Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 23rd Sep 2007 13:43 UTC
Permalink for comment 274043
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 22:23 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:30 UTC, submitted by JRepin
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 22:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 15:53 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 22:43 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 21:50 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:15 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:11 UTC, submitted by Drumhellar
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2006-04-20
Again, the same old argument to defend bad design by making comparisons to another piece of bad design as if that justifies it. The difference of course is that GTK+ and QT are both approaching the same task as competing modern toolkits, whereas Microsoft is gradually phasing out an old toolkit in favour of a new one. The situation for Windows is nevertheless very messy, and is a classic example of failing to break with old, worn out methods for the sake of backwards compatibility. Windows needs to ditch Win32 and move to a unified 64 bit API.
No, what it does is force developers to make a choice they should not have to make. It should be a case of "this is the API for writing Linux applications, deal with it", not "pick your favourite API and screw the end user into an inconsistent UI experience". QT applications behave inconsistently on GTK desktops much of the time (and vice versa). You need to install extra libraries if you want to run QT apps on a Gnome desktop (or v.v), and bugs that affect a GTK app only when running on KDE are less likely to be fixed.
I do treat all OS platforms in the same manner. I can give you an endless list of gripes I have with Windows or OSX or BSD etc., but the discussion at hand was the issue with GTK/QT interoperability on Linux. You assumed (incorrectly) that I was criticising what I perceive as a flaw in the design of one operating system as though other OSes were beyond reproach, which is not the case. I am quite happy to take any OS you care to mention (that I have used) to task, without fear or favour.