On Wed, 19 May 1999, Steve Philp wrote:
> > "I don't think KDE has a future at this point, it's not
> > completely free yet and it's bound to a single
>
> There ARE still license problems with the newest license. And they
> haven't even distributed Qt source UNDER that license yet.
Free software is not the basis of quality, especially when there are so
many definitions of free. I have 100% freedom to use Qt for writing
100% free software. In any case, I noticed that this message was sent
by way of Mozilla 4.51.
> > programming language in Unix. Gnome from the
>
> True. What if I don't WANT to use C++ for my GUI programming? I'm up a
> creek if I want to write to KDE.
With Qt, I can use C++, Python, Perl and C. Besides which, there is
nothing unfree or evil about C++.
> And if I want it cross-platform? Has Qt been ported to Windows?
Of course. From day one. That's the original purpose of Qt,
cross-platform development. However, I wasn't aware that the gtk was
ported to windows. Could you send me more information on this?
> > very beginning has been accessible through any
> > language. We are providing the GUI for all the
> > languages and programmers can choose the
> > language they like the most," says Miguel.
>
> Sounds perfectly rational to me. Maybe a bit of salesmanship, but how
> else are you supposed to let people know why GNOME might be a better
> choice than KDE?
It's more than salesmanship, since KDE can do exactly the same things.
--
Arandir...
_______________________________
<http://www.meer.net/~arandir/>
