2 ms·
Let me use a car analogy (heh) to critique your reasoning: "Telling us that automotive interfaces run on Linux is the most scathing comment on Linux that you co
by ahartmetz 7y ago
Let me use a car analogy (heh) to critique your reasoning: "Telling us that automotive interfaces run on Linux is the most scathing comment on Linux that you could possibly have written."
I have worked on IVI ("in-vehicle infotainment") software and I can tell you that Qt is not even remotely the problem. The problem is... car companies are really, really bad at software development.
- blattimwind 7y agoMost of the development is outsourced through so many levels it might as well be done on mars. "Hardware design? Yes we do that all here in Germany. Oh about the software? No we don't do software." Manufacturers still have not realized that the software is crucial and cannot be regarded as a cost-center which needs to be outsourced at the lowest possible cost. And it's quite obvious that they don't do much testing at all, either (even without knowing they don't, it's obvious). It's the only way how you can end up with for example a reversing camera that practically never works if you start the car in R.
- smt88 7y agoBy that reasoning, no one should criticize Electron because VS Code (and a few others) have managed to make it performant. My comment was partly tongue-in-cheek, but the kernel of truth in it is this: a good UI tool makes it easy to build what you want without sacrificing speed, not hard. Electron makes it incredibly hard (though still possible). I'd be interested to know how much better of a balance Qt strikes.
- blub 7y agoUI development is not a purely technical discipline, in fact it's very much shaped by design and user experience. To put it another way - if font rendering's poor or the UI's rendered at 15fps maybe one could blame the UI framework (although not always), otherwise it's on the programmers and designers.