Re: Awesome!

faq
flatforty
contribute
subscribe
configure
search
rdf

main
parent
thread

Re: Awesome!
by Debian User on Tuesday 15/Apr/2008, @14:36

Hello,

actually no, it doesn't. All this software was Free before. And it remains Free, so what's the point of owning it? Likely not the ability to ship KDE programs. That was Free before.

Yours,
Kay

Related Links

·   Articles on Qt
·   Also by Debian User
·   Contact author

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

Re: Awesome!
by because on Tuesday 15/Apr/2008, @15:15

by owning trolltech, nokia can make qt's developpers work on qt's compatibility with maemo.
QT was free, it IS still free, but now the "free" way is lead by nokia ^^.

[ Reply To This | View ]

Re: Awesome!
by she on Wednesday 16/Apr/2008, @03:41

"QT was free, it IS still free, but now the "free" way is lead by nokia ^^."

Wrong. Qt itself was not free, they always had a commercial license which one had to get when one wanted to use it. (For closed source apps for example)

Back then the dependence on Trolltech was one main reason why Gnome was started (and it is now funny that they wanted to incorporate C#/Mono stuff... probably they get paid)

KDE on the other hand was always free in the sense of "free". They even have a clause that when Qt would ever become non-free as such, KDE could continue (and fork the latest non free part too)

Just because Nokia bought Trolltech doesnt mean that Trolltech changes its agenda.

You cant say this without looking at the FACTS, and so far I believe Nokia has hardly done ANYTHING, they just seemed happy with the acquisition.

[ Reply To This | View ]

Re: Awesome!
by she on Wednesday 16/Apr/2008, @03:41

Sorry, not to "use" it. Using it was easy.
But to "develop apps with QT" one needed a license.

That sentence earlier was misleading.

[ Reply To This | View ]

Re: Awesome!
by Janne on Wednesday 16/Apr/2008, @05:37

"Wrong. Qt itself was not free, they always had a commercial license which one had to get when one wanted to use it."

Wrong. Since it was also licensed under the GPL, I would say that it most certainly was free. Well, excluding the early history with QPL and the like.

[ Reply To This | View ]

Re: Awesome!
by David Johnson on Wednesday 16/Apr/2008, @22:14

The QPL is a free software license. It's just not GPL compatible. But it is still free.

[ Reply To This | View ]

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


		"Spare time? What's that?" -- Dirk Mueller
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.