[Interest] 5.8 Features?

[Daniel França]

+1
I love Qt, but I'd tried to implement 3 mobile apps using Qt, and I always
fall in some sort of limitation that annoys me.
Like you said, pretty basic things like the video recording parameters.

And I look into the next steps and I don't see any much effort on that
area, this was the main reason I'd cancel my subscription.

Mobile seems more like a second class citizen.

On Fri, 24 Jun 2016 at 18:02 Jason H <jhihn at gmx.com> wrote:

> 6 months of latency would be great.
> But the things I talk about are pretty basic on mobile:
> - Foreground/background lifecycle events,
> - Screen wake locks,
> - Notifications (local / remote)
>
> These have been aound since before Qt targeted mobile and are sorely STILL
> missing from Qt.
>
> Things upcoming that I wouldn't complain about having to implement myself:
> - Fingerprint scanning
> As this is relatively new for Android and iOS platforms. Though the Atrix
> (2010) had a fingerprint scanner, but only Android 6 had a platform API.
> iPhone had it as of the 5S.
>
> It's like Qt is on mobile only if you want to put things on the screen and
> do AJAX. But if you really want to do anything really "mobile" you're on
> your own. We still can't control the video recording parameters on iOS
> (Thanks to my company, it will land in 5.6.2 -- was supposed to land in
> 5.6.1). Qt can only really be accurately described to be a Cross-platform
> UI on mobile. Outside of that, you're writing Java and Obj-C. So call it
> cross-platform for mobile is a stretch. I urging Qt to focus on eliminating
> the asterisks, so it's proper Mobile (capital M) platform.
>
> With that said though, Qt's abstraction of various platform services is a
> godsend. The fact that ReactNative gives you access to AVFoundation doesn't
> do a whole lot when you have to write ReactNative that targets AVFoundation
> and more code to target android.media SDK and handle the intricacies of
> both in your own code base. So I think the Qt approach is right. I just
> want more of it. :-)
>
>
> *Sent:* Friday, June 24, 2016 at 9:26 AM
> *From:* "Xavier Bigand" <flamaros.xavier at gmail.com>
> *To:* "Robert Iakobashvili" <coroberti at gmail.com>
> *Cc:* interest <interest at qt-project.org>
>
> *Subject:* Re: [Interest] 5.8 Features?
> Like you said I think that the iOS and Android progress too fast and on an
> other cadence than Qt.
> We should not forget that Qt has to create a unified cross platform API,
> that is necessary harder than creating a new one for one platform.
>
> I think that a latency of 6 months to a year is still reasonable for Qt
> depending on how it fall with releases.
>
> In my opinion if you need something faster, you may have to consider to
> implement features your self. We started our application with 4.8 and
> necessitas and Qt was much slower than now to integrate new features
> provided by mobile devices. Some features like DPI retrieving wasn't
> correctly implemented so because it was a blocker for us, we fixed it by
> calling the native API on Android.
>
>
>
>
>
> 2016-06-24 15:00 GMT+02:00 Robert Iakobashvili <coroberti at gmail.com>:
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 10:55 PM, Jason H <jhihn at gmx.com> wrote:
>> > I feel like the last few releases have been run by the trolls, and not
>> the users of Qt. I was hoping open governance would enable the community to
>> direct Qt development, but I seem to have misinterpreted what it means. I'm
>> looking for what's going into 5.8.. not much listed on the releases page.
>> >
>> > I'd like to suggest that mobile get some much needed love.
>> > - Application state transitions; Foreground, background
>> > - Background processing API
>> > - Screen wake lock API
>> > - In-app Notifications: local, remote
>> >
>> > While I have those characterized as "mobile" there are things like
>> notifications occurring on desktop platforms.
>> >
>> > Any thoughts?
>> >
>>
>> Agree with Jason that mobile support needs more love
>> and adding "Native, native, native ..."
>>
>> However, it could be that progress made at iOS and Android side is too
>> fast and
>> our expectations from Qt are too high?
>>
>> As any cross-platform framework Qt has its limitations.
>> Still, it has good integration points to allow additions of native code.
>>
>> jm4c to add.
>>
>> Kind regards,
>> Robert
>> _______________________________________________
>> Interest mailing list
>> Interest at qt-project.org
>> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest
>
>
>
> --
> Xavier
> _______________________________________________ Interest mailing list
> Interest at qt-project.org
> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest
> _______________________________________________
> Interest mailing list
> Interest at qt-project.org
> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/interest/attachments/20160627/a8cb67c2/attachment.html>