Trolltech Releases Qt 4.0

lypanov writes "Trolltech has released Qt 4.0 both under commercial and GPL licenses for X11, Mac OS X and MS Windows. It is the first time that a MS Windows GPL edition is available. To celebrate the release Trolltech employees have created a song and a music video (Bittorrent download, Ogg Theora version). Read the Qt 4 Overview and the online Qt Reference Documentation for more information. You can download Qt from ftp.trolltech.com or from one of its mirrors. Work on KDE 4 has already started with making a development branch of KDE compile and run with Qt 4."

Comments

No Kubuntu package yet?

[chx1975]

Can't believe this... Could this my first /. 0?

Need help w/ my Mac please

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't want to start a holy war here, but what is the deal with you Mac fanatics? I have recently upgraded from a Mac 8600/300 w/64 Megs of RAM to a new G5 dual 2GHz with AGP 8X and PCI-X to help me at my freelance gig where I needed to copy a 17 Meg file from my home network to a desktop folder. On the G5 it took about 20 minutes. At home, on my Pentium Pro 200 running NT 4, which by all standards should be a lot slower than this Mac, the same operation would take about 2 minutes. If that.

In addition, during this file transfer, my iPod will not work. And everything else has ground to a halt. Even Safari is straining to keep up as I type this.

I won't bore you with the laundry list of other problems that I've encountered while working on various Macs, but suffice it to say there have been many, not the least of which is I've never seen a Mac that has run faster than its Wintel counterpart, despite the Macs' faster chip architecture. My 486/66 with 8MB of ram running MS Windows for Workgroups 3.11 is faster than this G5 dual 2GHz machine at times. From a productivity standpoint, I don't get how people can claim that the Macintosh is a superior machine.

Mac addicts, flame me if you'd like, but I'd rather hear some intelligent reasons why anyone would choose to use a Mac over other faster, cheaper, more stable systems.

How does QT survive.

[Anonymous Coward]

With free alternatives like gnome, java and wxwindows, how does trolltech survive?

Re:How does QT survive.

[Larthallor]

3) The commercial license is very affordable.

Nice troll, no pun intended.

$50 for DarkBasic is "very affordable".
$109 for Microsoft Visual C++ is "quite affordable".
$3300 for QT 4.0 Desktop is not "very affordable".

And that is just for one platform. If you want to use one of Qt's biggest strengths ("QT is very cross-platform.") you have to shell out $6600 to be able to compile for all three platforms.

Depending on the economics of your business, it may be worth the money, but "very affordable" it ain't.

MOD ARTICLE DOWN

[Anonymous Coward]

Its a troll.
Buh Duh Dum

That doesn't work though

[Anonymous Coward]

These folks have logged various bugs against the Cygwin port, but the developers haven't bothered to address them yet. Too late for 4.0 I guess.

Re:Sure, why not

[DigiShaman]

In that case, maybe you should be modderated as "Troll" being that this is exactly what your post is.

Re:QT: Good but Expensive

[mp3phish]

Dude, these are ports... Don't you think they could get it right if they had time to waste on it? Do you think they care if it looks good on a mac? No, only a mac user would give a shit if his damn ported program from windows doesn't look metally enough. That is the mac attitude.

You know what. Mac users who bitch about such lameness can stuff it IMO.