On 7/14/2015 3:18 AM, Kate Alhola wrote:
I don't see Xamarin more than one competitor on that field. More
serious competition comes from native platforms.
One of the key selling points of Xamarin (like Qt) is that it allows to
reuse your technology knowledge (and tooling, let's not forget
Disclaimer: I don't work or speak for the Qt company. I work(ed) for
companies using the commercial license.
The problem, as I understood it, was that this majority of Qt developers
you mention never materialized or went for the indie license. The sales
suggestion we got indicated that people
On 7/11/2015 2:17 PM, Bob Hood wrote:
On 7/11/2015 5:00 AM, Nicola De Filippo wrote:
Mobile never was a core area for Qt in the post-Nokia period, and while
there are good intentions, I'm sure there is a line after which the
return on investment is really low from a commercial license business
On 7/2/2015 4:42 PM, Igor Mironchik wrote:
Ok, Xamarin is cheaper than Qt. But with Xamarin and C# you can write
crosspaltform only business logic. All UI is platform dependend and
you should write UI for iOS, UI for Android, and so on. With Qt you
can write once and deploy everywhere...
I
Hi,
I created a small QML DDP library wrapper, which makes it possible to
interface and Meteor from any native app written with Qt. This in turn
enables using Meteor as a back-end for native apps on a dozen or so
platforms (ranging from the desktop Win/Mac/Linux trinity to
easy give my controls this new flat light style? Or any other
pre-defined style?
Em Fri Dec 05 2014 at 11:41:50 PM, Attila Csipa q...@csipa.in.rs
mailto:q...@csipa.in.rs escreveu:
Food for thought - if you're not adhering to native
look'n'feel, your only
style?
Em Fri Dec 05 2014 at 11:41:50 PM, Attila Csipa q...@csipa.in.rs
mailto:q...@csipa.in.rs escreveu:
Food for thought - if you're not adhering to native
look'n'feel, your only
(melting) advantage to the various cross-platform
Web-frameworks
Hi,
Qt has a Visual Studio plugin, but Visual Studio Express doesn't support
plugins, so this
is of more interest to commercial developers (and fair enough, there is
an even fancier
version of the plugin in the commercial edition of Qt). While
historically it hasn't been
a high priority thing,
Food for thought - if you're not adhering to native look'n'feel, your only
(melting) advantage to the various cross-platform Web-frameworks is
performance. The classic benefit of cross-platform frameworks was
minimizing development efforts, and the web is (warning: biased opinion
ahead) actually
On 11/27/2014 9:13 AM, Koehne Kai wrote:
As it is now,
whenever I decide to add support for a new feature, I make my QML
incompatible with older Qt versions (which is understandable) with no way of
defining a fallback or alternative (which is not OK) regardless how trivial
the
new feature
On 11/27/2014 9:17 PM, André Pönitz wrote:
If at all, this works only on strictly controlled platforms and strict
policies for applications, not on open systems.
This. The QML versioning, as is, is well suited for
embedded/self-contained projects and those that care only about HEAD.
Hi,
While I'm not aware of the versions being well documented, the
autocomplete in QtCreator seems to offer all the available versions, so
you can check that. The idea originally was that the versions should
reflect the Qt module version, but IIRC this is not strictly true, as
the version
On 11/26/2014 1:39 PM, Tomasz Siekierda wrote:
On 26 November 2014 at 13:29, Attila Csipa q...@csipa.in.rs wrote:
The good news is your 2.0 statement will import whatever the latest
implementation registers for the 2.0 version. The ((un)intended?)
side-effect of this is that the backward
On 11/26/2014 7:34 PM, Thiago Macieira wrote:
On Wednesday 26 November 2014 13:29:12 Attila Csipa wrote:
The import versioning system as done by Qt is a sort of API handshake -
it doesn't actually select between different implementations, you just
select feature-sets. Thus, you should always
On 11/18/2014 11:37 PM, Ian Monroe wrote:
On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 7:13 AM, Attila Csipa q...@csipa.in.rs
mailto:q...@csipa.in.rs wrote:
It turns out you can do a fully functional (ie. not a subset)
Android UI
just by using QAndroidExtras and it's QAndroidJNIObject class from
HI,
It turns out you can do a fully functional (ie. not a subset) Android UI
just by using QAndroidExtras and it's QAndroidJNIObject class from C++,
without ever touching QML or QtQuick. At this point, this is just an
exercise, for details see
):
my.that()
Too far out there? :)
Best regards,
Attila Csipa
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest
one have
to go through native interfaces a la QAndroidJniObject?
Best regards,
Attila Csipa
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest
Hi,
Is there a way to get to Android versions/details (android.os.Build.*)
via Qt APIs (like QSystemDeviceInfo in the old days), or does one have
to go through native interfaces a la QAndroidJniObject?
Best regards,
Attila Csipa
___
Interest
On 18/01/13 13:41, Samuel Rødal wrote:
No, NaCL provides sand-boxing as well and is thus a very safe
alternative to downloading a native executable. Downloading and
installing a browser plugin tends to be a much more stream-lined process
too.
I guess someone just needs to write a killer
Hi,
I've ported QtInfo (shameless plug
https://projects.developer.nokia.com/qtinfo /shameless plug) to Qt5,
and here are a few notes. Overall the porting went fairly easy (had just
two methods to work around, QString::toAscii and
QLibraryInfo::buildKey), the rest was either packaging/qmake
On 21-Dec-12 17:22, Thiago Macieira wrote:
On sexta-feira, 21 de dezembro de 2012 17.14.00, Attila Csipa wrote:
2. QtOpenGL reports no non-ES versions, only OpenGL ES 2 as supported,
which is odd (being run on a desktop computer).
How did you configure Qt? It's possible you're linking
to be direct interest (monetary,
community, etc) for someone to actually do it now that the rich uncle is
gone.
Best regards,
Attila Csipa
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest
On 10/12/2012 03:56 PM, Wolfgang Baron wrote:
Hi Bo Thorsen,
2012-10-12T11:47:02+0200 Bo Thorsen b...@fioniasoftware.dk:
You have to download Qt creator and Qt separately.
Where can I get all the additional stuff then, which enables me to compile
and deploy on mobile devices and the
On 10/12/2012 06:03 PM, Bo Thorsen wrote:
I think it's easier the other way round (add new Qt and QtCreator in the
old SDK).
I have done this, but if you don't need the simulator or the embedded
devices targets, there's no point in it.
Well, the 2.6 does have plenty of nifty features (lots of
On 04/25/2012 04:17 PM, Jason H wrote:
I had considered that, but rejected it because Apple designs and
manufactures its own chips. Therefore, they would change their CPU
design rather than switch architectures.
AFAIK Apple doesn't manufacture their chips - they are in fact, fairly
famous
tying code to *VERSIONS* and not *API*s. The insult-to-injury
there is that the versions mentioned are actually ID strings and contain
no semantics or relations (like major version backwards compatibility, etc).
Best regards,
Attila Csipa
___
Interest
27 matches
Mail list logo
