


MiniGui, GPL'ed Qt/Embedded Alternative 105
joshmccormack writes "MiniGui, a GUI for embedded Linux devices that offers a GPL alternative to QT/Embedded and other embedded guis has become a 'stable, viable alternative,' according to a recent Linux Devices article. Lots of screenshots on their site, including PDA apps, a web browser and a virtual console."
Slash - late - dot ? (Score:2)
If you take a look at FRESHMEAT's minigui page [freshmeat.net] you will see that it was dated way back in 2001.
Hmmm
Could it be that minigui is from China, and
Pdas (Score:1)
will Pda's have linux preinstalled in a couple of years time? Probably not, but we can dream.
Re:Pdas (Score:5, Interesting)
- rastakid
Re:Pdas (Score:2)
wow, you must have lived in a cave for the past 3 years.
I've had a linux PDA for 2 now... and yes when I opened the box it magically had linux on it...
It's called a Sharp Zaurus 5500. and you can buy one for dirt ($199.00US) most anywhere now.. in fact a couple of guys at work got them from tiger direct lately...
Re:Pdas (Score:1)
*resists urge to turn this into a PROFIT!!! post*
Re:Pdas (Score:2)
Then they got a good deal...the cheapest price for any Zaurus (5500 or otherwise) is ~$250usd though the average price is over $300.
AFAICT Tiger doesn't sell them anymore.
What about wxWindows? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:What about wxWindows? (Score:2, Informative)
Oops, the wxWindows embedded link is:
http://www.wxwindows.org/embedded.htm [wxwindows.org]
Re:What about wxWindows? (Score:1)
Google Cache For Entire Artical (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Google Cache For Entire Artical (Score:2)
Re:MOD PARENT DOWN! (Score:1)
Try meta-moderate(1), if not try CmdrTaco(1), if not abuse-contact(1). Should all fail, try laywer(1) and pipe output to lawsuit(1) instead of stdin.
wow (Score:1, Flamebait)
www.minigui.org must be running on a uClinux-based web server! There are only four comments here and the site is already Slashdotted.
Go here [google.com] for the Google cached version.
Slashdotted... (Score:1)
Google cache here: http://216.239.59.104/search?q=cache:kHpwvk7mvSgJ
Re:MOD PARENT DOWN (Score:1, Offtopic)
Re:MOD PARENT DOWN (Score:1)
I was posting a lame joke, and decided to (try and) be helpful and put in the google cache link as well for the lazy. Nothing to see here, move along.
hmm, looks pretty (Score:1)
Anyone remember Picogui? (Score:2)
See here [picogui.org] but it's currently down. Head on over to #picogui on irc.slashnet.org for more info until the site comes back up.
GPL Alternative to Qt/Embeddded? (Score:3, Informative)
Is this to imply Qt/Embedded is not GPL?
Shouldn't it say, "an alternative to Qt/Embedded that is also available under GPL terms" ?
Qt/Embedded is dual licensed with the GPL being an avaiable way to license it. IMHO there is no need for an alternative that is an alternative just because it is GPL, Qt/Embedded is good enough.
John
not under GPL for commercial developers (Score:1, Insightful)
"Restrictions:
--Software created with Qt Free Editions is governed by the terms of the GPL and QPL.
--The Free Edition licenses do not allow the development or distribution of commercial software."
The LGPL allows you to use libraries, as long as you supply the code for those libraries, but your own code can remain closed. There is no such option for the GPL/QPL versions of QT.
Re:not under GPL for commercial developers (Score:3, Informative)
Trolltech are mistaken in that statement. They have released QT/E under the GPL, which means an aggregate product can be commercial, as long as it is distributed under the GPL as well.
IE, you can't make proprietary software without paying Trolltech. Commercial software is fine.
Re:not under GPL for commercial developers (Score:1)
Wrong.
Re:GPL (Score:1, Flamebait)
are you a complete moron?
Qt is NOT under the gpl. it's a modified gpl that will NOT allow me to make a commercial open source application without paying gobs of money to them.
minigui allows me to make a completely open source commerical application. I can SELL it and make it open source... (OMG! what a CRAZY idea!)
so YES it will be used. I can keep my device drivers closed and open sou
Re:GPL (Score:3, Informative)
QT is most definately under the GPL. (According to the Free Edition of QT/Embedded 2.3.7, it IS GPL'd, and the GPL doesn't prevent commercial software -- it requires that you provide the source to said software and distribute it to those requesting the software:
This is bullshit (Score:2)
Basically Open Sourc e== Free, Closed SOurce == Pay.
This MiniGUI is *ONLY* GPL so you can't make a closed source app with it *AT ALL*.
Now stop spouting your BS.
Qt advantage (Score:2)
Critical mass and absence thereof (Score:2)
Re:Critical mass and absence thereof (Score:1)
It's always the same thing: "We all need to get behind _one_ XYZ, lest users get confused and developers split their work". But never a thought on how to decide which XYZ to get behind, and how to enforce the ban on rival XYZ:s.
Some will refuse to use Qt, since they feel the license is not open enough, or not enough good language bindings exist. Others will balk at anything based on GTK, since they feel those people are mutant commie traitors for refusing to bac
Re:Critical mass and absence thereof (Score:2)
E.g. a set of requirements gathered based on usage scenarios then prioritized based on popularity and a solution meeting as many of those requirements as possible designed and implemented.
Irrational developers can have their own project - I hear Mono [go-mono.org] could use more help
requirements, reason, and missing the point (Score:1)
Re:requirements, reason, and missing the point (Score:2)
I suggest that people will cooperate if it is in their interest to do so. If the idea of organizing the activities of a group repels you then you are probably best suited to a project small enough for you to accomplish on your own.
Re:Critical mass and absence thereof (Score:3, Insightful)
Stable, viable alternative (Score:1)
slashdoted (Score:1)
Re:Why? (Score:1)
You should take up comedy
Seriously though, I have said this before, wxWindows certainly gives Qt a run for its money.
- Paul
Code looks ugly (Score:2)
TextOut (hdc, 100, 100, "Hello world!");
EndPaint (hWnd, hdc);
Feh. If I wanted to write that kind of JanglyCaps'd verbiage I'd just use Windows. If you are making a pretty and tasteful GUI, why spoil it by making the code ugly?
Re:Code looks ugly (Score:1)
BoD
Re:Code looks ugly (Score:1)
Re:Code looks ugly (Score:2)
You haven't looked at many open source projects, have you? There are a wide variety of notation styles to be seen, of which this is not even an extreme example. Too bad about the hungarian variables, but oh well. Such things are only superficial.
When you join a project, you use whatever coding style the leaders have decreed and get on with it.
Re:Code looks ugly (Score:1)
Re:Code looks ugly (Score:2)
And like someone else already pointed out; well, there are n+1 coding styles for Open Source projects, and trust me, there are much much worse examples
embedded devices need dedicated widget sets (Score:5, Interesting)
dragging should be kept to an absolute minimum, and there should be (almost) no need to double-click/tap.
Unfortunately, with the demise of PenPoint, dedicated pen UIs have become almost non-existent AFAICT---this project sounds interesting. Anyone able to contrast it w/ Berkeley's Graphical User Interface Research Projects (GUIR) which touch upon pen-enabled UI? (i.e., SATIN, SILK &c.).
This project is a case in point---why does an app on a pen-system need a window title bar? You're not going to be moving it, and surely you're not going to be forgetting what you've just launched, right?
Menus at the top which drop-down are also bad on pen-devices---click w/ the pen, and they appear under your hand, you then need to move away, look, find where to click and move back---this is one of the things which I hate about Windows for Pen Computing.
One UI which I think merits development is LCARS (Library Computer Access and Retrieval System), the ``Okudagrams'' from Star Trek: The Next Generation and later. While there are some programs out there modelled on this (including some commercial products licensed by Paramount), all-too-often it devolves to mere ``eye-candy'' (Berkeley Systems' StarDate anyone?).
Here's hoping someone adds a suitable widget set to this project.
William
Re:embedded devices need dedicated widget sets (Score:1)
More complaints about PDA GUIs:
Scroll bars for these things are retarded. Especially when viewing web pages that require horizontal scrolling. It is no fun at all to have to use a pen to point at a teeny scroll bar at the bottom and drag it back and forth to read a couple of sentences, and then move the pen to a teeny scroll bar on the right to have to move to the next sentence. PDA web browsers/document viewers should take a hint from GhostView and allow a pen click & drag anywhere on the screen drag
embedded gooeys (Score:2)
Re:embedded devices need dedicated widget sets (Score:1)
At one point in time there was an active effort to codify / describe the UI, but I think that's stalled. Need to re-visit that.
Some possible advantages:
- ``chording'' (where one presses multiple buttons to achieve an effect---probably requires direct digitizer support though, so not achieva
Palm ARM Version? (Score:2)
Who ported WindowsCE? (Score:2)
Re:Who ported WindowsCE? (Score:2)
Not the solution for all needs. (Score:5, Informative)
Secondly, like all embedded framebuffer attempts, this one yet again reinvents the wheel, defining a windowing system, event-handling, input-handling and so forth. And of course only programs using that exact API can run on this environment. This is a significant restriction that I find rather suffocating when I am using OPIE on my Zaurus.
For many devices, including handhelds, the best solution is still venerable X11. Keith Packard's KDrive server is completely self-contained (font support, XRender support) and weighs in at just 700 kb. Run a lightweight environment such as matchbox on top of that (wonderful window manager designed for handhelds) with a nice light widget set, and you have all the same features as this MiniGUI without the restrictions it imposes. See what the gpe [handhelds.org] people have done with this. It's impressive. In such an X11-based environment, MiniGUI could be viable because it wouldn't exclude any other toolkits or APIs from being used.
The final problem I see with MiniGUI is that code appears more complicated and MS-ish than QT or GTK. Clearly the developers come from a win32 background, as MiniGUI code is full of win32-isms, which I find harder to program and less elegant than the Signal/Slot mechanisms of QT and GTK.
Clearly, with or without X11 you need to change the widget look and behavior from that on a desktop. The idea of "windows" becomes less important as full-screen is the only desirable mode. Modifying the input mechanism is also important. Things that we take for granted on desktops such as right-clicking don't translate well to a handheld. QT/E and gpe solve this by having the user hold his stylus on the widget for a couple of seconds to emulate the right-mouse-button-click.
There is no perfect system, and MiniGUI appears to be yet another attempt and I'm sure has a valid niche to fill. I wish them well.
pointless (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:pointless (Score:2)
Perhaps if someone would release a similar slimmed-down version for desktops, then people would quit bitching about it. Seriously, for a single home-use desktop, how much of the extra stuff is absolutely necessary?
Re:pointless (Score:2)
Most of it. That "extra stuff" isn't functionality, it's all the infrastructure for making X11 run fast on modern desktop machines with large screens and lots of windows.
Perhaps if someone would release a similar slimmed-down version for desktops, then people would quit bitching about it.
The functionality is in X11 because people want it in their desktops. And why slim it down when X11 is already slimmer an
screenshots! (Score:2, Interesting)
screenshots here [members.shaw.ca]
Whats wrong with QT/E? (Score:1)
No thanks, I'll stick with my beloved QT