Slashdot Mirror
Screenshots Of Qt Designer
an Irie KDE user writes "This page shows some screenshots of Qt Designer on various platforms. Qt Designer is our visual user interface design tool. Technically, it is just another application written with the Qt GUI Toolkit."
Firstly, don't confuse GTK+ bindings with GNOME bindings. They are somewhat different things.
"I get the feeling that the traditional FSF crowd dislike KDE/Qt because it's developed by a different group of people than gnome (read: europeans vs americans) There's a witch hunt around KDE/Qt that never seem to stop. (ok, the original license gripe was a real problem, but IMHO that's fixed now). A lot of other programs have conflicting licenses that cause problems, but there's no will (mostly among redhat and debian) to work with the KDE crowd to solve it. For example, debian redistributes pine in a easy to compile source package, even though they can't legally distribute as a binary. Why not do the same with KDE?"
Absolutely not. I actually have little idea of where all the hackers of the two desktops are; nor does it really matter. What is happening is simple. Here we have two competant desktops for GNU/Linux. From a companies point of view, one of them needs to become standard. So I would see spiralling effect, with GNOME being considered standard, especially now after the GNOME foundation.
And don't play silly political games with words like "witch hunt". There are plenty of zealots on both sides of the fence. Things just happen the way they do. There is no conspiracy here, just mindshare. Debian has had a strict interpretation of the GPL for a long time now. And if KDE thinks there licenses do not conflict, well I doubt they are entirely free of bias either. So stop the finger pointing.
It isn't fair. But I have a feeling that the users of GNU/Linux will benefit from a standard being choosen...regardless which desktop it was.
Now this doesn't mean that people should stop using KDE. You and everyone else on this forum should know better than that. Some people stick to the command line, even.
I think splitting into two competing desktops was a mistake. But there was no way of stopping it and we can't go back now.
Don't reinvoke the Desktop Wars again. It is far more pointless now than it was before.
But what do I know? For all we know, it is KDE last week, GNOME today, and Berlin tommorrow. And in a couple years, the newbies crowd to UDE.
It could happen. Maybe.
Same reason. The set 'Linux people' is so large and diverse that there is NO pleasing everybody. And because open systems encourage hackers to scratch their own itches, interfaces change whenever the user wants them to change.
But nobody is stoping you from running whatever window manager and toolkits you want. Grab the source and have a blast.
This sig is false.
umm...
Qt designer is GPL'ed so you can use it as long as the GPL is acceptable to you.
QT is QPL'ed, so you can use it for free as long as you are willing to open source your code.
It's only if you refuse do write open-source code and want to develop a proprietary closed-source application that you need to buy the $1500 commercial license to Qt (not Qt designed, as you're just using that, not linking it in) in order to get license terms that don't forbid linking to closed code.
Btw, how are you planning to use glide to do your UI (woo - 3d word processors for my Voodoo2 to think about!)? Mayhaps you meant glade?
The Matrix is going down for reboot now! Stopping reality: OK. The system is halted.
"Which is fine, until ms updates the appearance of the GUI, or some third party does it (and there are several who have - chroma, windowblinds). When this happens, Qt apps will stand out and probably look pretty ugly, compared to the rest of the system. Think of those boring grey stark bevels sitting inside something like Apple's Aqua, because it doesn't pick up on the *real* native appearance. Ugh. I'm all for fancy interfaces, but please: *consistent* fancy interfaces. Developers and toolkit vendors have to keep that in mind."
If you aren't using the OS's native toolkit, this will always be a problem. Many apps suffer from this program, and it's not just third party software. For example, Microsoft Office on Mac OS and Windows does not use native widgets on either platform for everything.There are countless other examples.
They seem to have invented there own for widgets specfically for the program where needed. This certianly does break WindowBlinds, Kaliedoscope, Color Themes, etc. That's why I avoid themes, and try to go with the native color. If figure that way it has been highly tested, and should be consistant (if the UI developer had half a brain).
Qt and KDE by far are the hardest working widget set/desktop when it comes to trying to match one widget set to another one. Qt apps on Windows, is very similar to the MFC widget set. The screenshots show this is also true on other platforms.
People ask, why don't you just use the native widget set in the first place for everything? That would certainly make everything very consistant. But it would limit the design of advanced features and ease of use, by limiting ideas to one company. Not to mention that often the native widget sets API is difficult to program for, or clumbsy.
Good cross theming as you pointed out, isn't perfect, but it's a good start.
Among other things, he talks about pros and cons of both GTK and KDE themes. He also the future of KDE styles up to and beyond the KDE2 release, and gives his take on recent XFree86 developments.
From the screenshots, it didn't look like it to me. Admittedly I've done a lot of multi-platform GUI work, and I'm a bit of a perfectionist, but it just didn't "fit in" quite right. Qt seemed to suffer from the common problem where everything is just *slightly* the wrong size. You don't notice it until you see the application alongside others on the same platform, but once you do, it's one of those niggles that becomes an annoyance every time you use the application.
IMHO the attacks against GNOME were pretty out of line too, to say the least..
You'll see some suspicious dissing of Gnome on that screenshots page. Please understand that this is a statement of Trolltechs, not of KDEs. The KDE guys themselves (on their mailing lists) reacted to the dissing.
--
"Oppression and harassment is a small price to pay to live in the land of the free." -- Montgomery Burns.
This statement deeply saddens me. I thought the whole point here was to have friendly competition between two desktop environments. As one of the major representatives for the KDE movement, Trolltech should show a little more professionalism than this.
Also, although I am not a GNOME developer, I find the claim that the GNOME Control Center is a clone of the KDE Control Center somewhat unnecessary. It seems Trolltech can not leave the KDE / GNOME debate alone even when talking about a developer tool that is supposed to work on any desktop environment.
I've to admit that the real advantage of GTK is that it's C-based, so it's much easier to do language binding. GTK has really a lot of support for alternate languages like ADA, Eiffel and such, but the applications implemented in these languages are still missing, so most of the language bindings are for now more a proof of concept.
For Open-Source software Qt is the way to go (easier to program), for closed software development GTK is the choice (because it's LGPL and free of charge for proprietary software) if you don't expect to get to get any money for your GTK program. Otherwise, Qt is still better because it will save valuable hours of programming time compared to GTK. Remember, the license costs of Qt include one year of free support, where can you get that for GTK?
I think you are miss understanding the point of the GPL. You can design closed-source programs for free with GPL'd Qt Designer, but you must pay ("sponser Qt development") to use Qt for closed source programs.
The GPL only covers derived work from the program, not output of a program (according to RMS and others). Otherwise, everytime I used a GPL'd program to write a text file (like to write a book) I would be forced to GPL. That is so insane it would never happen. Of course a clarification would be nice, but almost every court would see it that way.
You have to let both the market and the community sort these issues out by themselves. Flaming doesn't accomplish that goal any sooner. As a KDE-turned-GNOME user, I happen to agree with you, but comments like the above only serve to get people's dander up and stretch the debate out even longer.
--
Tired of FB/Google censorship? Visit UNCENSORED!
Am I the only one who thinks that all the "multi platform" (SUN, SGI, Motif) screenshots are actually done on Linux with apropriate Enlightenment themes? Except for Win2K, maybe :)
---
It's running on KDE and on Gnome. Am I naive beyond belief, or does this indicate that it's going to benefit both parties? It'd be wonderful if an app could use a single forms layout database/file/record/XML to create a GUI for all the platforms they've demonstrated.
Gahd. Imagine. The core of your application would be exactly the same on all platforms. Your forms design data would be the same. The only thing that changes is the render engine or interpreter.
--
--
Don't like it? Respond with words, not karma.
For those that did not know: KDevelop has has a design tool for quite some time. As far back as last year at .4 (can't remember farther). Granted it didn't do as many features as this did, but it was very good and I have used it (the designer and KDevelop) for over a dozen projects. I looked at Glade at the time to see how good it was and it seemed to be missing things that the KDevelop designer had. Granted that could be different now. For those that missed it TrollTech was deminstrating it at LinuxExpo. I had heard of it before, but didn't have a chance to test it out. I played around on it for a few mintues at the expo. I was quite surprised and when I start my next project will use it. I am sure that I will save quite a bit of time off of development using it. I also took a look at the code that it spits out the end. Formatted nicly even with comments so after I can go in and edit to my hearts content. Over all it is a nice addition to my toolbelt.
Do you changes clothes while making the "chee-chee-cha-cha-choh" transformation sound?
As long as you have compatibility between Desktop Environments, you do not need an agreement. I'll give you an example: You can run your KDE Applets on the Gnome toolbar. It's even an advantage not to have always the same toolkits and Desktop environments, because the user/customer can choose the Desktop he likes, without having the need of thinking about compatibility.
That's competition. This page was from TT, and it's there choice. Like all the Linux commercials making fun of BillG are in good taste? Lastly, it IS true. GNOME DOES have slower repaints than KDE.
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
It seems that it has become extremely fashionable to criticize every single detail of whatever might not be absolutely politically correct about QT and KDE. On the other hand, whatever GNOME does is welcomed, even if it is, to say the least, as inflammatory as any of the KDE/Trolltech comments (e.g. Icaza's Unix sucks comments).
Trolltech is a software company that has to make money to survive. And they are writing fairly decent software for that, and provide it for free for non-commercial applications. All they get in return (from the slashdot crowd) is flames. Don't you think that this will make any other company think twice before they provide something for free for Open Source development?
As for the Gnome `dissing': Trolltech already took it off the website in no time. Please read before posting.
As for QT designer: sure there's more toolkits available (Kylix, KDevelop, etc.). But, hey, what's so bad about having yet another one? And for commercial development, 2.5k$ is nothing. A good coder costs heaps more than that (for instance MATLAB, a numerical simulations environment costs $10k for industry and $1k for universities).
So stop complaining and start coding if you want to make a point.
I believe Qt designer spits out C code, not some high level XML representation of the interface, so you're SOL there! :-(
Perhaps the best way to implement what you're after would be to implement a "libqtglade" that instantiates glade interfaces in Qt rather than GTK+ as libglade does.
It seems even TrollTech is getting in on the GNOME bashing. I like both GNOME and KDE, but really, that's not the sort of thing I expect to see on a corporate home page. How about a little professionalism, guys?