Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 16th Feb 2009 14:07 UTC
Editorial Late last week we ran a story on how the Google Chrome team had decided to use Gtk+ as the graphical toolkit for the Linux version of the Chrome web browser. It was a story that caused some serious debate on a variety of aspects, but in this short editorial, I want to focus on one aspect that came forward: the longing for consistency. Several people in the thread stated they were happy with Google's choice for purely selfish reasons: they use only Gtk+ applications on their GNOME desktops. Several people chimed in to say that Qt integrates nicely in a Gtk+ environment. While that may be true from a graphical point of view, that really isn't my problem with mixing toolkits. The issue goes a lot deeper than that.
Thread beginning with comment 349542
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[9]: We're Stuck With It
by Lousewort on Tue 17th Feb 2009 19:12 UTC in reply to "RE[8]: We're Stuck With It"
Lousewort
Member since:
2006-09-12

"I have neglected even looking at QT as an option due to my previous belief that there was a per-seat license cost implication."

Don't beat yourself up. For commercial development, up to just a couple months ago, there was a per seat charge for QT. QT has only very recently been released as LGPL. The fee was pretty steep as well, amounting to about $1500 per seat per platform. They offer 3 platforms, Windows, OS X, and Unix.



Many thanks. I understand now that this is a per-developer seat, which is sort of in the same price range as other dev toolsets. Steep, but probably reasonable. My previous understanding (prior correction) was that it was more like a royalty per customer.

Even so though, convincing a board of directors that we need to rig 20 developers at $1500 pers seat per platform

(or 1500*3 platforms*20 = $90 000),

they would go: "Are you nuts? how do you plan to recover those costs by not charging for your software? do you really need to target Max & Linux? why not just target WIN32 like you have for the past 15 years?"

I am very glad to hear QT has gone LGPL.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[10]: We're Stuck With It
by sbergman27 on Tue 17th Feb 2009 19:17 in reply to "RE[9]: We're Stuck With It"
sbergman27 Member since:
2005-07-24

I am very glad to hear QT has gone LGPL.

I have not followed this closely, but I don't believe that QT 4.5 Final has been released. I think the first RC was released Feb 6 or so. So I do not think that it is LGPL yet.

Reply Parent Score: 3