Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 2nd Jan 2013 19:05 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 546906
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.
If they wanted familiarity, they would've chosen C#
Bad idea. The woes of Google with Dalvik and Java should teach anyone to avoid encumbered development technologies, especially in the crazy mobile sphere. If Java has a shadow of Oracle behind it, C# has a shadow of Microsoft attached. While Sun encouraged Google to use Java, Oracle isn't Sun. So even if Microsoft wouldn't mind now, you never know where their rights over C# will end up tomorrow, or even if they'll just change their mind. It just doesn't worth the risk.
Edited 2013-01-02 23:51 UTC
Qt is nice, but Qt and especially QML are very immature pieces of technology yet.
Actually all the QML-like technologies (JavaFX and XAML as far as I remember) are very immature pieces of technology yet, but they are already in production.
But I completely disagree with the Qt part. Qt is one of the best and most mature UI frameworks available right now (IMHO next to Java Swing). Qt is by far the best C++ UI framework (more powerful, easier to learn and portable than, say, MFC, WTL, wxWidgets or the old VCL) and the best portable UI framework.
The Qt portfolio is very nice, AFAIK: Google Earth, Perforce Client, Adobe Elements, the KDE desktop, KOffice, Swipe Nokia N9 UI use it with success.





Member since:
2010-06-08
I think it's a great win allowing developers to reuse at least *some* of the skills they may have picked up already.
And Qt is good with that, since Qt is familiar to many who already used it on mobile and desktop. So no effort is wasted.