faq
flatforty
contribute
subscribe
configure
search
rdf
main
parent
thread
|
Re: KDE in windows is really Kool
by Ian on Monday 20/May/2002, @07:01
|
| Its because of the cygwin emulation layer. Hopefully they'll be able to port the GPL Qt to Windows, and ditch cygwin and a X server at some point. Qt is obviously made to be ported relatively easily, though I'm sure its still a huge job. |
|
|
The Fine Print: The following comments
are owned by whomever posted them.
( Reply )
|
NO! Please don't!
by Bryan Feeney on Monday 20/May/2002, @07:46
|
A GPL Qt would do a lot of damage to Qt - a lot of their licenses are sold for in-house and/or bespoke products. If a GPLed alternative became available, people wouldn't have to by Qt anymore, the license revenue would crumble, and a very good and decent company would fall by the wayside. After all Qt has done for KDE and the free software community (there was never any great financial benefit to releasing the GPL version in the first place) it would be a shame to see the community then take them down.
Remember, without Trolltech, we'd have to update Qt ourselves. That's not an easy job, look how long Gnome 2's been in development - every aspect of it had to be done by the community, from glib up. KDE benefits from havning a professional company of what, 50 people, working 40 hours a week on it's core library.
I know I've said you don't need a reason to start coding, great stuff has come from people just looking to scratch an itch (look at the fish:/ and audiocd:/ io-slaves), but when there's a good reason to leave it alone, you should at least consider it.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
You're totally wrong !
by Julien Olivier on Monday 20/May/2002, @10:39
|
GPL mean you can use it to make GPL apps. So, if anyone does a GPL version of QT for windows, nobody will be able to make proprieatry software with it, just GPL software. It's the same NOW on linux.
In fact, I think it's a shame Trolltech hasn't released a GPL version of QT for windows because I don't imagine anybody to pay in order to make GPL software.. it's a total abheration !
Conclusion: if Trolls are too stupid to understand that people won't pay to make GPL apps, make a windows version of QT for windows ! After all, nobody forced them to make a GPL version for Linux !
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: You're totally wrong !
by Manfrodo on Monday 20/May/2002, @10:48
|
The GPL says you must provide the source IF you distribute binaries.
A lot of Trolltech's clients use QT for in-house development (software used only whithin the company) so they could use the hypothetical GPL'd QT for Windows and not release the source.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Yes, please do
by jmayer on Monday 20/May/2002, @14:33
|
Just a few points:
1) You basically argue that a) the free (GPLed) version for Linux is being subsidized by the Windows users. b) A port of Linux Qt to Win (GPLed) would seriously hurt Trolltechs business. So, if one day (which comes soon hopefully) Linux achieves the goad of "world domination", Trolltech will loos it's source from thos inhouse users of Win Qt anyway. What will they do? If you are right with your assumptions, then they will stop subsidizing Linux and make version 4.0 (or 5.0 or ...) non GPLed. That's the time, when KDE will have to work on Qt anyway.
2) There are some open source applications, that should be available on Windows as well as on Linux that use Qt. These applications cannot be ported in a way that gives Win users their "look and feel", because it's currently XFrees look and feel instead. This is an obstacle many win users will not even attempt to master.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: Yes, please do
by Bryan Feeney on Monday 20/May/2002, @14:55
|
A lot of people don't seem to understand what I was on about. Most of Qt's business goes to programs developed in house, or programs developed by a company for a particular customer. It's not about making boxed products. In most cases the source is available anyway, if it's in-house it benefits everybody to have it, and for bespoke solutions (i.e. programs made to request) it's probably a part of the contract. That's why Qt non-commercial specifically states that you can't program with it in a company. If Qt/Win became GPL, it would make no difference to it's main customers, as they're usually making the source available for free anyway, so they could simply get the free GPL version (Qt might be able to charge, but everyone else could just copy it on, and it's been shown to be extremely difficult to make money from support).
As regards the loss of the Windows market, as Linux becomes more mainstream, more boxed software will be made available under proprietary licenses, and Qt should do well (though if the Free Software Foundations ideal comes to pass, Qt could find itself in trouble). I expect that the majority of Qt's money comes from Windows licenses.
As for making open-souce apps work on Windows, Windows users can get the look and feel by installing a theme. In a rootless X server running the WinXP theme for KDE most KDE apps would blend right in. Remember, a lot of the cheaper Windows applications don't look so homogenous. From the user's perspective a Cygwin system should look fine. Most Windows users who toy with the idea of installing Linux will have no problems with Cygwin.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: Yes, please do
by Philippe Fremy on Tuesday 21/May/2002, @00:39
|
I used to think that too but I changed my mind: no company will buy a product without a license or without a support. Trolltech's CEO Eirik Eng once told me that something like 1/5 of their sales was for Unix inhouse development where the client obviously could have used GPL Qt.
And you'll get more with Trolltech's true Qt on windows, like the promising ActiveQt, than with a port that will always be late, doesn't provide support, is not commercially backed, ...
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
|
The Fine Print: The previous
comments are owned by whomever posted them.
( Reply )
|
|
![[KDE Dot News]](http://www.kde.org/dot/Images/kdedotnews.gif)
