4 ms·
Some of the criteria are insanely subjective. For example: look. First off, as far as I remember, Qt and Gtk can be configured to use the OS theme, which mean t
by maeln 7y ago
Some of the criteria are insanely subjective.
For example: look. First off, as far as I remember, Qt and Gtk can be configured to use the OS theme, which mean that your GUI will respect the overall desktop theme. Electron does nothing of the sort and rely entirely on you to provide a good looking design.
Responsive UI: Depending on how you use Qt or Gtk, you can easily be responsive using the various layout provided, at no extra cost.
Finally, one big point that is not mentioned is accessibility. If most browser handle accessibility very nicely with the basic HTML components, if you start to do anything remotely advanced you gonna have to be careful and correctly implement ARIA norm, which most don't. Native UI framework are not perfect either, but can behave better in a lot of cases (it's not a clear cut though).
Electron or local-server + webapp is really nice. Having done front end development as well has "native" application (with Qt), I can really appreciate how easier it is do to custom components using web technology, but I think we tend to dismiss their disadvantages too quickly.
- Liquid_Fire 7y agoI also don't understand the different "License" ratings for Qt and GTK, given they are both LGPL.
- z0mbie42 7y agoNot all Qt libraries are LGPL, some are GPL likce charts.
- vunie 7y agoI am also baffled by the difference in license ratings. My guess is that some parts of Qt are licensed differently (like their WebAssembly port) and it's not immediately clear which parts are licensed under which license.
- opencl 7y agoThe Qt licencing situation is way more complicated than that. Parts of it are available under LGPL, parts are available under GPL, and some parts are only available under a commercial license which is a minimum of $5500/dev/year. There's a big chart here: https://doc.qt.io/qt-5/qtmodules.html#gpl-licensed-addons https://doc.qt.io/qt-5/qtmodules.html#gpl-licensed-addons
- Liquid_Fire 7y agoBut all of the extras parts that are not under the LGPL are things that GTK (nor Electron) doesn't even have, so I would argue it's still an unfair comparison.
- z0mbie42 7y agoHi, thank you for the feedback. By Look I mean The ability to create advanced UI which are not influenced by the Desktop native theme (as are all successful end user oriented applications). The ability to create a native app which is at least beautiful as modern WebApps. e.g. Slack or VS Code (Electron) are beautiful, while fractal or notecase (gtk) are not.
- maeln 7y agoAh ok, make sense this way. "Customization" would be less confusing for me.
- Crinus 7y agoI second the 'customization' label (though perhaps themability is a better one?), for me applications that do not use the desktop look and feel are a negative thing and something i try to avoid, so the 'look' is certainly subjective.
- jcelerier 7y ago> (as are all successful end user oriented applications). That is a very debatable assumption. The large majority of apps I use use the desktop's native theme.
- allover 7y agoI don't think this is very debatable. Consider the fact you might be in the vast minority of users. I'm a dev/technical user, in the key audience for native look & feel powertools, yet the main apps I use on Mac are still Chrome, Spotify, Slack, VS Code. None of these use the desktop's native theme. Imagine the case for non-technical users. Average users expect apps to have a custom look and feel. Ever tried SnapChat?
- jcelerier 7y ago> Ever tried SnapChat? ... no > Imagine the case for non-technical users. Most non-technical users I know - elderly couples, family, etc don't even install apps, they just use what their OS gives them. I don't know any who does not have VLC or LibreOffice however (but that may be a french thing)