Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 14th Feb 2009 12:55 UTC
Google A major complaint about Google's Chrome web browser has been that so far, it is still not available on anything other than Windows. Google promised to deliver Chrome to Mac OS X and Linux as well, but as it turns out, this is a little harder than they anticipated, Ben Goodger, Google's Chrome interface lead, has explained in an email. It has also been revealed what toolkit the Linux version of Chrome will use: Gtk+.
Thread beginning with comment 348918
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: QT does not get it right
by acobar on Sat 14th Feb 2009 16:28 UTC in reply to "QT does not get it right"
acobar
Member since:
2005-11-15

Well, maybe on Mac you have this "consistent look" people like to praise here, but it is not like things are on Windows *. Office 2003, Office 2007, Windows Media Player (9, 10 , 11), Firefox, Chrome and lots and lots of other softwares abound on Windows and are hated or beloved without showing this "holly grail" thing.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: QT does not get it right
by MacMan on Sat 14th Feb 2009 17:08 in reply to "RE: QT does not get it right"
MacMan Member since:
2006-11-19

Its not just that QT is 'odd' on a Mac, its that nothing quite works right. Edit boxes are not drawn correctly, text is always misaligned, pretty much everything else is misaligned as well.

Not to mention how coding for QT is just plain UGLY compared to objective-c, vala, c#, or pretty much anything else I can think of, well maybe, MFC is almost as bad as QT.

Reply Parent Score: 2

vivainio Member since:
2008-12-26


Not to mention how coding for QT is just plain UGLY compared to objective-c, vala, c#, or pretty much anything else I can think of, well maybe, MFC is almost as bad as QT.

Qt code actually flows really well - I wouldn't call it ugly at all. It's a telling fact that PyQt ui code is not all too different C++ Qt ui code (to the point where PyQt documentation is pretty much a copy of the Qt documentation). Managing that in "writing to the metal" language like C++ is no mean feat.

The alternatives you present are proprietary/specialized languages for a small target group (ok, C#'s target group is large but still limited mostly to one segment of computing, Windows), while C++ is a standardized "universal" language that delivers pretty much the best performance on all platforms.

Regarding the choice of Gtk for chrome - the toolkit choice doesn't really play a big part here, it will use Chrome's custom stuff for almost everything. It's mostly about file selection dialog & the likes. I believe this is the same situation with Firefox and OOo.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: QT does not get it right
by ardor on Sun 15th Feb 2009 12:01 in reply to "RE[2]: QT does not get it right"
ardor Member since:
2009-02-15

Of all the toolkits I've used so far, Qt is the only one that was pleasant to code for. I cannot understand your comment. Perhaps you used Qt with some other different toolkit design design guidlines in mind?

Reply Parent Score: 1