological romance
    No romance, no romance, no romance for me, mama
    Come on baby, tell me what's the word

    Word up (up, up), everybody say
    When you hear the call you've got to get it
    underway, ow

    Ow
    Dial L for love
    Ah... hey hey
    Ah hey hey
    Now just come on, all you people say

    (W-O-R-D up, W-O-R-D up) ah ah ah ah ah
    (W-O-R-D up, W-O-R-D up) wooh
    (W-O-R-D up) hey hey
    (W-O-R-D up) he-hey
    Hey hey hey, yeah
    Hey hey, no no no no no no no
    Yeah, ooh ooh ooh, woh
    Tell me like that, like that
    Say it like that, now now yeah
    That's the word, everybody's got to know the word
    Like that, come on

    Ow
    Take me real low

    Bingo Foo

    ---

  • I thought the OT3 posts were banned from slashdot last week....

    Better not let Travolta know.

    Bingo Foo

    ---

  • This is not meant to be flame-bait, so consider it an honest question from someone who is under-informed.

    Why the heck should I choose KDE? Both Sun and HP have announced the replacement of CDE with Gnome. RedHat (the largest distributor, at least in the US??) favors Gnome as well, though they do ship KDE.

    Personally, I don't see Gnome as all that unstable. It's not like it ever crashes (and I usually run semi-bleeding edge). So anti-aliased fonts aside, what's the justification for KDE when it seems like major players in the Unix world are going to Gnome? Has anyone announced a similar migration to KDE that I just missed?

  • Yet another possibly unfounded impression - I get the feeling that KDE development is moving faster than Gnome development at the moment, though I gather that Gnome development is still clicking along quite well.

    I don't know how unfound it is, but it seems to me that environments win more by luring developers than users. KDE, thanks to Qt, has a superbly easy to use library that allows relatively fast development. I think that is a big edge. You have to know the gtk library to write for gnome, and gtk is more difficult to learn and use.

  • I'm an average user, I suppose, but I find myself trying to read things in other languages that use non-roman alphabets. Try reading hebrew, arabic, hindi, chinese, or russian on a computer without international text display. Better yet, try typing them. I, for example, have tried to read Arabic newspapers online(I'm taking the language in college and would like to improve my reading. Many, MANY 'average users' would attempt such a thing), but its damn near impossible(at least, on Win98...bleh) due to my OS's lack of international text display.

  • It's true that KDE is more stable and slightly faster than Gnome at the moment, but the key to Gnome is that it's not as draconian or "locked-in" as KDE.

    KDE requires development to be done in C++...anyone can hack Gnome code in whatever language they want - Perl, Python, C, Java, you name it. I'd be surprised if a Gtk+ Bash binding doesn't come out soon.

    Freedom is very important to GNU proponents and most Linux users, and Gnome is definitely a more extensible, free-thinking enviroment. Sure, some aspects of it are not at the level of their KDE counterparts yet, but in the end, Gnome has the right key ideal, freedom....

    And I'm not talking about GPL vs. Whatever, I realize that KDE is GPL'd and Qt is GPL'd for free apps...I'm talking about the spirit of freedom rather than the strict definition of freedom that using the GPL bestows upon software under its banner.

    KDE's draconian development enviroment, user interface and application methodology are breaking the spirit of freedom by forcing users to do things THEIR WAY and THEIR WAY only. Yes it might be more stable, and faster, but it's definitely not as free - and that's as in the spirit of freedom, not true freedom itself. Both are important, though.
  • The power to integrate with the rest of the system through technologies such as Bonobo....can you extend any application and even add to the codebase itself in anything other than C++/QT in KDE ? No, I didn't think so.

    Still, KDE is a nice system and may in fact be the desktop of choice to someone who prefers the draconian Windows-like feel, such as an Executive Business User.

  • Stroustrup himself has said in his retrospective book "The Design and Evolution of C++" (p. 207), "Within C++, there is a much smaller and cleaner language struggling to get out. Many hackers would now add 'Yes, and it's called Java'

    That pretty much sums it up. C++ is an industry standard in much the same way that Windows 9X became the industry standard desktop. In some cases this is good, but in others it's not - one language cannot rule them all, however, one language can bind them - the ultimate glue component language, Python.
  • Darwin's CoreFoundation also uses COM for 'Plugins'
    ---
    >80 column hard wrapped e-mail is not a sign of intelligent
  • Just because you load an 'Aqua' theme or whatever doesn't mean all Qt or KDE apps will magically behave like mac apps or follow the "Aqua HI Guidelines".

    What we really need is interface abstraction, but the only project close to that is GNUStep.

    I mean what's the point of Qt in multiple platforms if applications won't behave like other apps on that platform? Might as well use SDL |-p
    ---
    >80 column hard wrapped e-mail is not a sign of intelligent
  • Exactly what do you mean by a heart and soul? Isn't comparing QT to KDE kind of like comparing General Motors with Snerple Car Seating Inc.? KDE is UNIX software. Just like Gnome. What are you talking about????????
  • I'd be lying if i said i thought gnome was currently more usable and complete than KDE, but I think that in the long term, because it has so many people behind it (RedHat, Sun, HP, Eazel, Ximian, GFSF [i believe Gnome is part of GNU]) it is bound to eventually become a much more widespread and complete system.

    There is also the issue of developers - gtk has language bindings for umpteen different languages and there also arent the licensing issues (unless you buy TrollTechs "Professional Edition" of Qt, you have to GPL all your Qt programs).

    Not wanting to start a flamewar of course :)
  • Most commercial apps are written in C++. For GUI C++ is simply much more natural language than C ...
  • wait wait..64 bit processors? goddamn..I was just looking foward to 64bit grfx, and it turns out all they wanted to do was speed it up...when are they gonna figure out what linux users really want? 1.845E19 colors? yes please.

    go ahead..take this seriously.

  • Since when exactly has the GPL allowed its use in commercial products? LGPL, maybe, but it's being deprecated as we speak...
    Well, it's a bit more complicated than that. See, there's more than one version of Qt.

    One is called "Qt Free Edition", and it is dual-licensed under the GPL and a home-brew, Open Source compatible license dubbed QPL. It allows developers to use Qt in Open Source and Free projects, like KDE or, well, just about anything on Freshmeat starting with "K". :-) This was done to resolve licensing conflicts with KDE. The catch is that this version is only compatible with X11. There is no Free version for Windows . (Trolltech will begrudgingly support Free Edition on proprietary Unix variants, but when it comes to Microsoft, they'd rather "stick it to The Man", as if he cares.)

    The other versions are called "Professional" and "Enterprise". They carry a per-developer royalty-free commercial license.

    In short, once you go beyond Qt Free Edition on Linux or BSD, the licensing becomes a nightmare.

    We're not scare-mongering/This is really happening - Radiohead
  • Why does everybody in the linux world need to bitch and whine when a new feature is added that *they* don't need,

    licq has several frontends, including a Gnome and a QT frontend. All the umpteen Gnome libraries, GDK, GTK and Glib loaded by the Gnome frontend take up less memory than just QT alone. Duplication of already existing database and HTTP libraries in QT doesn't help the time and thrashing it already takes to load any QT program.

  • Because KDE apps are always complete rewrite or ports, there are not as many KDE apps as Gnome/Gtk apps

    First off, a minor question: Other than starting from scratch or porting, how else would you write a program?

    As for the "lack" of KDE apps: if you're judging by Freshmeat, I'd agree. But (unfortunantly, IMHO), many many KDE apps aren't listed on Freshmeat. KDE has its own applications site, Apps dot KDE [kde.com] located at http://apps.kde.com/.

    --
    Evan

  • Of course what they want to write those apps new, because they want to do it better (like arts)

    Ironic that you should use aRts as an example - it was not intended for KDE, and was choosen for use in KDE2 because it was a good, standalone, desktop neutral sound server.

    --
    Evan

  • I'm just grabbing a chunck of this: mms (Ok, mp3players are a matter of taste. But xmms is still running on most of the KDE screenshots I see ;)) Evolution (it's quite finished, aethera is not) Gnapster (I'm not sure if Knapster has become so much better since my last look at it)

    It's pretty much a matter of taste. Konqueror, KMail, Konsole, Kit and noatun are my primary applications. I'm thinking about switching to Aethera, which is in second Beta, and very stable and complete. Knapster stinks, but then, I use lopster, which is fantastic. And as for xmms, you do know that noatun uses the same skins, right? Along with K-Jofol skins (the Windows mp3 player), GQMpeg skins, and obviously winamp skins. noatun is now the standard song player for KDE (supports plugin for many formats), and before that, kaiman supported skins as well. Nowadaya, you can't identify a mp3 player in a screenshot.

    My point is, I use KDE because I like the apps. You don't, so don't use KDE. Presto! We're both happy. As the great four letters say: YMMV.

    --
    Evan

  • Multi-monitor support is in X. Applications need some way to actually use it, though.

    What they announced was that support.

    These "bloat" posts really bug me. What is so wrong with adding another library that seamlessly integrates with the existing libraries? Isn't that how software development works?
  • well,

    can you perhaps shed some light on this: is there a major philosofical difference between KDE and Gnome that transcends implementational details (like vi's command mode and edit mode duality vs emacs's lisp programmability) or are there mainly surface differences (like pico's keybindings vs jove's)?
  • eh.

    Why does KDE care whether QT is GPLed or not? GPLled software can't be USED by closed software, but it fully able to USE closed software (presuming that QTs licence allows this).

    or am I confused again?
  • This is not meant to be flame-bait

    Neither is this post, but these too are honest questions:

    Why should I choose Vi over Emacs? I mean, more people use Emacs.

    Why should I use MySQL over SQL server?

    Why should I use Linux over Windows2K? I mean, clearly more companies support windows.

    My point: you know damn well when your posts are flame-bait, especially when the reason you give for something is "more people do it than the other", so dont bother saying they are not.


    --
  • Duplication of already existing database and HTTP libraries in QT doesn't help the time and thrashing it already takes to load any QT program.

    I think it's nice that if my GUI will work on a machine, then I can also be sure that I can do HTTP or DB or everything else non-GUI related in Qt. It's all on the same library, so instead of requiring 8 different libraries for your app, you require 1.

    As for the memory requirements, C++, in my experience, is slower/bigger than C, no doubt there. But that has not stopped pretty much EVERY commercial application (I forgot the actual numbers) from using it, because it just lends itself better to good design principles. (I think you're exaggerating anyway, but I'll trade .8 more seconds of start up time for the power of a rich, clean, well-designed, well-documented, object-oriented, portable Qt anyday.)

    Awe damn, now look what I've done. I've responded to a toolkit troll with a language troll! Be gentle on me.... :P
    --
  • Why the heck should I choose KDE

    KWord, KLyx, KDevelop, ...

    These are all quite useful (to me!) KDE apps. Otherwise, I like the look of gnome better so that's what I use (that is, the gnome panel and sawfish). I know many people who like the KDE panel/wm better and that's fine. I'm not the first one to say that, but you don't have to choose between gnome and KDE and I don't understand why so many people want to make it look that way. Just use whatever you like from both and everyone will be happy, and there will be no war in the world and humanity will be happy, and..... OK, I'll stop!
  • As other posters have already commented, commercial uses of GPLed software are fully supported. However, Trolltech has Qt under a dual license. You may use the GPL if you don't mind all the restrictions it puts you under, or you may pay them a licensing fee if you want to develop non-free software using Qt.

    This way, Trolltech keeps making money off of it, but KDE can be used happily by all.

    The only "intuitive" interface is the nipple. After that, it's all learned.

  • "soulless and teutonic" whoo-boy! anywaaaay

    Pretend the QT 3.0 was possible fud. (no release date whatsoever given, from a commercial company?) Who would they be fud-ding against? Just curious...

    Peace,
    Amit
    ICQ 77863057
  • Yes, but I was talking about GTK. The GIMP Toolkit, which I think was started in the US.
  • WTF???

    This was the lamest post I have ever read.

    While I do agree that the post is lame I'd like to comment on some things you said:
    I thought the purpose of gnome (other than to KILL KDE) was to emulate the windows look and feel?
    The purpose of GNOME is not to emulate Windows, it's to build a better GUI than Windows. Unlike Qt/KDE that seem to be much more based on Windows (although KDE does aim to be better!).

    And about that trying to KILL KDE, GNOME would have never existed if KDE didn't make the license mistake, don't take it personal.

    American? Linux isn't even american...it's global.
    I agree, even though one could argue that KDE was started in Germany and GTK in the US. Though people arguing that are very short-sighted IMHO.
    and GTK+ (and gnome) have been ported to win32 as well so what does that mean?
    AFAIK GTK for Windows doesn't integrate well with the rest of the system. That is because it wasn't designed to look like other toolkits.
    if you don't like qt or kde then don't use it, that's why we have choices.

    not to start any flame wars here, i respect and use both environments...but qt/kde already represents a greater market share than gnome, is further along than gnome, and quite simply not quite as ugly as gnome....

    so it should read...if gnome is to have any chance against QT3.....

    Yes, KDE is far more mature than GNOME but GNOME has much more supporters these days so I don't think that the market share will last. Not that it matters in the end, thanks to X we have a choice ;).
  • Could you please clarify? When driving my BMW or even my Beetle, it feels teutonic, but definitely not soulless. I could say the same thing about listening to Bach or Beethoven. Teutonic, yes, but with lots of soul.

    Now, what does it mean to be soulless AND teutonic? I am just dying to know.

  • Damn man, 17 mods? Is that a record?
  • So we have a component library that is wanting to become a complete RAD tool. Well good for QT, interesting thing is, everyone of those features have been in Delphi, and Delphi has been around for 5 years. For Linux, we now have Kylix. Creating your own components, database access, and localization is exactly what made Delphi great. Kylix ueses QT so makes ya wonder if Kylix is the reason why they are doing these features. I say that becuase its one thing to make a component library, its something completly differnt to make a full RAD tool. Why the change for QT? If they do these features, I sure hope they do them right.

  • QT 3.0 snapshots... (Score:3)

    by drw ( 4614 ) on Monday April 09, 2001 @12:49PM (#304360)
    Are available on their FTP site [trolltech.com]. Enjoy!
  • Yep, falling for a troll, that's me.

    When I use QT based environments, I feel like I am using a windows95 machine. The simple fact is that QT was designed to be used by windows converts, and was designed to work on a variety of platforms. It is not designed specifically for linux like gnome is, and so does not have a soul.

    Many innovations found in GNOME are direct attempts to "ape" Microsoft, from compound documents [ximian.org] to an implementation of Visual Basic for GNOME [ximian.org]. Not that this is (all) bad; MS came up with some pretty good software design strategies, and GNOME is smart to follow the good ones.

    That having been said, I use both KDE (on my home desktop) and GNOME (at work). They're basically the same as far as I can tell, from a UI point of view. There's a couple of minor differences (it's easier to use workspaces in GNOME; it's easier to set fonts in KDE; I like Konsole better; I like GTK's look-and-feel better), but they basically do the same things as each other, and both better than Windows. Which I think is the point.

    GNOME is no longer designed specifically for Linux, as GNOME now must be working on Solaris and FreeBSD before it can be released.

    If QT3 is to have any chance against gnome, it must become specific - it must become a pure linux environment.

    Not bloody likely. In fact, one could argue that using a cross-platform environment such as Qt or wxWindows [wxwindows.org] is closer to the hacker ethic of "solve the problem once." In fact, part of Python's success as a GUI building language is wxPython [wxpython.org]. I've also heard of cases where Qt/Python is used to build GUIs for software that's meant to run on Windows and UNIX, although that involves some expense...Qt is NOT GPL'd for Windows!!

    OK, that's my two cents.

    ObJectBridge [sourceforge.net] (GPL'd Java ODMG) needs volunteers.

  • Re:What does QT3 ADD though? (Score:3)

    by ajs ( 35943 ) <{moc.sja} {ta} {sja}> on Tuesday April 10, 2001 @02:53AM (#304362) Homepage Journal
    As for the memory requirements, C++, in my experience, is slower/bigger than C, no doubt there. But that has not stopped pretty much EVERY commercial application (I forgot the actual numbers) from using it, because it just lends itself better to good design principles.

    I'm guessing you don't program. C++ lends itself to incoherent parameter-passing, inscrutable overloading, downright insane side-effects of innocuous looking declarations and the kind of debugability that one has come to expect of biological systems.

    I have a great deal of respect for what C++ tried to do with C, but let's face it: good design principles are not what C++ lends itself to. What C++ has going for it is that it's the first language that a lot of people learned OO concepts in. Certainly, all of those concepts can be applied in other languages (e.g. Gtk+ in C), and OO has been done better elsewhere (e.g. Java, Smalltalk, Python, etc), but that's not why people use C++. They use C++ because they feel they need speed and a language that the average joe will know how to "do OO stuff" in.

    I'll trade .8 more seconds of start up time...

    Ignore the startup time. How much slower will your desktop be overall? Will people with last month's machine be able to run it cleanly? How embeddable is it?

    ...for the power of a rich, clean, well-designed, well-documented, object-oriented, portable Qt anyday.
    • rich Every feature that I know of in Qt is supported in other widget sets
    • clean Large widget sets are cleanly coded (e.g. Gtk+) or they die (e.g. Motif). It's very hard to maintain a poorly coded widget set.
    • well-designed What widget set do you feel is poorly designed and has traded memory requirements for it other than Motif, which is a poorly designed pig, I'll grant.
    • well-documented None of the widget sets that I know of trade memory for documentation. I think this one's a bit of a straw-man.
    • object-oriented I've never seen a non-OO widget set for X or Widnows. Which ones were you thinking of?
    • portable This is the one that gets me. Qt is written in C++, and thus suffers from C++'s portability problems (which is exactly why Sun was unable to choose Qt for Solaris) from the onset. It can never be as portable as something written in C (e.g. Gtk+).
    All things considered, I don't think any of your points are sufficient to warrent the extra memory requirements....

    Awe damn, now look what I've done. I've responded to a toolkit troll with a language troll!

    If you intended this as a troll, I guess you succeded, but you certainly did not succeed in laying out a case for Qt or C++. Both are deeply flawed, and those flaws are not sufficiently offset by either's merits.

  • Re:Why KDE.. (Score:3)

    by Gen-GNU ( 36980 ) on Monday April 09, 2001 @01:14PM (#304363)
    Firstly, a couple of points...

    Sun, HP et al joined with the gnome foundation prior to Qt being released fully GPL. To go with KDE would mean licensing issues, and fees paid to Trolltech for every copy of their OS shipped.

    Since that time, I have heard MANY people saying that Qt is fully GPL. If this means that it can be used for free in a commercial product, Sun, HP, et al may have more decisions to make.

    More importantly, though, is the fact that KDE, as well as Gnome, and many 'Linux' desktops are not exclusively Linux at all.

    My Sun machines, other than pure servers, all run KDE. So do my Linux boxes. I know people who do the same with Gnome. And Windowmaker.

    The point here is that it's all about choice. I have the choice to use KDE, you have the choice to use Gnome, and others have the choice to use whatever they want. Ideas, innovations, etc from one desktop quickly migrated to others, and in the end, we will hopefully have many mature, stable desktops, which can be quickly and easily exchanged, based on a persons tastes, needs, etc.

    There are those who will use whatever comes installed on their machines, and never tinker. But I for one am glad that I can replace bits and pieces, until I get my machine to my liking.

    So why use KDE? For the same reason that many people put Linux on in the first place. If you like what you have, stick with it. Many people didn't like the Windows that came with their computers, and installed something else. If you like Gnome, stick with it. If you find yourself not liking it, or wondering if something else just may be more to your liking, try KDE, or Windowmaker, or whatever.

  • Re:improvements? (Score:3)

    by mallan ( 37663 ) on Monday April 09, 2001 @01:07PM (#304364) Homepage
    Yes, we all know that the Linux community is entirely made up of "average" users. Sheesh.

    Databases on Linux? Nah.
    Multi-monitor Linux boxes? Nah.
    64 bit Linux platforms? Nah.
    Non-english speaking Linux users? Nah.

    Looks like we don't need Qt3, then.

  • What does QT3 ADD though? (Score:3)

    by sabre ( 79070 ) on Monday April 09, 2001 @01:33PM (#304365) Homepage
    Moderators: Note, this not a troll... I really do not understand what they were thinking... (see below/end)

    From the perspective of a KDE developer (the primary users of QT fwik), I really have to wonder how much of this stuff is desirable:

    "Database Programming: Qt 3.0 will include a platform- and database-independent API for accessing SQL databases": KDE already has put significant resources towards a uniform Database model, as has the GNOME project and even specific languages (DBI for perl, f.e.). Why do we need or want, yet another splinter in the market?

    "Qt Designer: Qt Designer has now evolved from a dialog editor to a true GUI builder.": Okay, so they seem to have cloned some of the capabilities of KDevelop and others. My question is WHY? So they can sell it to windows users?

    "Qt Assistant: Qt 3.0 features a separate application called Qt Assistant, which can be used to browse the Qt Class Documentation, as well as the Qt Designer and the Qt Linguist manuals. Qt Assistant offers index search, contents overview, bookmarks, history and search in pages. ": Again, KDevelop seems to have most if not all of this capability...

    "International Text Display": Hrm... pango in a box.

    "HTTP network protocol support": Proving the QT is not just a gui toolkit, they implement protocol support. What the heck for? Isn't this better implemented in the 'framework' kind of level as KDE has done? Konq obviously supports this, as does the protocol facilities in general...

    "New Component model: Qt 3.0 will provide a platform-independent API for runtime loading of shared libraries and accessing of their functionality using a COM-like interface concept": WHY does QT want to develop their OWN object model? Isn't enough enough? Do they really have value add here? XPCOM is MUCH more portable than they could ever support QT with. Why would they want to add this?

    Being a naive user, I have to wonder how much of this is actually useful for free software development. We seem to already have superior solutions for much of what they are providing. Some things (that I have not listed) will definately be nice (64bit portability, better unicode/localization, multiscreening, etc...) and actually seemed to be related to the core of QT: the graphics toolkit.

    It seems to me that they are basically trying to reinvent what the freesoftware community has already developed in order to sell it to those less worthy (ie win32/commercial developers). Am I missing something here, or is there a reason a GUI toolkit should have its own incompatible object model?

    -Chris [nondot.org]

  • Automotive Synchronization (Score:3)

    by cube farmer ( 240151 ) on Monday April 09, 2001 @12:49PM (#304366) Homepage

    From Linuxprogramming.com's QT 3.0 Preview story:

    Among the new capabilities in Qt 3.0 are: database support; data-aware widgets that provide automotive synchronization between the GUI and the underlying database ...

    Wow! Now I can put a Linux GUI in my car!

  • Re:What does QT3 ADD though? (Score:4)

    by ajs ( 35943 ) <{moc.sja} {ta} {sja}> on Tuesday April 10, 2001 @04:31AM (#304367) Homepage Journal
    The idea that 'all those concepts' can be applied to C is simply stupid.

    Ah, the depth of the argument becomes clear ;-)

    Gtk has no table widget, no Unicode support, and no rich text widget yet.

    Table widgets are kept in Gnome. You can use just the table widget if you wish, without having to use Gnome's overall session managment, etc.

    Unicode support is handled by pango, which while still under development, is definitely ready for developers to start designing their projects against. Pango is much richer Unicode support than most toolkits (including Win32) offer.

    Define rich, when you're refering to text widgets.

    * The win32 api and Tk are the most obvious examples. I'm surprised that you don't know about them.

    Don't be rude just to prove you can. Of course, I've heard of them. I gave a couple of examples, not a comprehensive list. Win32 is the worlds most comprehensive abomination ever written down, so I don't use it as an example of much. Tk is just too limited for most use. Why is Tk one of the "most obvious examples"? No one really uses it anymore (even Python is moving to Gtk+).

    Of course Solaris could use Qt, thousands of people use Qt on Solaris.

    Yes, of course they do. But, Sun cannot ship Qt becuase they would have to decide which C++ to support. There's Sun's C++ and GCC. They do not interoperate becuase C++ is not as portable as it should be. So, Sun would have to ship two sets of libraries and let you guess which ones to install.

    Gtk+ did not require Solaris to choose. C is portable.

  • Re:Why KDE.. (Score:5)

    by Dr.Dubious DDQ ( 11968 ) on Monday April 09, 2001 @01:32PM (#304368) Homepage
    it seems like major players in the Unix world are going to Gnome?

    "Everybody's doing it" never struck me as an important reason to do anything :-)

    I, on the other hand, haven't used Gnome recently. My impression of the differences from an end-user perspective (note:based entirely on hearsay, posts on Slashdot, voices in my head, and other incredibly reliable sources!) is that KDE has a more "tightly 'integrated'" feel than Gnome does (this may or may not be a good thing, depending on your tastes). Gnome, on the other hand (aside from Antialiased fonts), has a reputation for being better with the eye-candy. I also get the impression(again, just an impression) that Galeon isn't yet as "polished" as Konqueror is [this may or may not still be true).

    Yet another possibly unfounded impression - I get the feeling that KDE development is moving faster than Gnome development at the moment, though I gather that Gnome development is still clicking along quite well.

    In the end, honestly, I think it's as much a "look and feel" thing as anything else, unless you intend to contribute to the development, in which case if you're in the "Ewww! C++ Sucks!" category, you go with Gnome. :-)

    In short - I'd say pull down the KDE 2.1.1 packages for your favorite distribution and try it out. I recommend using it just long enough to get over the traditional "this sucks because it's not what I'm used to" phase...then decide. You may very well decide that you still prefer Gnome, in which case, no big loss. You may also decide that you like KDE better. Also no big loss. You may not be able to decide, and find yourself switching back and forth regularly. That'll cost you a little extra time and effort due to possible addiction to bleeding-edge updates from 2 large projects instead of one, but still fun...

    The more people that try both, the more "interoperability" improvements between the two will be suggested and implimented...


    ---
    "They have strategic air commands, nuclear submarines, and John Wayne. We have this"
  • "HTTP network protocol support": Proving the QT is not just a gui toolkit, they implement protocol support. What the heck for? Isn't this better implemented in the 'framework' kind of level as KDE has done? Konq obviously supports this, as does the protocol facilities in general...

    I just picked this one out - the below is applicable to just about all of the items you listed.

    The first major reason they moved these things into Qt is because Qt's primary reason for existing is to be a *portable* GUI library. It runs under Mac, Windows, just about any *nix, including Solaris, AIX, Linux, *BSD, etc. That's the reason you can, by making two setting changes (which can be runtime), make the interface turn into Mac Platinum, including having all the menubars moved to the top of the screen and folded into a single menubar (a la Mac) (which can be done in KDE, making it a very close clone of Macintosh... although everybody seems to think it's a clone of Windows).

    The second main reason (and I think this is a bigger reason), is that their main focus lately seems to be Qt/Embedded, which gives a *very* lightweight GUI on top of just about any OS kernel. It's perfect for everything from cellphones with 9 Mhz processors to the mythical webtablets to dashboard computers. Write it in Qt, and worry about the OS later... and it's fully unicode compliant *and* language independant (even mixed languages). That's a seriously important factor for Asian manufacturers making gizmos.

    Oh, and one other thing:

    to sell it to those less worthy (ie win32/commercial developers)

    Fuck you. That's how I've put food on my family's table for years, and how leigons of engineers and programmers have fed, clothed and housed their loved ones for decades. Yes, there is a major shift in the works, and yes, I support it fully and believe that Open Source and/or Free Software is the way to go, and hopefully within the decade will` be the prevalant model of business. But that does not mean that businesses or individuals still working within the old model of software sales are (in your words) "less worthy".

    That's the kind of shite that lead to the phrase "Open Source, Closed Minds".

    --
    Evan

  • Re:What does QT3 ADD though? (Score:5)

    by furiousgeorge ( 30912 ) on Monday April 09, 2001 @03:11PM (#304370)
    KDE blah blah KDE blah blah KDE blah blah blah.....

    I use Qt. I use it at work. We pay for it. We love it. We DON'T use KDE. We will NEVER use KDE. Ergo, features in Qt and not in KDE are what are useful to us. Plenty of people are in the same boat.

    >>WHY does QT want to develop their OWN object model?

    They're not. Reread what the feature is.

    Why does everybody in the linux world need to bitch and whine when a new feature is added that *they* don't need, that it's a colossal waste of time. Guess what - other people have different needs than you.

    For example the database stuff.... personally i have zero interest in this (we've written our own DB layer), but plenty of people on the Qt mailing list have shown interest in this so i'd assume thats why they're doing it --- CUSTOMER DEMAND. And it's customers that pay the salaries of the Trolltech engineers... which also allows all the free software types access to such an excellent toolkit.

    Qt has a huge user base and a lot of them are paying customers... And one thing about paying customers is that they don't usually get into these stupid religious turf wars that the Open Source community gets into. They just want a good toolkit. And Trolltech delivers that.

    j

  • Re:What does QT3 ADD though? (Score:5)

    by MemRaven ( 39601 ) <kirkNO@SPAMkirkwylie.com> on Monday April 09, 2001 @02:11PM (#304371)
    I think you hit the nail RIGHT on the head several times. You assume that the primary motivation for what Trolltech does is whatever is good for KDE, which you see as their primary consumer. But as far as Trolltech the corporation, they should be completely and 100% ignoring what KDE wants when it doesn't jibe with their primary focus as a company: corporate consumers. What direct revenue does Trolltech get for KDE? Pretty much Zero.

    What they're really doing is getting things in Qt up to a level of MFC or something like that (with the database-backed widgets, which have been in PowerBuilder and Visual Basic for a while now) so that it can be seen as a more complete solution for corporate development.

    Remember, Trolltech is fundamentally a company, and as such has to get revenues, and thus needs to write things which will be useful to their corporate customers, not non-revenue-producing users of their technology.

    If the focus here is why should FREE software developers care, well, they'll ultimately have much of this through KDE anyway. Otherwise, there are a lot of corporate types who read Slashdot anyway. ;-)

  • Re:Why KDE.. (Score:5)

    by garett_spencley ( 193892 ) on Monday April 09, 2001 @01:01PM (#304372) Journal
    The way I see it is you should try out as many of your options as you feel like (have time to, want to etc.) and choose the one that you like best.

    I for one am sick of hearing about people saying that this is better than that or that is better than this. It's been going on for too long. Emacs vs. Vi, Linux vs. BSD, KDE vs. GNOME, Sony vs. Nintendo, whatever....

    If you like KDE, use it. If you like GNOME, use it. If you like pizza, eat it.

    I don't think it matters if KDE is better than GNOME or vise versa. I think what matters is that people have the option to choose what they like best. One of the many reasons I feel uncomfortable when I use windows, mac or beos. I'm not even going to say what I use as my desktop because it's irrelevant (and no it's not GNOME :O).

    Just my $0.02

    --
    Garett

Slashdot Top Deals

Let's organize this thing and take all the fun out of it.

Close