Re: [ilugd] QT

rahul wrote:
>
> 
> Also, Sandip had mentioned that the issue with qt is the expense (sorry 
> if i misquote you). Essentially, if you are writing a closed source 
> application, the license can be prohibitive...
> 

To be more specific, there are two practical issues I have with QT:

1. Most open software are written by people who have real jobs and
    happen to use the same technology at work. Let us suppose I am a
    programmer who is also in the market for jobs, where close source
    software is more often written than not. Also suppose that most of my
    prospective employers are not of the kind who are likely to be able
    to afford QT for their own products. Shall I be aiming for
    proficiency in something which is not likely to help me in my job? Or
    shall I try to instead devote all my energies to Gtk or
    wxwindows(which is a layer over Gtk AFAIK), which is likely to be
    used?

2. QT Free edition is not available on Windows, you have to buy a
    licence. So if you are planning to use the portability features of QT
    to make a Free cross-platform application, it doesnt happen - you
    need a licensed QT Windows edition to even compile the application.

So even if I love the toolkit for its looks and features, my personal 
decision is to stay away from it.

Ofcourse, this doesnt apply if you have ample time to keep multiple 
widget toolkit coding always in your head, or want to learn QT to only 
create Free applications on the Linux platform. For me, the knowledge 
should have benefits both to my professional and free software world, 
cause I need to earn my bread.

- Sandip

-- 
Sandip Bhattacharya
sandip (at) puroga.com
Puroga Technologies Pvt. Ltd.
Work: http://www.puroga.com        Home: http://www.sandipb.net

GPG: 51A4 6C57 4BC6 8C82 6A65 AE78 B1A1 2280 A129 0FF3