There is a controversy in the Linux world. It doesn't have to do with Microsoft, or anything overtly technical. It may seem, to the outsider, the open source equivalent of the question, "Boxers or briefs?" But it's much more serious than that. More here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-07-15
>The idea that Qt is unattractive to corporations is suspect.
You have to distinguish. You list software companys who decide to use Qt. That's not the "problem". Sure, every company is free to choose their toolkits and Qt isn't that expansive if you compare it to the costs of large software projects.
The "problem" arises for companys which offers an operating system like RedHat, Sun, Novel,...
If they would choose KDE they would "force" their customers to become customers of a second company if they want to write non-free software in/for the supported and recommand environment of the OS.
By contrast if they choose GNOME they can deliver their customers everything they need to do whatever they want. They than can of course still decide to use Qt.
Edited 2007-12-26 23:45
Member since:2005-07-07
Member since:2005-07-06
If they would choose KDE they would "force" their customers to become customers of a second company if they want to write non-free software in/for the supported and recommand environment of the OS.
Well, you have two options. Either you put all your time and resources (and that's not insignificant) into developing something that is good enough for developers out there to want to use, or you basically enter into a partnership with a project and a company to offer a path for non-free software development. Software companies do these agreements all the time, and they won't bat an eyelid.
Again, this is reasoning that means nothing to a developer in an ISV out there, or to an end user. As a distributor, you want developers writing software for your platform to increase your user and customer base. All the distributors out there are currently doing an exceptionally poor job at that, because the first option has failed. The sole concern here is to get developers developing for your platform in order to increase your customer base, not that you are going to be charging them money to do so!
You also have a semi third option, which is to integrate GTK into KDE, and it can be done ;-).
Member since:2005-07-07
Right.
I'd like to ask you to explain why an ISV can choose to use Qt to develop an application for a GNOME desktop, but cannot choose, e.g. Gtk+, for developing an application for a KDE desktop.
Sound like a contradiction to me.
Member since:
2006-01-28
The idea that Qt is unattractive to corporations is suspect. From Google to Skype to Adobe to NASA, there are tons of people who are building very serious software on Qt.
http://trolltech.com/customers
Why do they pay for something when they could get gtk+ for free? Think about it.