"A few months ago, the GNOME Mobile Platform was announced to the public. One of the main forces behind the launch of this initiative was Nokia, which uses a lot of GNOME-components in its Linux-based Internet Tablets Nokia 770 and N800. During this years GUADEC Andreas Proschofsky had the chance to sit down with Carlos Guerreiro, Nokias Manager for Open Source Software, to talk - amidst other things - about the not so different needs of personal computers and mobile devices, about the necessity for GTK+ 3.0 and the impact of the iPhone launch."
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-07-06
If even Adobe, VMWare and Nero chose GTK+, not Qt for their Linux software, what can be said about smaller shops?
Well, one is entitled to ask if any of the software from those companies matters. They all just seemed to wheel in developers to knock together Linux versions of their software, and those people they employed had a preference for GTK.
In the case of Adobe, we all have good PDF readers that come with our desktop environments. Who needs Acrobat? There are a ton of things I can do with K3B that I can't with Nero, and K3B is free and is shipped with my system. Both Adobe and Nero have missed the boat there.
In the case of VMware, given that their software runs on multiple platforms I think they're silly not to use a cross-platform toolkit so they don't have to worry about such issues. Maintaining a GTK codebase for Linux and a Windows codebase for Windows for their console user interface just strikes me as daft. With Qt they could have exactly the same codebase between platforms, and run it on a Mac as well.
The latter doesn't seem to be a choice that has been made out of common sense.
Member since:2005-10-18
Well, one is entitled to ask if any of the software from those companies matters.
That is indeed an interesting question, but the answer to it happens to somehow prove my point. It all boils down to the definition of "matters", and in the closed source world (from the developer POV, since we talk about choosing toolkits) this means simply "generates revenue." For the apps that generate less revenue using Qt with its rather steep per-developer fees might not be economically justified - you won't get the ROI.
In the case of VMware, given that their software runs on multiple platforms I think they're silly not to use a cross-platform toolkit so they don't have to worry about such issues.
Are you sure they are just silly? Do you have access to their data? Can you prove that maintaining two versions is indeed more expensive than paying for Qt? It's not at all clear and depends on many factors.
Besides, GTK+ is a cross-platform toolkit. Most of my gripes with GTK+ on Windows are removed by now (especially if one uses native common dialogs like for example Abiword). There are some smaller quirks (see pane resizing in Sylpheed on Windows), but AFAICS they group around some very specific use cases.
Member since:2005-09-21
On the other hand, Opera, Google (Earth), Skype, and VirtualBox chose Qt.. I don't think there is overwhelming evidence that commercial developers prefer one or the other.
Member since:2006-08-29
Actually Google Earth for Linux uses it's own bundled version of Wine. So no 'native' toolkit at all.
Opera use QT but *seem* to have written their own GU abstraction toolkit (or atleast skinning engine) for in webpage form elements since these, as is the rest of Opera, are skinnable. Opera's dialog's, when skinned, do not match the main menu style (which looks 'native' QT).
All in all, the situation regarding GUI toolkits on Free Desktop's is a community dividing one. People (in my experience) don't tend to use QT apps under Gnome or GTK+ apps under KDE. It just feels wrong somehow, and both toolkits and their respective DE's have their own philosophies.
Btw, those wanting homogenous GTK+ and QT themes might want to look at "QtCurve".
Member since:2005-07-06
Member since:
2005-10-18
A paid-for toolkit is OK. It's just that the price might be too high for many shops. If even Adobe, VMWare and Nero chose GTK+, not Qt for their Linux software, what can be said about smaller shops?
Also, it's perfectly OK, both morally and legally, to build closed source software without paying license fees. For that you have BSD- and LGPL-licensed libraries and toolkits.