To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
I think the point is that Google wasn't satisfied with the Lowest Common Denominator that the available toolkits offer.
Fact is, outside of Firefox & Adobe, there is no major piece of software that uses a cross-platform toolkit across Mac & Windows. And both these companies UIs have often been criticized for not behaving / appearing correct on the Mac (and I have heard similar complaints about the Windows versions as well).
And it doesn't have to be as complicated as you make it sound. You will have one team working on the rendering engine, which will be cross-platform, and one team each working on the wrapper for each platform. Considering that there are small companies like Omni & Shiira that are able to develop their own browser for a Mac, I'm sure Google has enough guys to work on the Mac platform, Linux platform, and Windows platform.




Member since:
2005-07-06
Hmmmmm. So I want to be a developer writing a cross-platform application, wondering why my Windows users have the right layout in a dialogue box and my GTK and Mac users don't and wondering when that open SWT bug for the problem will get fixed on specific platforms?
It's not my idea of developer nirvana, I can tell you.
No they're not.
The problem is that they're not writing a native GUI. They are writing one that they want to work cross-platform in the same way with the same functionality.
If it's the same application, and they want the same set of core functionality, then yes. That's the whole idea behind a lowest common denominator.
I'm afraid once you have divergence like that then that's the road to hell. Users complain that one port is behind another, you find there are some things you can do on one platform and not on another and the whole thing drops to pieces. You then prioritise the platforms that are most important to you.
I don't think you have any idea how difficult that is to do, because how do you work out what code to share and what to make native? In the case of SWT, wxWidgets and Firefox you simply wait for the bugs to flow in and spend forever trying to fix them or hope that no one ever writes anything too complex.
There is no amount of manpower you can throw at an application once it gets past a point of no return to make it better. It's the mythical man month.
It doesn't come at any cost. The toolkit identifies a proven lowest common denominator which you don't have to find and you then add platform specific extensions if you want to. It's very doable with Qt.