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 391508
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[6]: qt, not native
by moondevil on Tue 27th Oct 2009 22:31 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: qt, not native"
moondevil
Member since:
2005-07-08

I partially agree with you, but only when it makes sense to re-implement the missing 2%.

Just for the sake of the example, lets say your application makes heavy use of OLE/COM in Windows. What would you do in another platforms, implement it from scratch? What for? No other application would understand it.

Or your application makes heavy use of the BeOS filesystem metadata. How are you going to provide similiar funcionality in another platforms?

Sometimes the 2% are just too much effort.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[7]: qt, not native
by leos on Wed 28th Oct 2009 00:53 in reply to "RE[6]: qt, not native"
leos Member since:
2005-09-21

Just for the sake of the example, lets say your application makes heavy use of OLE/COM in Windows. What would you do in another platforms, implement it from scratch? What for? No other application would understand it.


Well what are we using COM for? To allow other applications to control/embed ours? Then we can use Apple events or whatever the equivalent is on OSX, and dbus on Linux.

If we're embedding some OLE app into ours, then that might be a feature we can only offer on Windows. Not the end of the world.

Or your application makes heavy use of the BeOS filesystem metadata. How are you going to provide similiar funcionality in another platforms?


Fake it with an internal database. Whatever, this is completely beside the point. If you didn't use a cross-platform toolkit, you'd be implementing 100% of the functionality on each platform, including that difficult 2%.

Of course there are certain apps that are so dependent on the unique features of a certain platform that they make no sense on others, but that is the extreme minority, and not the subject of this discussion. The whole point here is how to make cross platform apps with minimum effort, while still fitting in on each platform.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[8]: qt, not native
by moondevil on Wed 28th Oct 2009 08:04 in reply to "RE[7]: qt, not native"
moondevil Member since:
2005-07-08


Of course there are certain apps that are so dependent on the unique features of a certain platform that they make no sense on others, but that is the extreme minority, and not the subject of this discussion. The whole point here is how to make cross platform apps with minimum effort, while still fitting in on each platform.


That is exactly the focus of this discussion. I was trying to make a point that for certain applications you really want to make use of unique OS features to make it stand out from the competition. And you want to make your application be the best of the world in that OS, and you couldn't care less about portability to achieve that goal.

Having said that, I am all for portability and I also do find that it is tricky to really explorer OS specific features the way I have been describing.

Reply Parent Score: 1