[Qt-interest] Many have not aware about this letter, Its for all who relies on Nokia

[Scott Aron Bloom]

Sorry.. But Qt creator is nowhere near on par with VS...

Its on par for building and developing Qt apps.. kind of..

But the ecosystem around VS is amazing.. Want source reformatting, there is a plugin.

Develop on VM's.. VMWare has a Dev Studio plugin...

Is it a great environment for Linux.. Sure.. but on windows, I don't understand why someone would use it, EXCEPT to develop for a supported embedded device.
  
Could they have used Eclipse to get the same results?  Absolutely..

-----Original Message-----
From: qt-interest-bounces+scott.bloom=onshorecs.com at qt.nokia.com [mailto:qt-interest-bounces+scott.bloom=onshorecs.com at qt.nokia.com] On Behalf Of pmqt71
Sent: Friday, February 11, 2011 8:23 AM
To: BRM; qt-interest at trolltech.com
Subject: Re: [Qt-interest] Many have not aware about this letter, Its for all who relies on Nokia

> Qt Creator is pretty much on par with Visual Studios as an 
> environment. It's far superior to most any other IDE out there.
> That's not to say it's perfect or that it is on par in every way, but 
> it's makes a very good challenger to the VS market.

Well, it's also a matter of preference. But let's take another point of view: how much resources, people, time, did it take to Nokia? how much it costs? but above all, why to develop a new IDE? Samsung, for instance, has shipped a new framework for their devices; did they need a new, dedicated IDE? Has Android a custom IDE?
Qt Creator is just an example of how Nokia wanted to make (almost) ALL, but without focusing on the most important target: Nokia phones.

pm


2011/2/11 BRM <bm_witness at yahoo.com>:
>> From: Konstantin Tokarev <annulen at yandex.ru> 11.02.2011, 13:05, 
>> "Arnold Krille" <arnold at arnoldarts.de>:
>> > They  don't need to. Qt is LGPL, just leave Nokia (or get the pink 
>> > slip,
>> >  whichever comes first), gather in a new firm or in one of the 
>> > existing  Qt- consulting firms and continue to work on Qt or
>>the_fork_formerly_known_as_Qt.
>> But they need if they want to sell  commercial licenses as they did 
>>before acquisition
>>
>> of Trolltech by  Nokia
>
> Or just have the firm buy a Qt license first, before announcing the 
> fork - it's perpetual itself; you just don't get support or updates beyond the 1 year mark.
> Now, I am not a lawyer, so consult one first.
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----
>> From: pmqt71 <pmqt71 at gmail.com>
>> Porting Qt to WP7 is a nonsense. They already have a framework,  they 
>> already have tools, good tools. Do you consider Qt Creator better  
>> than Visual Studio? Do you consider Qt Creator better than Visual  
>> C++ Express (free) Edition? Can we compete?.
>
> Qt Creator is pretty much on par with Visual Studios as an 
> environment. It's far superior to most any other IDE out there.
> That's not to say it's perfect or that it is on par in every way, but 
> it's makes a very good challenger to the VS market.
>
> Now, per VC++ - Qt Creator uses a far superior compiler. VS's C++ 
> compiler is functional and improving, but no where near as good as 
> GNU's g++, which underlies Qt Creator.
>
> $0.02
>
> Ben
> _______________________________________________
> Qt-interest mailing list
> Qt-interest at qt.nokia.com
> http://lists.qt.nokia.com/mailman/listinfo/qt-interest
>
_______________________________________________
Qt-interest mailing list
Qt-interest at qt.nokia.com
http://lists.qt.nokia.com/mailman/listinfo/qt-interest