[Development] Question about Qt's future

[Nicola De Filippo]

+1
   N.
Il giorno 24/apr/2014, alle ore 21:15, Attila Csipa <qt at csipa.in.rs> ha scritto:

> It's a bit tricky. Traditionally, Qt did UIs by mimicking/drawing the UI 
> elements itself. This is cool, as it's allows for those native looking, 
> but also super-customizable (and quite fast) UIs. Or, rather, this used 
> to be cool. It's still VERY good for embedded and custom UIs requiring 
> that pixel perfect snappy UI (also the reason why it fares so well in 
> the consultancy/solutions business). But. Unfortunately platforms have 
> diversified, UIs look/act more different than ever (and it's not going 
> to change). This is, indirectly, IMO the reason why Qt Quick Components 
> took so long, why they (pardon my French) suck, and why they will suck 
> in the foreseeable future, and why I think Qt is (still) so far behind 
> in mobile. It seems nobody has the bandwidth to reimplement ALL the 
> controls/look'n'feel for ALL the platforms, so they would feel native 
> and integrate with the Qt apps seamlessly. This would be OK if Qt was a 
> game engine or not trying to have a general application framework 
> appeal. The current mobile examples demonstrate IMHO this quite clearly 
> - they do have a "I want this" appeal on a first run, but when you 
> scratch the surface you see these are more like Potemkin villages than 
> solutions to cross platform mobile development :( After playing a bit 
> with Xamarin (yes, I know, but put aside the C# hate for a minute), it's 
> quite striking what different approaches can result in (and it also made 
> it quite clear what Qt is doing better - but also worse than other cross 
> platform solutions).
> 
> Best regards,
> Attila

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/development/attachments/20140425/94e3c3b1/attachment.html>