Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 27th Oct 2009 11:02 UTC
Qt The Haiku alpha is barely out the door, and we already have another important news item about the open source reimplementation of the BeOS. About 18 months ago, Evgeny Abdraimov started porting the Qt4 graphical toolkit to Haiku, and now, we ave some seriously epic screenshots showing a multitude of Qt4 applications running in Haiku, as well as a developer preview release.
Thread beginning with comment 391361
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: qt, not native
by bornagainenguin on Tue 27th Oct 2009 13:43 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: qt, not native"
bornagainenguin
Member since:
2005-08-07

moondevil asked...

Why?

As a developer I would not care about the BeOS frameworks if my application is QT based.

If all functionality that my application requires is provided by the framework is already there, why should I look elsewhere?


Personally (and I hope to no offense) I hope you don't care about Haiku if you are a QT based developer. I really don't think this is about you if you are already a happy KDE developer, this is about something else altogether. This is about the applications.

As much as I love my Ubuntu desktop I am aware that (thanks to the tireless efforts of Linus Torvalds to cut out developers like Con Kolivas) Linux is not intended to be a desktop operating system, it is intended for servers. Haiku on the other hand has always been intended as a desktop operating system from the start and has performance to match. What the porting over of QT does for us is provide Haiku with the necessary applications any desktop operating system needs to survive.

Thanks to the efforts of FOSS desktop application developers there will be no chicken and the egg issues on other free operating systems like there were in the past for Linux.

moondevil asked...
If you want to take advantage of what makes a certain platform unique, your application will be tied to that system. If on the other hand you want to make your application work everywhere, then you have the problem that your framework can only provide common features.


Which is why I consider these applications to be a stopgap measure. They will eventually be replaced by better applications written for the Haiku platform itself and as such they will perform better and work better than the ports do. The whole pervasive multithreading was always more than just being buzzword-compliant you know...

How can 'simple' ports of QT applications possibly stand up to Haiku applications written to be able to take full advantage of the possibilities Haiku offers?

--bornagainpenguin

Edited 2009-10-27 13:48 UTC

Reply Parent Bookmark Score: 5

RE[4]: qt, not native
by sbergman27 on Tue 27th Oct 2009 14:06 in reply to "RE[3]: qt, not native"
sbergman27 Member since:
2005-07-24

As much as I love my Ubuntu desktop I am aware that (thanks to the tireless efforts of Linus Torvalds to cut out developers like Con Kolivas) Linux is not intended to be a desktop operating system,

Let's refrain from spreading disinformation. Con did some interesting and important work in bringing completely fair scheduling to Linux. But his scheduler had problems... which is OK. But his attitude was that the people reporting the problems were corner cases and didn't matter... which is not. Linus told Con so in no uncertain terms. Con threw a hissy fit.

Ingo Molnar decided to do more than just talk and wring his hands regarding the issue. He wrote a new completely fair scheduler, which also had its problems at first. But Ingo took on a more responsible and "work with" attitude toward the bugs and his users. Linus selected Ingo's scheduler because of that, and said so. Petulant Con took his ball and went home, but not without posting one last drama piece on the way out.

Of course, recently he has made noises suggesting a return. And early indications suggest that he intends to bring the drama with him.

Edited 2009-10-27 14:17 UTC

Reply Parent Bookmark Score: 5

RE[5]: qt, not native
by bornagainenguin on Tue 27th Oct 2009 14:42 in reply to "RE[4]: qt, not native"
bornagainenguin Member since:
2005-08-07

sbergman27 posted...

Let's refrain from spreading disinformation. Con did some interesting and important work in bringing completely fair scheduling to Linux. But his scheduler had problems... which is OK. But his attitude was that the people reporting the problems were corner cases and didn't matter... which is not. Linus told Con so in no uncertain terms. Con threw a hissy fit.


That's not what it looked like to me when I went back and read through the kernel mailing list.

As for Ingo Molnar, as far as I can tell the only reason he was selected was because he was already in the clique. The scheduler he provided did not really help all that much in making Linux work as well on desktops as it does on the big iron. If I were spreading misinformation I'd claim that Molnar "stole" his scheduler by aping Con's work. I did not and do not claim this--not even Con says this. There is no misinformation here.

I just understand that Linus has made it quite clear oiver the years where his focus is--and that is not the desktop.

Which is fine, really, because it means that all projects like Haiku have to do is provide a better desktop oriented operating system and the users will follow them. If the user drain gets large enough we might even see some changes in how responsive the Linux desktop becomes... Ah the joys of competition!

Meanwhile, as I said we have the large pool of FOSS applications from which Haiku can draw and obtain those necessary basic applications until such a time they can be either forked and rewritten as native or native applications are written capable of taking full advantage of the Haiku framework.

No matter what happens the user wins!

Just understand that people will go with what works best on their hardware, so if Linus is more happy fiddling with 4096 CPUs instead of making basic stuff like flash work, well people who want the flash to work will go elsewhere.

--bornagainpenguin

Reply Parent Bookmark Score: 2

RE[4]: qt, not native
by moondevil on Tue 27th Oct 2009 15:22 in reply to "RE[3]: qt, not native"
moondevil Member since:
2005-07-08

I am all for native Haiku applications.

Actually I am more interested to try out Haiku than Linux nowadays.

I had some contact with BeOS back in the day, and still have the old R5 CDs somewhere.

My comment was more to emphasis that contrary to what many people think, multiplatform toolkits also bring problems.

For example, lets say you are targeting MacOS X, then maybe your usage of some CoreXXX APIs is what will set your application from the rest. Or if you are targeting Windows, maybe there are also some Win32 API calls that will make your application shine, when compared with the available applications.

This is of course an experience that cannot be made multiplatform.

Sometimes you can only target a specific platform.

Reply Parent Bookmark Score: 1

RE[5]: qt, not native
by leos on Tue 27th Oct 2009 18:01 in reply to "RE[4]: qt, not native"
leos Member since:
2005-09-21

For example, lets say you are targeting MacOS X, then maybe your usage of some CoreXXX APIs is what will set your application from the rest. Or if you are targeting Windows, maybe there are also some Win32 API calls that will make your application shine, when compared with the available applications.

This is of course an experience that cannot be made multiplatform.

Sometimes you can only target a specific platform.


I just have to correct this, because for some reason this is a mistake I see so often from people when talking about cross-platform toolkits (most recently Google made this mistake).

Just because you use Qt doesn't mean you can't put in platform specific stuff. I have apps that run on Windows, Mac, and Linux using Qt. 98% of the code is cross platform using Qt. On Windows there is platform-specific code to do things like speech synthesis and some specific Windows behaviour that's not in Qt. On Mac I have mac-specific code to integrate into system services like spell checking.

Qt doesn't stop you from adding platform specific code to integrate into the environment. If a cross-platform toolkit doesn't provide 100% of people's needs, they seem to be inclined to throw the baby out with the bathwater and just start from scratch. We'll I'd much rather share 98% of my code between platforms than rewrite the UI on every single one.

Reply Parent Bookmark Score: 4