Re: A sad state of affairs

faq
flatforty
contribute
subscribe
configure
search
rdf

main
parent
thread

Re: A sad state of affairs
by Henrik Pauli on Saturday 07/Jul/2007, @07:15

Skype for Linux is Qt, and so is Google Earth. And, apparently, Adobe and Autodesk use it too.

wx is probably the best choice for those coming from Windows with an already done piece of software they want to port to other systems, as wx is the "most native" there. Gtk looks very out of place on Windows, so unless someone comes from a non-KDE linux background, I doubt they would decide on it. Motif? Don't be ridiculous, you must be talking about software made a decade ago.

But I think this all has nothing to do with "KDE dying". We have many people working on KDE &| Qt software... most of those don't meddle with the affairs of the KDE core though, but hey. In my case that's simply because I prefer not to mess around with C++ when possible (and when much more modern languages are available).

Related Links

·   Articles on KDE Official News
·   Also by Henrik Pauli
·   Contact author

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whomever posted them.
( Reply )

Re: A sad state of affairs
by Leo S on Saturday 07/Jul/2007, @09:24

>> wx is probably the best choice for those coming from Windows with an already
>> done piece of software they want to port to other systems, as wx is
>> the "most native" there.</blockquote>

Interstingly enough, a lot of companies like to make a separate interface for each platform. Like Skype uses Qt on Linux, but the Windows interface is made in Delphi, and the Mac interface with Cocoa. Instead of saving a bunch of work by making one Qt interface, they reinvented the wheel 3 times.

Similarly with Opera, they only use Qt on Linux (although they have their own UI toolkit that does most of the drawing on the major platforms (what is it about Norwegians and making toolkits? :)).

[ Reply To This | View ]

Re: A sad state of affairs
by Kevin Krammer on Monday 09/Jul/2007, @03:39

> Interstingly enough, a lot of companies like to make a separate interface for each platform

This is usually the result of considering too late to also support other platforms.

When a company wants to create a multiplatform product by design, they have a real incentive to share as much code as possible (or the other way around to have as few pieces of platform specific code as possible).

But often companies decide at a latter point to actually support other platforms, which mean they already have considerably large amounts of platform specific code.

In the long run the first model is obviously superior, since the company at most needs one or two experts per platform and can have the majority of development work spread across all their developers.

Companies which are aware of this sometimes choose multiplatform technology like Qt even if they are now just aiming at a single platform product, just in case there is enough demand on different platforms later on.

[ Reply To This | View ]

The Fine Print: The previous comments are owned by whomever posted them.
( Reply )


		"Nobody will ever write that kind of HTML code!" -- The KHTML Team
KDE®, "K Desktop Environment", "KDE Dot News", "got the dot?" and the KDE Logo® are trademarks or registered trademarks of KDE e.V. in the European Union, the United States and other countries. All other trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the poster. The rest: Copyright © 2000-2008 KDE e.V. for The KDE Project. For further information or comments on this site, please contact the Webmaster.