I'll just repeat (since these threads seem to be linked from many
places) - a Qt version for Linux is not impossible, it just requires a
dedicated set of folk to work on it and maintain it. The design of
Chromium is such that N front ends are possible. The team is most
familiar with GTK and so that's where they'll be focusing their
energy.

-Ben

On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 9:59 PM, inaneframe <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> I'm not understanding the animosity shown toward GTK in this thread
> thus far.  A majority of GNU/Linux distros are now using GNOME as the
> default distro, I use and nearly every Free Software user that I know
> IRL uses and prefers it.  I'm not going to bad mouth QT, I used it
> predominately a couple years ago in the 3.2 days and used it up until
> the betas of 3.5.
>
> All I want is a fast browser and I for one am happy about the choice
> to use GTK, not only because I use GNOME but also because I've noticed
> quite a bit of difference between loading QT in a non-QT environment
> vs loading GTK in a non-GTK environment, GTK is faster.  Try loading
> Dolphin or Konqueror from GNOME and then Thunar, nautilus or epiphany
> from KDE and it's apparent.  Dolphin is a very fast application,
> pretty darn slow to load in GNOME, Thunar is comparable directly, fast
> as hell to load in either environment.
>
> All I know is that there shouldn't be this kind of hate in the Free
> Software community.
> >
>

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
Chromium Developers mailing list: [email protected] 
View archives, change email options, or unsubscribe: 
    http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-dev
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to