4 ms·

I don't get this. I've used GTK, Qt, Tk and FLTK software in OSX, Windows and Linux. The rest is usually covered by standard libraries and third party libraries

I don't get this. I've used GTK, Qt, Tk and FLTK software in OSX, Windows and Linux. The rest is usually covered by standard libraries and third party libraries. So I take it this approach is disqualified on your terms for not being meaningful, which raises the question about what "meaningful" means. My own guess is that it's a matter of convenience of distribution: enter an URL and you can start using the app.

MontagFTB 5y ago
Isn’t it that most software written today has to target the web? So you have two distinct platforms to write to: web, and non-web. Even if Microsoft and Apple came up with a brilliant, singular API, that’s still one more API that has to be coded to. With solutions like Electron, you have a very fast time-to-market with a “desktop” app, and your engineering team only needs to target the web. Customers will only notice the fundamental issues with the solution after it’s too late (or they won’t care.) Sadly, the solution seems very business-driven. The ROI threshold to making a desktop-native app is quite high.
- ryandrake 5y ago
  Why do you have to target the web as a platform if you already have sufficient platform-native support in your application?
  - MontagFTB 5y ago
    That's a good question. I can think of a handful of reasons, but I am sure there are more. 1) ease of use. It's much easier to tell a prospective customer a URL than instructions on how to download/install/run a local application (if they even have permission to do so.) 2) Ecosystem. If your customers are generating content that needs searching, sharing, or collaboration, it has to be on the web in some capacity. 3) (Unfortunately) Shiny object syndrome. Browser-based applications have an innate appeal that outmoded desktop applications lack.
golergka 5y ago
> GTK, Qt, Tk and FLTK Aren't all of those C/C++? There's time and place for manually managing memory, figuring out UB and segfaults. If you're trying to render a frame full of AAA graphics in under 15 milliseconds, or go through a million requests a second, then I don't mind it. But if I'm just writing an email client...
- nsajko 5y ago
  > Aren't all of those C/C++? No. > If you're trying to render a frame full of AAA graphics in under 15 milliseconds Irrelevant. > But if I'm just writing an email client... Use bindings.
littlecranky67 5y ago
None of those UI libs work on Android or iOS.
- anhanhanh 5y ago
  I think that's a huge part of it. Most of the users nowadays are using smartphones and tablets.
- boomlinde 5y ago
  Qt does.
  - littlecranky67 5y ago
    It is very niche, and again only if you go with C++. For most Apps that are not games, using C++ is probably overkill on mobile just so you can use Qt. And you will still have to come up with a mobile optimized UI, as a standard desktop UI layout will just not work on 5" screens.
    - boomlinde 5y ago
      https://wiki.qt.io/Language_Bindings https://wiki.qt.io/Language_Bindings > And you will still have to come up with a mobile optimized UI, as a standard desktop UI layout will just not work on 5" screens. No tool will magically solve this problem for you. Qt has excellent support for responsive design if that's how you'd propose to solve it. And no, Qt is not very niche.
      - sally1620 5y ago
        Qt has done a fantastic job in this space. It is also isn't cheap. It is only free for GPLv3 software.
sally1620 5y ago
I use Qt for anything cross-platform. The main problem is that C++ is not an easy language for UI developments. also consider the fact that C++ devs are paid higher that Java, JS or C# devs. Most other UI toolkits are really terrible for cross-platform development.

MontagFTB 5y ago

Isn’t it that most software written today has to target the web? So you have two distinct platforms to write to: web, and non-web. Even if Microsoft and Apple came up with a brilliant, singular API, that’s still one more API that has to be coded to. With solutions like Electron, you have a very fast time-to-market with a “desktop” app, and your engineering team only needs to target the web. Customers will only notice the fundamental issues with the solution after it’s too late (or they won’t care.) Sadly, the solution seems very business-driven. The ROI threshold to making a desktop-native app is quite high.

ryandrake 5y ago
Why do you have to target the web as a platform if you already have sufficient platform-native support in your application?
- MontagFTB 5y ago
  That's a good question. I can think of a handful of reasons, but I am sure there are more. 1) ease of use. It's much easier to tell a prospective customer a URL than instructions on how to download/install/run a local application (if they even have permission to do so.) 2) Ecosystem. If your customers are generating content that needs searching, sharing, or collaboration, it has to be on the web in some capacity. 3) (Unfortunately) Shiny object syndrome. Browser-based applications have an innate appeal that outmoded desktop applications lack.

golergka 5y ago

> GTK, Qt, Tk and FLTK Aren't all of those C/C++? There's time and place for manually managing memory, figuring out UB and segfaults. If you're trying to render a frame full of AAA graphics in under 15 milliseconds, or go through a million requests a second, then I don't mind it. But if I'm just writing an email client...

nsajko 5y ago
> Aren't all of those C/C++? No. > If you're trying to render a frame full of AAA graphics in under 15 milliseconds Irrelevant. > But if I'm just writing an email client... Use bindings.

littlecranky67 5y ago

None of those UI libs work on Android or iOS.

anhanhanh 5y ago
I think that's a huge part of it. Most of the users nowadays are using smartphones and tablets.
boomlinde 5y ago
Qt does.
- littlecranky67 5y ago
  It is very niche, and again only if you go with C++. For most Apps that are not games, using C++ is probably overkill on mobile just so you can use Qt. And you will still have to come up with a mobile optimized UI, as a standard desktop UI layout will just not work on 5" screens.
  - boomlinde 5y ago
    https://wiki.qt.io/Language_Bindings https://wiki.qt.io/Language_Bindings > And you will still have to come up with a mobile optimized UI, as a standard desktop UI layout will just not work on 5" screens. No tool will magically solve this problem for you. Qt has excellent support for responsive design if that's how you'd propose to solve it. And no, Qt is not very niche.
    - sally1620 5y ago
      Qt has done a fantastic job in this space. It is also isn't cheap. It is only free for GPLv3 software.

sally1620 5y ago

I use Qt for anything cross-platform. The main problem is that C++ is not an easy language for UI developments. also consider the fact that C++ devs are paid higher that Java, JS or C# devs. Most other UI toolkits are really terrible for cross-platform development.