| |||||||||||||
Day: GNOME OSDay: GNOME OSPosted Aug 8, 2012 9:36 UTC (Wed) by BlueLightning (subscriber, #38978)In reply to: Day: GNOME OS by drag Parent article: Day: GNOME OS Abandoning a existing and functional GTK-based platform for QT is what Nokia tried to do with their Linux distribution and it turned out to be a disaster. Seems to me that had more to do with other things going on at Nokia than whether Qt was an effective toolkit or not. Not that I think GNOME making a leap to Qt would be helpful though - it would just take a very long time, push a bunch of developers away from the project and probably not actually achieve anything anyway. Those calling for it probably don't know what they are asking for.
(Log in to post comments)
Day: GNOME OS Posted Aug 8, 2012 10:18 UTC (Wed) by drag (subscriber, #31333) [Link]
I think the toolkit is largely irrelevant.
I believe this because it appears that things like GTK vs QT is dwarfed by other, far more important, issues related to the Linux platform as a whole. And as such is seems very likely to me that switching toolkits will yield no positive net benefit; yet require a massive amount of work. Work that is better spent addressing other issues and improving existing applications.
Day: GNOME OS Posted Aug 8, 2012 13:45 UTC (Wed) by boudewijn (subscriber, #14185) [Link]
It seems to me that the gnome, too, decided that GTK isn't the right toolkit to create attractive applications for a mobile environment -- hence Clutter. And, of course, Qt isn't just a toolkit, it's way more that than, and Nokia actually, while using Qt, switched toolkits a couple more times, from QWidget-based DUI (might be mistaken about the official name, we used it for Fremantle office on the N900) to libmeegotouch to Meego QML Components.
Having used it, I have to say that libmeegotouch in particular was a travesty of everything that makes Qt so wonderful to work with. Bad documents, ghastly performance, horrible API.
QML is pretty nice, though.
|
|||||||||||||