4 ms·

I think native UIs are overrated and just cause headaches for developers. E.g. take the most popular UI system: HTML/CSS/JS: users have no problem with the fact

I think native UIs are overrated and just cause headaches for developers. E.g. take the most popular UI system: HTML/CSS/JS: users have no problem with the fact that all their favourite websites look different. IMHO it is a better idea when the application enforces the same UI across platforms (like QT) than the platform expecting the same UI for all programs. On top of that QT does support native look&feel.

zanny 11y ago
Theres a major difference between a website and a native application. I'm used to websites having no consistency and having elements all randomly over the page. I'm only there for a few minutes, after all. A lot of productivity software uses Qt. If it were not using native look and feel it would piss everyone and their grams off when system level keyboard shortcuts didn't work, when menu bars weren't oriented system native, when it didn't use the system file dialog, etc. Integrating with the OS is essential to workflow unless the application literally is your entire workflow.
rdsnsca 11y ago
The truth is Mac user expect a Ui to look and feel native, otherwise you will be savaged in reviews, no matter how good your feature set. You last sentence tells me you have never used a QT app on a Mac, because it does not look and feel native.
- shaan7 11y ago
  There are ones that don't (Quassel for example) and there are ones that do (VLC for one). At the end there is always some polish a developer needs to do, no matter how awesome the toolkit gets. If the developer won't do that, your app will look crap. And its not just OSX, you write your Qt app on Windows and then you run it on Linux, you will need some fine tuning to look perfect. I still prefer it over any other free IRC client for OSX simply because the feature set rocks.
- throwaway24242 11y ago
  But do the users care? I do not think so. Otherwise a lot of famous websites would have native UI clients.
  - yoz-y 11y ago
    The iOS AppStore is exactly that. A bunch of native UIs for famous websites. E.g.: Facebook, Twitter, Google Apps... Precisely because users (at least iOS and Mac users) do care.
    - throwaway24242 11y ago
      Yeah, but mostly because these applications do not work properly on mobile devices (smaller screen size, too slow, etc.) and a native (in the sense of NOT browser-based) application makes sense. However my hypothesis is just, that the LOOK does not have to fit into the OS.
  - jeffbax 11y ago
    Absolutely. A QT/GTK/Java UI framework is immediately noticeable on OS X, and IMO even Windows though to a lesser extent. Doing native is without a doubt the right call.
- rhodysurf 11y ago
  Its not nearly as bad as you make it seem. Also you can embed objective c and native cocoa widgets in Qt apps so you cam make it as native as you want.

zanny 11y ago

Theres a major difference between a website and a native application. I'm used to websites having no consistency and having elements all randomly over the page. I'm only there for a few minutes, after all. A lot of productivity software uses Qt. If it were not using native look and feel it would piss everyone and their grams off when system level keyboard shortcuts didn't work, when menu bars weren't oriented system native, when it didn't use the system file dialog, etc. Integrating with the OS is essential to workflow unless the application literally is your entire workflow.

rdsnsca 11y ago

The truth is Mac user expect a Ui to look and feel native, otherwise you will be savaged in reviews, no matter how good your feature set. You last sentence tells me you have never used a QT app on a Mac, because it does not look and feel native.

shaan7 11y ago
There are ones that don't (Quassel for example) and there are ones that do (VLC for one). At the end there is always some polish a developer needs to do, no matter how awesome the toolkit gets. If the developer won't do that, your app will look crap. And its not just OSX, you write your Qt app on Windows and then you run it on Linux, you will need some fine tuning to look perfect. I still prefer it over any other free IRC client for OSX simply because the feature set rocks.
throwaway24242 11y ago
But do the users care? I do not think so. Otherwise a lot of famous websites would have native UI clients.
- yoz-y 11y ago
  The iOS AppStore is exactly that. A bunch of native UIs for famous websites. E.g.: Facebook, Twitter, Google Apps... Precisely because users (at least iOS and Mac users) do care.
  - throwaway24242 11y ago
    Yeah, but mostly because these applications do not work properly on mobile devices (smaller screen size, too slow, etc.) and a native (in the sense of NOT browser-based) application makes sense. However my hypothesis is just, that the LOOK does not have to fit into the OS.
- jeffbax 11y ago
  Absolutely. A QT/GTK/Java UI framework is immediately noticeable on OS X, and IMO even Windows though to a lesser extent. Doing native is without a doubt the right call.
rhodysurf 11y ago
Its not nearly as bad as you make it seem. Also you can embed objective c and native cocoa widgets in Qt apps so you cam make it as native as you want.