Qt-interest Archive, April 2008
Re: Qt on the iPhone
Message 1 in thread
On Saturday 29 March 2008 19.58:06 Thiago Macieira wrote:
> 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.
It's an age long discussion just what the Nokia tablets are supposed to be.
They are not designed to be phones, and the OP is correct that it's
functionally more next of kin to a Zaurus or iPod Touch than it is to an
iPhone. Whether the future is that these devices will gain more phone-like
functionalities, or the phones will get more of what these devices can do
today is still anybodys guess, I think. The Nokia logo on the device is
somewhat misleading in this case, from personal experience nobody really
understands why this isn't a phone - then I just cover the nokia logo, and
say imagine you have not seen an iPhone yet - would you think this is meant
to be a phone ? The Nokia device is just great at what it's originally aimed,
it's just that from the physical appearance and brand people think it's
Nokias iPhone competitor - which it clearly isn't. It probably could have
been made such, but is wasn't _meant_ to be the same class of devices. You
can probably tell that I'm one of the people who don't actually miss phone
functionality from the tablet (3G _DATA_ transfer is a different issue, but
let's not open pandora's box here :).
PS. And, just to stay marginally on topic, I really enjoy QT being available
for my little hacks on the tablet, now, if only Python-QT would be readily
available, the fun would never end :)
--
[ signature omitted ]
