3 ms·

I am hoping Qt will regain its status of a cross-platform toolkit of choice. Back in time it provided the solution for fragmented Desktop development. With Digi

by kombine 14y ago

I am hoping Qt will regain its status of a cross-platform toolkit of choice. Back in time it provided the solution for fragmented Desktop development. With Digia's involvement now it can solve the same problem but in mobile space. But even if this does not happen, there is still the whole field of desktop development which is not going away any time soon. Web is simply not capable enough to create truly big and complex applications.

guilloche 14y ago
Google native client is a promising tech for web to reach desktop performance. I developed a complex vector application (htp://www.torapp.info) and reached better performance than desktop equivalents.
- kombine 14y ago
  I find it hard to believe, because even that it runs native code, there is a small penalty of a sandbox environment and it certainly cannot be faster than pure native code.
  - jj00nathan 14y ago
    Just because desktop always wins in theory doesn't mean that you can't exceed the performance of existing native clients. I'm sure Illustrator leaves a ton of performance on the table simply by virtue of having a large legacy codebase. For instance, if it becomes practical to assume that all of your clients support GPGPU then Illustrator's existing CPU optimized code instantly goes from being a critical advantage to a heavy burden: they have to maintain that code and write new GPU code that somehow fits with the old code whereas you just have to write the GPGPU code. Witness pixelmator curb-stomping Photoshop in the performance department. Of course, that example is Desktop App vs Desktop App but the principle is the same.
- icefox 14y ago
  And of course there is a Qt for native client project: http://qt-project.org/wiki/Qt_for_Google_Native_Client http://qt-project.org/wiki/Qt_for_Google_Native_Client
- icefox 14y ago
  Your url is missing a 't'
tolos 14y ago
I was fond of Qt when I used it, but no one I talk to -- a small sample size to be sure -- speaks highly of c++. I have a feeling that Qt will eventually go by the wayside as web browsers replace what it means to be "cross-platform compatible."
- icefox 14y ago
  How do you explain the rise of Objective C using that same logic? Will ObjectiveC go the wayside and be replaced by web browsers? I would rather make the argument that Qt will rise and fall on the platforms it works on. In the past this was the classic desktop, but with Nokia on the helm they refused to let resources go to making Qt on anything mobile, but their internal projects. So now with the classic desktop being replaced with both mobile and the web Qt feels out of place. If Digia does well and gets Qt working on iOS, Android, etc then suddenly it becomes much more interesting for tech news and not so "old". And if someone were to take Qt and build a successful platform on top of it then suddenly it becomes _really_ interesting. Platforms usually make and break languages and toolkits. Witness the rise of JavaScript which while being a neat language, no one would say should be the most important language out there like it is. Disclaimer: I currently work on WebKit during my day job and used to work for Trolltech
bostonpete 14y ago
> I am hoping Qt will regain its status of a cross-platform toolkit of choice. Despite their recent focus on mobile, I wasn't under the impression that they had lost this status with respect to desktop development. Which toolkit do you think supplanted them...?

by kombine 14y ago

guilloche 14y ago

Google native client is a promising tech for web to reach desktop performance. I developed a complex vector application (htp://www.torapp.info) and reached better performance than desktop equivalents.

kombine 14y ago
I find it hard to believe, because even that it runs native code, there is a small penalty of a sandbox environment and it certainly cannot be faster than pure native code.
- jj00nathan 14y ago
  Just because desktop always wins in theory doesn't mean that you can't exceed the performance of existing native clients. I'm sure Illustrator leaves a ton of performance on the table simply by virtue of having a large legacy codebase. For instance, if it becomes practical to assume that all of your clients support GPGPU then Illustrator's existing CPU optimized code instantly goes from being a critical advantage to a heavy burden: they have to maintain that code and write new GPU code that somehow fits with the old code whereas you just have to write the GPGPU code. Witness pixelmator curb-stomping Photoshop in the performance department. Of course, that example is Desktop App vs Desktop App but the principle is the same.
icefox 14y ago
And of course there is a Qt for native client project: http://qt-project.org/wiki/Qt_for_Google_Native_Client http://qt-project.org/wiki/Qt_for_Google_Native_Client
icefox 14y ago
Your url is missing a 't'

tolos 14y ago

I was fond of Qt when I used it, but no one I talk to -- a small sample size to be sure -- speaks highly of c++. I have a feeling that Qt will eventually go by the wayside as web browsers replace what it means to be "cross-platform compatible."

icefox 14y ago
How do you explain the rise of Objective C using that same logic? Will ObjectiveC go the wayside and be replaced by web browsers? I would rather make the argument that Qt will rise and fall on the platforms it works on. In the past this was the classic desktop, but with Nokia on the helm they refused to let resources go to making Qt on anything mobile, but their internal projects. So now with the classic desktop being replaced with both mobile and the web Qt feels out of place. If Digia does well and gets Qt working on iOS, Android, etc then suddenly it becomes much more interesting for tech news and not so "old". And if someone were to take Qt and build a successful platform on top of it then suddenly it becomes _really_ interesting. Platforms usually make and break languages and toolkits. Witness the rise of JavaScript which while being a neat language, no one would say should be the most important language out there like it is. Disclaimer: I currently work on WebKit during my day job and used to work for Trolltech

bostonpete 14y ago

> I am hoping Qt will regain its status of a cross-platform toolkit of choice. Despite their recent focus on mobile, I wasn't under the impression that they had lost this status with respect to desktop development. Which toolkit do you think supplanted them...?