[Qt-interest] Qt future ...

[BRM]

----- Original Message ----

> From: Duane <duane.hebert at group-upc.com>
> On 4/28/2011 8:49 AM, Paul Miller wrote:
> > On 4/28/2011 7:24 AM, Duane  wrote:
> >> On 4/27/2011 6:48 AM, Thiago Macieira wrote:
> >>>  Em Wednesday, 27 de April de 2011, às 12:29:02, QtNext  escreveu:
> >>>> I don't wants to restart the big thread from March  after the bad news
> >>>> ...  But just wants to know if some  good news (Thiago says that we don't
> >>>> know all about that  ...) are coming for Qt :
> >>>
> >>> I'm not going to  discuss this with an anonymous person.
> >>
> >> Most of us have  the same questions and aren't anonymous.  We have
> >> several new  products in the planning stage and the question came up
> >> yesterday  whether we should continue with Qt.  We would certainly prefer
> >>  to do so but some indication of future support would be useful.
> >
> >  Seriously, what is the alternative? If you're writing for one platform
> >  then maybe it's easier but if you have to write for more than one
> >  platform I don't see a viable alternative.
> 
> I guess it depends on how you  define viable.  One choice would be Java. 
>   Another that we've  discussed would be  C#.

While I grant you that the other viable alternatives are no where near as nice 
as Qt, there are choices.
The below are just the prominent ones from the FLOSS camp, but there are 
commercial ones too:

- Gtk/Gtk+
- WxWidgets
- SDL

WxWidgets, and (to what I understand) recent Gtk/Gtk+ both support Signals/Slots 
as well.
Of course, those are just the options if you need a GUI - if you don't, then you 
get other options as well
such as the Boost Libraries (which also provide Signals/Slots), and more.

Of course, that doesn't prevent you from changing programming languages (e.g. 
Java, Python, Tcl/Tk), etc.

Just saying, there are alternatives. Qt just happens to be the best of its class 
- the most portable, cleanest API, and wide-range of language integrations.

Ben