[Interest] rebooted QtWebKit for Qt4??

[Roland Hughes]

It is sad to see constant after the fact "justification" for the 
existence of QML. Plain and simple, it is a completely insecure hand 
polished turd and no amount of rah-rah after the fact can change that.

On 7/12/20 8:02 PM, Donald Carr wrote:
> @rene: I would recommend reading:
>
> https://woboq.com/blog/verdigris-qt-without-moc.html
>
> to contextualize Copperspice's "wins"
>
> It is sad to see people miss the necessity for hardware accelerated UI
> that QML addresses; Qt widgets backing onto QPainter was extremely
> problematic to accelerate and the Qt company addressed this with
> scenegraph/QML.
> Feel free to hate on QML, just be aware you appear to be missing the
> driving impetus behind it which was not fashion but necessity.
>
> Widgets is "done"; it is kinda hard to get a more stable API than one
> which is no longer being actively developed.
>
> Cheerio,
> Donald
>
> On Sun, Jul 12, 2020 at 4:15 AM Roland Hughes
> <roland at logikalsolutions.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 7/11/20 11:06 AM, René J.V. Bertin wrote:
>>> Not my words ... and there must be money in it so it can't be entirely worthless ;)
>>>
>>>
>> If there was "money in it" we wouldn't have FUD licensing practices and
>> statements about making people buy QtCreator. You get that from a dying
>> company. I'm old. I've seen a lot of companies die. They all engage in
>> this death spiral of trying to royalty and license "everything" in hopes
>> of squeezing out just enough money to survive.
>>
>> There have been many spectacular examples over the years. While it is
>> not quite as spectacular as the Qt Company implosion that appears to be
>> going on.
>>
>> https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fimage.shutterstock.com%2Fz%2Fstock-photo-building-demolition-by-implosion-image-of-a-shot-sequence-101827762.jpg&f=1&nofb=1
>>
>> https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fimage.shutterstock.com%2Fz%2Fstock-photo-building-demolition-by-implosion-image-of-a-shot-sequence-101827765.jpg&f=1&nofb=1
>>
>> Wang was a great case study. They tried to license everything and
>> royalty everything. In the ultimate human sacrifice they changed
>> licensing policy after the fact stating that the OS license could not
>> transfer with the machine. You had to buy a new OS license _at list_
>> when you bought a used Wang. For over a decade this had not been the
>> case. Even "small" used Wang computers sold for $20K because you got a
>> complete system. The day after that decision they stopped selling
>> because Wang wanted a hideous amount of money for a "new" license. It
>> was something like $40 or $60K. The millions of dollars in used
>> inventory dealers held became not only worthless, but a liability. They
>> had to pay someone to haul the stuff away when they went under. Yes,
>> they all went under. It wasn't too many days/weeks after the
>> announcement that people and companies stopped buying Wang computers.
>> Nobody was willing to pay half a million for something they would have
>> to pay to throw away when they could spend about the same money on other
>> midrange computers that still would have resale value.
>>
>> It didn't matter that Wang was the only platform _anywhere_ that could
>> do multi-person document editing. Something like 7-8 people could all be
>> editing the same part of the same document at the same time and see the
>> changes real-time. Even Google Docs hasn't caught up to what Wang had
>> back in the late 1980s. Wang just had the limitation of Green Screens.
>>
>> The first deadly drug you see a failing company reach for is royalties.
>> The second deadly drug is license roulette. After that it doesn't matter
>> if they have a completely unique product; companies will simply choose
>> to live without it.
>>
>> The Wang customers gave the document people AT computers with
>> WordPerfect and told them to pass around floppies until Netware came along.
>>
>> Yes, there was a time when WordPerfect ruled the land.
>>
>> https://www.wordperfect.com/en/
>>
>> Know what did them in? Licensing. A ghost of a product is still around,
>> but the company is long since dead. They are still trying to get $400
>> for the full package.
>>
>> https://www.wordperfect.com/en/product/professional-edition/
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Roland Hughes, President
>> Logikal Solutions
>> (630)-205-1593
>>
>> http://www.theminimumyouneedtoknow.com
>> http://www.infiniteexposure.net
>> http://www.johnsmith-book.com
>> http://www.logikalblog.com
>> http://www.interestingauthors.com/blog
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Interest mailing list
>> Interest at qt-project.org
>> https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest
>
>
-- 
Roland Hughes, President
Logikal Solutions
(630)-205-1593

http://www.theminimumyouneedtoknow.com
http://www.infiniteexposure.net
http://www.johnsmith-book.com
http://www.logikalblog.com
http://www.interestingauthors.com/blog