[Interest] QtQuick for mobile - any experience to share?

[Sylvain Pointeau]

On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 5:00 PM, Jason H <jhihn at gmx.com> wrote:

> A few things not mentioned, (or scanning to catch up on the thread, I did
> not see)
> 1. RN will expose native libraries. This is terrible for a X-platform
> developer as if you use Multimedia, have to know each multipedia API
> expertly. The best thing is to use Qt and have it abstract the native
> libraries. I once attempted to write the code to use different recording
> qualities in iOS and got close, but the Trolls had it done right in a week.
> Now repeat this for Android (luckily, this was already supported on
> android). So whule RN is "cross platform" as soon as you do anything fancy,
> you're into native API land. Qt does not have this problem.
>

I fully agree, however the react native community is really large, maybe
someone did it, maybe (often?) not perfect but better than nothing


>
> 2. The license is really worth it. I'd love to say that Qt is perfect. It
> is not. Having your issues fixed in the next maintence release is a good
> thing. But, not all your issues will land. I have paid for Qt support, and
> I think I got comparable value out of it. Sometimes more, sometimes less.
> But I do recommend it. One downside is that for Agile teams that release
> often (weekly/bi-weekly), it takes longer to get an issue resolved than a
> sprint. Some of this is just due to communication time (48 hour turn
> around, 3 messages, has you in the next sprint.) But such is life.
>

Yes it is surely worth it, if you are sure about the revenue, in my case I
am quite reluctant to spend 459$/Month without knowing if I will get return
on investment, I will not hesitate if a client wants to pay to have a
certain app and I know that the Qt license can be paid with this client.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/interest/attachments/20180529/86c241ad/attachment.html>