8 ms·

Hi, if I can ask: "why QtWebkit instead of Qtquick?".

by pabloski 10y ago

jventura 10y ago
+1, I'm wondering if anyone is using Qt Quick for productivity-like desktop applications?
- kidproquo 10y ago
  I built Tasktopus[1] using QtQuick/QML/C++. Highly recommended. I built it on the LGPL version. [1]https://gumroad.com/l/ADWm/tasktopus https://gumroad.com/l/ADWm/tasktopus
  - jventura 10y ago
    Can you comment on your experience? One of my doubts is if I should go the QML / Qt Quick Controls way or the standard Qt Widgets (with PyQt).. For instance, do you think you could implement your app's interface with Qt Widgets by itself? The problem is that I know how far I can go with Qt Widgets, but on the same way, I would like to build something more "modern" and Qt Widgets may be quite limited..
    - kidproquo 10y ago
      I could have implemented it with QtWidgets, however I had found a decent UI widget library that suited my use case very well ([1]). Hence went with QML/QtQuick. My advice - just do it :-). If you want to build a cross-platform desktop app then go for QtQuick/QML/C++. QtCreator has a bunch of example projects. Use those as reference. The Qt docs are solid. Worst case - you will learn that Qt/C++. I am not a big fan of PyQt/PySide, especially when starting fresh with Qt - you would have a hard time figuring out how everything fits and where the issues are. [1] https://github.com/papyros/qml-material https://github.com/papyros/qml-material Paraphrasing a previous comment: I have used web-based task/todo lists (trello, asana, etc.) but I wanted something that could be used offline - my work does not allow storing company sensitive data on 3rd-party servers. Started the project with Electron, using AngularJS and Angular Material. That allowed rapid prototyping with a slick UI and it was fairly easy to find additional Angular-based plugins. My main motivation in selecting Electron and Angular was to learn the two technologies (easier to learn something by doing a project in it). Screenshot: http://imgur.com/NZzEFKX http://imgur.com/NZzEFKX Had a few issues with the Electron app - big download size (50-70MB zipped), no print functionality, app felt non-native, very convoluted process to get it published on the Mac App Store. Decided to change the tech stack to Qt/QML. I have published C++-based games, built on Cocos2dx. Wanted to try Qt to build a serious app. Gumroad has been a slick experience - I have opted for the fully functional trial option and let the user buy a license to use beyond the trial period. Gumroad's onboarding (buy workflow) and tech (license key generation and validation) have been a revelation.
- motti 10y ago
  We (copycopy.com), do. Atm we use a mix of QtQuick/QML and some widget code mainly when wrapping QtWebKit it for some parts of the app furniture that need it. Although the guts of our app requires native code (for clipboard monitoring and websocket message receiving), were considering ditching much of the UI in favour of a webapp.
ownedthx 10y ago
We have a website presence too, and the website UI (as visited in a normal browser) is 95% the same style and functionality as the desktop app. So when you browse to our site via the desktop app, certain OS-only features turn on. So it made a bunch of sense to use QtWebkit. I welcome the switch to QWebEngine though, if for nothing else in the hopes that the underlying browser code gets a update and the app will hopefully then feel more responsive.
ausjke 10y ago
For anything-QT that is commercial you need pay and it's not cheap for small teams.
- pabloski 10y ago
  Is QtQuick commercial? No GPL version?
  - ausjke 10y ago
    IANAL but if you're making commercial products you need pay for QT. You can use GPL etc if you're doing open source I assume.
    - jventura 10y ago
      Qt has both commercial and LGPL licenses. I think you can develop commercial applications with LGPL and not distributing the source code of your own app, but you can't statically link to Qt's libraries. https://www.qt.io/qt-licensing-terms/ https://www.qt.io/qt-licensing-terms/
      - kevincox 10y ago
        IIRC some of the newer libraries are being licensed under GPL (unless you pay for a commercial license of course)
    - hermitcrab 10y ago
      That's not correct. You can use the LGPL version of Qt to develop commercial product without paying for a license and while keeping your source proprietary. You aren't allowed to statically link Qt under LGPL, but that isn't a big deal.
      - anotherevan 10y ago
        Does the LGPL deal with the fact that you actually pull in a lot of Qt code in the form in header files into your actual compiled binary?

Hi, if I can ask: "why QtWebkit instead of Qtquick?".

jventura 10y ago

+1, I'm wondering if anyone is using Qt Quick for productivity-like desktop applications?

kidproquo 10y ago
I built Tasktopus[1] using QtQuick/QML/C++. Highly recommended. I built it on the LGPL version. [1]https://gumroad.com/l/ADWm/tasktopus https://gumroad.com/l/ADWm/tasktopus
- jventura 10y ago
  Can you comment on your experience? One of my doubts is if I should go the QML / Qt Quick Controls way or the standard Qt Widgets (with PyQt).. For instance, do you think you could implement your app's interface with Qt Widgets by itself? The problem is that I know how far I can go with Qt Widgets, but on the same way, I would like to build something more "modern" and Qt Widgets may be quite limited..
  - kidproquo 10y ago
    I could have implemented it with QtWidgets, however I had found a decent UI widget library that suited my use case very well ([1]). Hence went with QML/QtQuick. My advice - just do it :-). If you want to build a cross-platform desktop app then go for QtQuick/QML/C++. QtCreator has a bunch of example projects. Use those as reference. The Qt docs are solid. Worst case - you will learn that Qt/C++. I am not a big fan of PyQt/PySide, especially when starting fresh with Qt - you would have a hard time figuring out how everything fits and where the issues are. [1] https://github.com/papyros/qml-material https://github.com/papyros/qml-material Paraphrasing a previous comment: I have used web-based task/todo lists (trello, asana, etc.) but I wanted something that could be used offline - my work does not allow storing company sensitive data on 3rd-party servers. Started the project with Electron, using AngularJS and Angular Material. That allowed rapid prototyping with a slick UI and it was fairly easy to find additional Angular-based plugins. My main motivation in selecting Electron and Angular was to learn the two technologies (easier to learn something by doing a project in it). Screenshot: http://imgur.com/NZzEFKX http://imgur.com/NZzEFKX Had a few issues with the Electron app - big download size (50-70MB zipped), no print functionality, app felt non-native, very convoluted process to get it published on the Mac App Store. Decided to change the tech stack to Qt/QML. I have published C++-based games, built on Cocos2dx. Wanted to try Qt to build a serious app. Gumroad has been a slick experience - I have opted for the fully functional trial option and let the user buy a license to use beyond the trial period. Gumroad's onboarding (buy workflow) and tech (license key generation and validation) have been a revelation.
motti 10y ago
We (copycopy.com), do. Atm we use a mix of QtQuick/QML and some widget code mainly when wrapping QtWebKit it for some parts of the app furniture that need it. Although the guts of our app requires native code (for clipboard monitoring and websocket message receiving), were considering ditching much of the UI in favour of a webapp.

ownedthx 10y ago

We have a website presence too, and the website UI (as visited in a normal browser) is 95% the same style and functionality as the desktop app. So when you browse to our site via the desktop app, certain OS-only features turn on. So it made a bunch of sense to use QtWebkit. I welcome the switch to QWebEngine though, if for nothing else in the hopes that the underlying browser code gets a update and the app will hopefully then feel more responsive.

ausjke 10y ago

For anything-QT that is commercial you need pay and it's not cheap for small teams.

pabloski 10y ago
Is QtQuick commercial? No GPL version?
- ausjke 10y ago
  IANAL but if you're making commercial products you need pay for QT. You can use GPL etc if you're doing open source I assume.
  - jventura 10y ago
    Qt has both commercial and LGPL licenses. I think you can develop commercial applications with LGPL and not distributing the source code of your own app, but you can't statically link to Qt's libraries. https://www.qt.io/qt-licensing-terms/ https://www.qt.io/qt-licensing-terms/
    - kevincox 10y ago
      IIRC some of the newer libraries are being licensed under GPL (unless you pay for a commercial license of course)
  - hermitcrab 10y ago
    That's not correct. You can use the LGPL version of Qt to develop commercial product without paying for a license and while keeping your source proprietary. You aren't allowed to statically link Qt under LGPL, but that isn't a big deal.
    - anotherevan 10y ago
      Does the LGPL deal with the fact that you actually pull in a lot of Qt code in the form in header files into your actual compiled binary?