Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 18th Jan 2011 22:18 UTC, submitted by alinandrei
Permalink for comment 458924
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 05/23/13 23:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:04 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:01 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 17:52 UTC
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
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2005-07-06
They've eventually been dragged kicking and screaming into doing this after years of the "Oh, we won't ship Qt or anything that even smells like it's been near KDE" basically for their own petty NIH reasons - something they were more than happy to accuse others of. Those of us who identified Qt as the right basis years ago are simply rolling our eyes.
To be honest, all this sounds like it's coming from a company that's now thinking it has to do something.
All they need now is a desktop environment that works well with Qt and isn't a tack on, and some actual Qt applications........... From Mark's blog postting that sounds like it's going to be as much of a challenge as getting them to even acknowledge Qt was there. It's only taken seven years!
Edited 2011-01-18 23:00 UTC