2 ms·

PyQt is just the Python binding for Qt, so don't expect a fully polished website there. If you really want to compare Electron with QT, I suggest looking at the

PyQt is just the Python binding for Qt, so don't expect a fully polished website there. If you really want to compare Electron with QT, I suggest looking at the main QT website: https://www.qt.io/ https://www.qt.io/ Also, having developed apps in both frameworks I would say that it's easier to get started with Electron if you come from a HTML/CSS/JS background, but apps written in QT look more native and like "real" desktop apps to me. Also, QT as well as PyQT are incredibly well designed libraries and it's a lot of fun programming with them (I'm not saying that it's not as much fun programming in JS).

Klonoar 9y ago
It's not crazy to expect a UI toolkit website (even if it's just the bindings...) to have a better presence/pitch to make the sell. UI toolkits are built on how good they look and what they enable you to do, and the last thing PyQt should be doing is forcing people to check out a very marketing-heavy Qt main page.
- TomMarius 9y ago
  That's not true, Qt itself doesn't look like anything. It's the style engine that matters in this case. The framework itself is interesring from the API viewpoint.