Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 8th Feb 2010 13:23 UTC, submitted by kragil
You may remember that back in November last year, I wrote about the lack of a decent Paint.NET-like application for Linux (or, more specifically, for Gtk+ distributions, since Qt has Krita). As it turns out, this compelled Novell employee Jonathan Pobst to code a Paint.NET clone in Gtk+ using Cairo. Version 0.1 is here, and it's remarkably advanced for something so young.
Thread beginning with comment 408470
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2007-02-17
"Why would anyone use C# for Qt, when there are perfectly good Qt bindings for Python, C, C++, Ruby and Java? If you have Qt libraries installed, why would you bother also with Mono? It isn't as though KDE needs anything like a Paint.NET clone, when it already has the more functional and far more mature Krita program. KDE doesn't need Banshee ... it has Amarok. KDE doesn't need FSpot ... it has digikam. KDE deosn't need a Paint.NET clone ... it has Krita. KDE deosn't need GNOME Do ... it has krunner. In each case above, with the possible exception of the last, the native KDE application is better and more functional than the GNOME/Mono try-hard equivalent. Hence, KDE doesn't need C# and Mono at all, there is no point.
C# is a quite nice language to work with. Like Java, it supports what most seem to use in C++ and gets rid of allot of the convolutedness, and Java isn't listed as having a mature KDE binding (neither is C). What's the point of the whole Banshee/Amarok, Do/Krunner, etc comparison. You wouldn't be using those apps anyways because they are clearly meant for Gnome. I mean, by that logic why support Python bindings for KDE since Exaile isn't as good as Amarok, Deluge isn't as good as Ktorrent, Emesene is comparable to Kmess, etc. " The whole reason why GNOME users say they shun KDE applications is because of the need to install Qt libraries.
However, GNOME users would have to install Qt libraries these days in order to run some desirable desktop applications such as VLC or SMPlayer, and there are still no GTK+ applications (or GTK# applications) as good as Amarok or K3b.
Anyway ... if the point is that if GNOME users are loath to install Qt libraries and so they miss out on K3b, Amarok, VLC and (relevant to this topic) Krita, then clearly it is equally as reasonable for KDE users to be loath to install the completely un-necessary Mono libraries.
Member since:
2009-04-10
If you have Qt libraries installed, why would you bother also with Mono?
It isn't as though KDE needs anything like a Paint.NET clone, when it already has the more functional and far more mature Krita program.
KDE doesn't need Banshee ... it has Amarok.
KDE doesn't need FSpot ... it has digikam.
KDE deosn't need a Paint.NET clone ... it has Krita.
KDE deosn't need GNOME Do ... it has krunner.
In each case above, with the possible exception of the last, the native KDE application is better and more functional than the GNOME/Mono try-hard equivalent.
Hence, KDE doesn't need C# and Mono at all, there is no point.
C# is a quite nice language to work with. Like Java, it supports what most seem to use in C++ and gets rid of allot of the convolutedness, and Java isn't listed as having a mature KDE binding (neither is C).
What's the point of the whole Banshee/Amarok, Do/Krunner, etc comparison. You wouldn't be using those apps anyways because they are clearly meant for Gnome. I mean, by that logic why support Python bindings for KDE since Exaile isn't as good as Amarok, Deluge isn't as good as Ktorrent, Emesene is comparable to Kmess, etc.