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 349036
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: Why QT? Why not GTK+?
by leos on Sat 14th Feb 2009 23:31 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Why QT? Why not GTK+?"
leos
Member since:
2005-09-21

Of course, if you're just an amateur developer sitting in your bedroom, it IS expensive. But it is not for companies making software.


The funny thing is, I was/am a developer sitting in my bedroom and I bought a Qt license. Yes it was fairly expensive, but it was an investment, and made my small business possible. I can say with 100% conviction based on my experience that without Qt I wouldn't have been successful with my software. Qt allowed me to produce something valuable with extremely limited resources (just me in my spare time, which isn't much). I tried other toolkits previously and they didn't allow that. It's that simple.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[5]: Why QT? Why not GTK+?
by abraxas on Sun 15th Feb 2009 00:59 in reply to "RE[4]: Why QT? Why not GTK+?"
abraxas Member since:
2005-07-07

The funny thing is, I was/am a developer sitting in my bedroom and I bought a Qt license. Yes it was fairly expensive, but it was an investment, and made my small business possible. I can say with 100% conviction based on my experience that without Qt I wouldn't have been successful with my software. Qt allowed me to produce something valuable with extremely limited resources (just me in my spare time, which isn't much). I tried other toolkits previously and they didn't allow that. It's that simple.


Yeah it's that simple if you have thousands of dollars to throw around on licesning costs but most small business owners don't. A QT license is so expensive that forgoing that expense would leave you enough money alone to start a small business and then some.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[6]: Why QT? Why not GTK+?
by leos on Sun 15th Feb 2009 04:28 in reply to "RE[5]: Why QT? Why not GTK+?"
leos Member since:
2005-09-21

Yeah it's that simple if you have thousands of dollars to throw around on licesning costs but most small business owners don't. A QT license is so expensive that forgoing that expense would leave you enough money alone to start a small business and then some.


That's hilarious. When I bought Qt I had a grand total of ~$4000 to my name (having just finished my undergraduate degree). I made the investment for Qt (about $1100 US with the small business discount) because I knew it was my only chance to grow my business. If I had used wxWidgets or GTK I wouldn't have a product to sell, because I couldn't be as productive (believe me I tried).

So do you have a real experience with using some toolkit to start a real business? If not, I don't see what basis you're arguing from.

Reply Parent Score: 5