[Interest] Fwd: vs. Flutter

[Jason H]

> Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2019 at 2:59 PM
> From: "Richard Weickelt" <richard at weickelt.de>
> To: interest at qt-project.org
> Subject: Re: [Interest] Fwd: vs. Flutter
>
> > Your every response has indicated this will not happen, just that mobile
> > will follow the other platforms. I don't understand why Qt won't commit
> > to adding the missing Mobile APIs.
> The company is a joint stock company with the sole purpose of making as much
> profit as possible and filling the pockets of its owners.

So this is the best reply so far. I just wish it was more than speculation.

> I guess someone in TQtC has done the math and came to the conclusion that
> they could make much more profit by investing their limited resources in
> growth markets like Industrial & Automotive. Mobile apps are probably a
> mature business and the marketing department doesn't expect any more growth
> there, at least no growth in their market share. This means that the cow
> will be milked and only maintained.

A very valid point. But there's a bit of chicken and egg. They are a mature 
business, but everyone expects iOS and Android availability at launch. Qt is
the best API (so far) to deliver this. However there is a bit of chicken and 
egg. If you build it, they will come, but you want to know that they will
come before you build it. QML is dead-simple and the best way to make an
app, but then you run into these missing APIs and you're in a world of hurt. 
One moment cross-platform as can be, playign video, then writing ObjectiveC 
to keep the screen from locking. It's a combination of both extremes.

> In addition, TQtC may not be able to keep up with the big players who are
> constantly pushing new programming languages and frameworks into the market.
> Simply because the big players have a multiple of manpower and don't have to
> earn any money with their frameworks. Google & co earn a lot of money with
> every sold app anyway. TQtC doesn't have this opportunity.

This really isn't how I see it. The platforms have reached maturity and what
we're after is only the missing bits - device control and notifications - 
that have been standard on smart phones for 10+ years. I don't expect that 
anyone expects Qt to be cutting edge.

> But what I can recommend, and this is the special thing about TQtC: Submit
> patches because the product is open source and the developers are very
> responsive. Stories in JIRA with suggestions and wishes are in my experience
> like write accesses to /dev/null. You have to do it yourself. Once you've
> overcome this hurdle, you usually get a decent code review and constructive
> feedback.
> 
> Of course, this is all pure speculation. ;-)

And reasonable speculation at that. I just I wish it weren't, and we could 
have clarity on this.