OSNews

We're not talking about interpreted programs, but compiled ones, with different resultant code depending on the target platform.

"Qt uses the native graphics APIs of each platform it supports"
http://qt.nokia.com/products

For example, I've used Qt Creator in Linux and Windows and the controls were the ones from each operating system.

For someone who's "used Qt Creator", you're quite frankly wrong. Qt uses the themeing APIs of the respective platforms to get colors and such correct, but it does not use the native platform widgets.

Seriously, software developers know the benefits of using native controls but do not have unlimited time and resources. Learning a new language and system takes time that many do not have.



That's ridiculous. Most mobile applications are games which don't need to look native. IOS applications of all types don't have a consistent look.

Then find another field. This isn't about commoditizing software development, this isn't a race to the bottom. You are supposed to pay attention to detail, you're supposed to design a maintainable, scalable, app. This isn't something you should just now be doing, this should be programming practices you're following - anyway - .

Writing anything even remotely complex and if your shop has any kind of credebility, you 'll already be using a separation of concerns.

This whole thing stinks, and all it will do is lower the quality of applications to where they're all carbon copies of each other on every platform. At some point, being so much about money, actually decreases your bottom line.

I've found as a trend in these comments, that it's very easy for a few non programmers to sit there and say what programmers should do, or ought to be doing, but what they're expected to do and told to do at work is a completely different thing all together. I know at least at my job, sacrificing code quality for turn around time is generally frowned upon. Both personally and as a policy.

If you get to the point in the commoditization of the software development industry, where the need to "learn" is used as a negative, then we've already reached a very sad state.

Besides, it's Qt, it's C++, you're already learning and maneuvering through extremely obtuse and unwieldly programming concepts.

Don't look at good practicies as the enemies, look at a cumbersome and outdated language as the problem.