4 ms·

Looks like this is mainly QtQuick? Has anyone had success getting platform native-(ish) looking and behaving Desktop applications working in QtQuick? I have a f

Looks like this is mainly QtQuick? Has anyone had success getting platform native-(ish) looking and behaving Desktop applications working in QtQuick? I have a few applications running on QWidgets which I'd like to port over for performance reasons (QWidgets has known performance problems on high-DPI Apple platforms they probably won't ever fix), but QtQuick apps tend to behave like off-brand tablet apps, out of the box.

alien1993 8y ago
You could use Quick Controls 2, they can be styled easily. http://doc.qt.io/qt-5/qtquickcontrols2-index.html http://doc.qt.io/qt-5/qtquickcontrols2-index.html
- CarVac 8y ago
  You can style the original Controls too, but I've never tried for a native look in my photo editor.
- jcelerier 8y ago
  There is a Quick Controls 2 style that uses the Qt Widget looks : https://github.com/KDE/qqc2-desktop-style https://github.com/KDE/qqc2-desktop-style
Elv13 8y ago
Right now this is less and less "important". QtQuick.Controls2 fill that niche a bit, but it isn't the point. To them, the world has moved on. Web apps have zero consistency and people prefer them. There is also little money left in desktop application development. Qt on Android and iOS targets the "good enough" rather than driving their business. The people who will choose Qt for mobile don't do it for consistency. The money is on IoT and embedded. This is where having a certified platform with support is important. It's also where you can't use the OpenSource license and have to pay for the commercial one. It's also where having native UX is absolutely irrelevant. In a way, it's hard to argue about any of that. It's sad, but unavoidable.