| Trolltech Home | Qt-interest Home | Recent Threads | All Threads | Author | Date | |
| All threads index page 5 | |
This is more of a detailed feature request / roadmap suggestion than a question. I thought some other people on the list might want to comment, or throw their $0.02 worth in as well. I'm a dual platform commercial license holder (Windows/Mac), and I am planning to start two new iPhone projects. I've been using Qt since the late 3.3 days and absolutely love it. I know Trolltech already has their hands full getting Qt on top of Cocoa instead of Carbon, now I'm sure they have some developers telling they want Qt for the iPhone too. This is a huge undertaking, as it's not just a port, but the GUI on the iPhone presents it's own unique challenges. As a paying customer, I would be really really really happy if Trolltech could just provide in the near term the ability to build QtCore for the iPhone (AND this needs to co-exist with my desktop Qt build). Things like QString, QFile, sockets, etc. Nothing GUI or event loop related. All my core libraries and components are becoming Qt based over time. I'm probably not the only developer who will just suck it up and learn Cocoa and Objective C (I have already mixed Cocoa and Qt on the desktop on more than one occasion) for the front end. Rather than wait a year (or two) for a version of Qt for the iPhone, I would much rather see: 1. Ability to build any QtCore components with XCode 3.1 binary ready to iPhone. I could start using this tomorrow (development snapshots are cool). 2. Ok... down the road, maybe offscreen painting with QPainter, that could be useful, but wouldn't have to be a priority. 3. Full Qt support for the iPhone... whenever. I don't plan to wait this long to deliver my first iPhone app. But I would like to use Qt as much as possible, as soon as possible. I'm sure other developers have their own priorities and needs. I don't think anyone reasonably expects Trolltech to have a full iPhone solution soon, if ever. If Trolltech is considering it, they need to hear from their customers that we want it. And if we are willing to take some compromises in the near term, what they are. Richard -- [ signature omitted ]
With Nokia courting Trolltech, I doubt Qt will ever support the iPhone. Keith **Please do not reply to me, reply to the list.** On 03-27-2008 10:22 AM, "Richard S. Wright Jr." wrote: > This is more of a detailed feature request / roadmap suggestion than a > question. I thought some other people on the list might want to > comment, or throw their $0.02 worth in as well. > > I'm a dual platform commercial license holder (Windows/Mac), and I am > planning to start two new iPhone projects. I've been using Qt since > the late 3.3 days and absolutely love it. I know Trolltech already has > their hands full getting Qt on top of Cocoa instead of Carbon, now I'm > sure they have some developers telling they want Qt for the iPhone > too. This is a huge undertaking, as it's not just a port, but the GUI > on the iPhone presents it's own unique challenges. > > As a paying customer, I would be really really really happy if > Trolltech could just provide in the near term the ability to build > QtCore for the iPhone (AND this needs to co-exist with my desktop Qt > build). Things like QString, QFile, sockets, etc. Nothing GUI or event > loop related. All my core libraries and components are becoming Qt > based over time. I'm probably not the only developer who will just > suck it up and learn Cocoa and Objective C (I have already mixed Cocoa > and Qt on the desktop on more than one occasion) for the front end. > > Rather than wait a year (or two) for a version of Qt for the iPhone, I > would much rather see: > > 1. Ability to build any QtCore components with XCode 3.1 binary ready > to iPhone. I could start using this tomorrow (development snapshots > are cool). > > 2. Ok... down the road, maybe offscreen painting with QPainter, that > could be useful, but wouldn't have to be a priority. > > 3. Full Qt support for the iPhone... whenever. I don't plan to wait > this long to deliver my first iPhone app. But I would like to use Qt > as much as possible, as soon as possible. > > I'm sure other developers have their own priorities and needs. I don't > think anyone reasonably expects Trolltech to have a full iPhone > solution soon, if ever. If Trolltech is considering it, they need to > hear from their customers that we want it. And if we are willing to > take some compromises in the near term, what they are. > > > Richard > -- [ signature omitted ]
Um... the time for courting is over... all that's waiting it the consummation of the relationship :) Though I think the iPhone will be a definite proof if independence issue... If it becomes clear they will not work towards it, then it shows the true intentions of the new relationship. Scott > -----Original Message----- > From: Keith Esau [mailto:keith.esau@xxxxxxx] > Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2008 11:28 AM > To: Qt Interest > Subject: Re: Qt on the iPhone > > With Nokia courting Trolltech, I doubt Qt will ever support the iPhone. > > Keith > **Please do not reply to me, reply to the list.** > > > On 03-27-2008 10:22 AM, "Richard S. Wright Jr." wrote: > > > This is more of a detailed feature request / roadmap suggestion than > a > > question. I thought some other people on the list might want to > > comment, or throw their $0.02 worth in as well. > > > > I'm a dual platform commercial license holder (Windows/Mac), and I am > > planning to start two new iPhone projects. I've been using Qt since > > the late 3.3 days and absolutely love it. I know Trolltech already > has > > their hands full getting Qt on top of Cocoa instead of Carbon, now > I'm > > sure they have some developers telling they want Qt for the iPhone > > too. This is a huge undertaking, as it's not just a port, but the GUI > > on the iPhone presents it's own unique challenges. > > > > As a paying customer, I would be really really really happy if > > Trolltech could just provide in the near term the ability to build > > QtCore for the iPhone (AND this needs to co-exist with my desktop Qt > > build). Things like QString, QFile, sockets, etc. Nothing GUI or > event > > loop related. All my core libraries and components are becoming Qt > > based over time. I'm probably not the only developer who will just > > suck it up and learn Cocoa and Objective C (I have already mixed > Cocoa > > and Qt on the desktop on more than one occasion) for the front end. > > > > Rather than wait a year (or two) for a version of Qt for the iPhone, > I > > would much rather see: > > > > 1. Ability to build any QtCore components with XCode 3.1 binary ready > > to iPhone. I could start using this tomorrow (development snapshots > > are cool). > > > > 2. Ok... down the road, maybe offscreen painting with QPainter, that > > could be useful, but wouldn't have to be a priority. > > > > 3. Full Qt support for the iPhone... whenever. I don't plan to wait > > this long to deliver my first iPhone app. But I would like to use Qt > > as much as possible, as soon as possible. > > > > I'm sure other developers have their own priorities and needs. I > don't > > think anyone reasonably expects Trolltech to have a full iPhone > > solution soon, if ever. If Trolltech is considering it, they need to > > hear from their customers that we want it. And if we are willing to > > take some compromises in the near term, what they are. > > > > > > Richard > > > > > -- > To unsubscribe - send a mail to qt-interest-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with > "unsubscribe" in the subject or the body. > List archive and information: http://lists.trolltech.com/qt-interest/ -- [ signature omitted ]
Hi, > Um... the time for courting is over... all that's waiting it the > consummation of the relationship :) > > Though I think the iPhone will be a definite proof if independence > issue... If it becomes clear they will not work towards it, then it > shows the true intentions of the new relationship. I think that is overstating it. There can be all kinds of reasons not to port Qt for the iPhone (just yet). In my view, not releasing for the iPhone can be a valid technical and/or business desission that has nothing to do with Nokia protecting it's interests by not "supporting" the iPhone. One such reason is, IMHO, that the importance of the iPhone is overrated. It is not by a long shot the most popular OS for mobile phones at the market. Why invest all the effort to get it on there, if a) QTopia uptake is still rather limited to begin with in the phone/smartphone/pda market b) there are bigger targets - like symbian - that might be more interesting in terms of market share? Anyway, we will see. I'd like to see Qt on as many platforms as possible, as long as it doesn't damage Qt's quality or rate of development. André -- [ signature omitted ]
> > Though I think the iPhone will be a definite proof if independence > > issue... If it becomes clear they will not work towards it, then it > > shows the true intentions of the new relationship. > I think that is overstating it. There can be all kinds of > reasons not to > port Qt for the iPhone (just yet). In my view, not releasing > for the iPhone > can be a valid technical and/or business desission that has > nothing to do > with Nokia protecting it's interests by not "supporting" the iPhone. > One such reason is, IMHO, that the importance of the iPhone > is overrated. [...] i disagree. i think the iPhone is showing us the future of mobile phones. i also think it would be a very stupid move of Nokia to keep Qt off the iPhone. i think they are more clever than that ;-) It would be a good idea to have Qt behave natively on multitouch devices in general. just my 2 cents, Peter -- [ signature omitted ]
On Friday 28 March 2008 11:12:26 Peter Prade wrote: > > > Though I think the iPhone will be a definite proof if independence > > > issue... If it becomes clear they will not work towards it, then it > > > shows the true intentions of the new relationship. > > > > I think that is overstating it. There can be all kinds of > > reasons not to > > port Qt for the iPhone (just yet). In my view, not releasing > > for the iPhone > > can be a valid technical and/or business desission that has > > nothing to do > > with Nokia protecting it's interests by not "supporting" the iPhone. > > One such reason is, IMHO, that the importance of the iPhone > > is overrated. [...] > > i disagree. i think the iPhone is showing us the future of mobile phones. > i also think it would be a very stupid move of Nokia to keep Qt off the > iPhone. i think they are more clever than that ;-) It would be a good idea > to have Qt behave natively on multitouch devices in general. There's a difference between "keeping it off" and "not having enough demand to do it". It will take resources to do it and to maintain it, all for one device. The Windows CE platform is used in many devices and has a clear demand. As other people have pointed out, there's also Symbian that might be more interesting first. And, obviously, Embedded Linux. You can only hope that the Embedded Darwin platform becomes more mainstream. -- [ signature omitted ]
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Hi, >> One such reason is, IMHO, that the importance of the iPhone >> is overrated. [...] > > i disagree. i think the iPhone is showing us the future of mobile phones. OK, let me clarify: the importance in terms of the device itself is, IMHO, overrated. The importance in terms of the concept, in, as you say, "showing us the future of mobile phones" *is* there. I agree. But the same ideas can, in that future, be implemented based on other platforms, such as embedded windows or linux versions, or even symbian. There is no need to support the iPhone as a device and OS in order to think about how to support features demonstrated on that device. > i also think it would be a very stupid move of Nokia to keep Qt off the > iPhone. > i think they are more clever than that ;-) It would be a good idea to have > Qt behave natively on multitouch > devices in general. The latter I agree with, the former I'm not so sure. It may be stupid try to keep it off the iPhone (as in: actively trying to prevent that), but it may be just as stupid for Qt/Nokia to invest the effort to get Qt ported to that *one* device. André -- [ signature omitted ]
André Somers wrote: >> i disagree. i think the iPhone is showing us the future of mobile >> phones. I agree. I recently purchased an iPod Touch and I am dying to write some Qt code for it to demonstrate the power of in-your-hand rich applications to my customers. I know they would *love* to use the iPhone to run their software without being tethered to their desk. --Dave -- [ signature omitted ]
On Friday 28 March 2008 10:14:32 André Somers wrote: > I think that is overstating it. There can be all kinds of reasons not to > port Qt for the iPhone (just yet). In my view, not releasing for the iPhone > can be a valid technical and/or business desission that has nothing to do > with Nokia protecting it's interests by not "supporting" the iPhone. > One such reason is, IMHO, that the importance of the iPhone is overrated. Yes, that's true. But that's not all truth. Most of the popular "social" websites are running iPhone-compatible versions. Why do they dedicate resources to make site look just a bit better on one platform and one hardware device? iPhone is the first UNIX-powered device you can really easy hack into. No really, I've got toolchain and vim up and running onboard the next day after I got iPhone. Sure that's not officially allowed by Apple, but until SDK-compatible firmware is out this is the only choice. Greenphone was never actually targeted at consumer market, and Neo1973 is still not ready. -- [ signature omitted ]
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Vladimir Pouzanov wrote: >iPhone is the first UNIX-powered device you can really easy hack into. > No really, I've got toolchain and vim up and running onboard the next > day after I got iPhone. Sure that's not officially allowed by Apple, > but until SDK-compatible firmware is out this is the only choice. > Greenphone was never actually targeted at consumer market, and Neo1973 > is still not ready. You forgot the Nokias N770, N800 and N810. They all are Linux-based (as opposed to Darwin-based) and, unlike the iPhone and iPod Touch, come with a full SDK supported by opensource developers, built on top of known Open Source software. See: http://www.maemo.org The difference? They are not phones and, in my view, could be considered no more than prototypes. In a few years, people will look back at these and say they were ahead of their time. They use Internet protocols for accessing the network (as opposed to telephony, like GSM), which means they had poor coverage, and went mostly unnoticed. -- [ signature omitted ]
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
On Saturday 29 March 2008 20:58:06 Thiago Macieira wrote: > You forgot the Nokias N770, N800 and N810. They all are Linux-based (as > opposed to Darwin-based) and, unlike the iPhone and iPod Touch, come with > a full SDK supported by opensource developers, built on top of known Open > Source software. No, I did that on purpose. > The difference? They are not phones This is the answer ;) I consider Nokia internet tablets as devices of same category as Sharp Zaurus. -- [ signature omitted ]
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
On Thursday 27 March 2008 16:22:10 Richard S. Wright Jr. wrote: > I'm sure other developers have their own priorities and needs. I don't > think anyone reasonably expects Trolltech to have a full iPhone > solution soon, if ever. If Trolltech is considering it, they need to > hear from their customers that we want it. And if we are willing to > take some compromises in the near term, what they are. i want symbian first! no seriously, i doubt that's going to happen. TT is already quiet understaffed (imho). Of course you could increase the amount of developers as well as the amount of money you pay for qt. (qt is still quiet cheap compared to Borland, which is quiet crap) but... why not just start an unofficial port like the port to the nokia tablet? if you make it opensource, and announce it here and on some other community portals, i'm sure some people would join you. Oh and i suggest you mail customer support, so the desicion makers hear your voice. -- [ signature omitted ]