Re: [Interest] QtQuick for mobile - any experience to share?

@ekke thanks for sharing! still not clear what > > *With this in mind, we have leveled out the playing field for small teams > and growing businesses by providing an extended evaluation period of Qt for > up to 3 named developers.* really means? On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 6:42 AM, ekke wrote: >

Re: [Interest] QtQuick for mobile - any experience to share?

for iOS I found this: https://opensource.stackexchange.com/questions/6463/in-2018-if-i-use-c-qt-5-10-0-to-build-a-closed-source-application-requires-ope/6495#6495 but sounds complicated for me as a mobile business app developer really sorry that there is no Indie mobile dev license from Qt I

Re: [Interest] QtQuick for mobile - any experience to share?

On 29 May 2018 at 06:39, René Hansen wrote: > > I can't speak for IOS, but at least on Android, all Qt libraries are packed > inside the application apk as .so files, so no static linking there. > > It seems the "go-to" reply on the list and from Qt in general is, "just buy > the license".

Re: [Interest] QtQuick for mobile - any experience to share?

I can't speak for IOS, but at least on Android, all Qt libraries are packed inside the application apk as .so files, so no static linking there. It seems the "go-to" reply on the list and from Qt in general is, "just buy the license". Somewhat shortsighted, but understandable as it is, Qt is a

Re: [Interest] QtQuick for mobile - any experience to share?

My mistake, I understood the question was about to make my app GPL compliant. I would agree with you for the desktop version but I don't think that it is feasible for a mobile app (is it not statically linked BTW?) and I also understood the app store was not GPL friendly, but maybe my knowledge is

Re: [Interest] QtQuick for mobile - any experience to share?

> I thought about it but that does not work for all projects, and I don’t see the business model in that case for my app. in which case would using Qt under the LGPL affect your business model ? You don't have to publish your sources, only under the GPL. --- Jean-Michaël Celerier

Re: [Interest] QtQuick for mobile - any experience to share?

On Mon, 28 May 2018 at 16:21, René Hansen wrote: > Or... > > Just make your app LGPL compliant and use Qt anyway. > I thought about it but that does not work for all projects, and I don’t see the business model in that case for my app.

Re: [Interest] QtQuick for mobile - any experience to share?

Or... Just make your app LGPL compliant and use Qt anyway. /René On Mon, 28 May 2018 at 15:57 ekke wrote: > Am 28.05.18 um 11:25 schrieb Christoph Keller: > > You are correct, in my opinion the price for Qt is way too high if you > only need the mobile platforms. > >

Re: [Interest] QtQuick for mobile - any experience to share?

Am 28.05.18 um 11:25 schrieb Christoph Keller: > > You are correct, in my opinion the price for Qt is way too high if you > only need the mobile platforms. > that's right there should be a 30$ or so per Dev per month license for mobile platforms really don't understand why Qt isn't pushing mobile

Re: [Interest] QtQuick for mobile - any experience to share?

You are correct, in my opinion the price for Qt is way too high if you only need the mobile platforms. That's the reason we're thinking about phasing out Qt in the next project. You'll likely reach the $100k revenue with a 2-man project soon. Don't forget there's also Google's Flutter in the