Linked by Eugenia Loli on Fri 7th Dec 2007 06:25 UTC, submitted by poundsmack
Qt Jambi ships as a single Java library, or JAR (Java Archive) file, plus a handful of tools, including an interface layout and design tool, and an Eclipse plug-in. Trolltech uses its vaunted Qt C++ library as the GUI engine and puts Java wrappers around it. This approach uses the JNI (Java Native Interface) to call the necessary functions from Java. More here.
Thread beginning with comment 289236
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Unconvinced
by pgquiles on Fri 7th Dec 2007 11:08 UTC in reply to "Unconvinced"
pgquiles
Member since:
2006-07-16

Actually, Qt is cheap and cheaper.

It is cheap because it boosts your development process. You are 3 or 4 times more productive using Qt than not using it.

And it is cheaper because those 1480 EUR/platform/developer are to buy, renewal is about 1/3 of that.

Did I say at my company we develop software using Qt and we do have commercial licenses?

Edited 2007-12-07 11:09

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Unconvinced
by evangs on Fri 7th Dec 2007 11:18 in reply to "RE: Unconvinced"
evangs Member since:
2005-07-07

But you are using C++, right? The question is whether the productivity boosts that come with Qt-Jambi transfer to Java which already has GUI toolkits that appear to be similar.

I have no doubt that Qt is better than any C++ GUI toolkit (like wxWidgets, MFC or some other obscure toolkit). As I've said, just looking at the line count from the examples that come with Qt-Jambi, what jumps out at me is how similar the code looks to Swing.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[3]: Unconvinced
by segedunum on Fri 7th Dec 2007 20:07 in reply to "RE[2]: Unconvinced"
segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

But you are using C++, right? The question is whether the productivity boosts that come with Qt-Jambi transfer to Java which already has GUI toolkits that appear to be similar.

The reason why Trolltech thinks there will be a market for Jambi, particularly from the GUI point of view because Qt is a lot more than GUI libraries, is because Swing and SWT are crap - quite frankly.

Sun still haven't sorted out Swing over the last ten years, and the code and development required for it is like swallowing a large breeze block as well as not fitting into the desktop environment right - even with Gnome!

SWT took the direction of reimplementing itself natively on every platform - Win32, GTK and Mac. The problem with this can be seen very clearly when you view the bugs list in Eclipse and SWT that a handful of IBM developers are going red in the face trying to squash. Bugs that don't appear on Win32 but appear in GTK and Mac, and obscure bugs that mean that cross-platform apps aren't very cross-platform at all. They also don't integrate very well with the desktop either.

Certainly from a GUI point of view, Qt is light-years ahead of just about anything, but particularly in the Java world.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[2]: Unconvinced
by joshv on Fri 7th Dec 2007 13:36 in reply to "RE: Unconvinced"
joshv Member since:
2006-03-18

3 to 4 times as productive eh? Care to substantiate that? At a certain level, object oriented GUI toolkits all work pretty much the same.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[3]: Unconvinced
by sbergman27 on Fri 7th Dec 2007 15:44 in reply to "RE[2]: Unconvinced"
sbergman27 Member since:
2005-07-24

"""
Care to substantiate that?
"""

I can't comment on QT. But I've been using PyGTK, and it made my teeth 37% whiter in just 2 weeks! ;-)

Reply Parent Score: 1