David Ching wrote on Saturday, February 27, 2010 2:09 AM:
> ... For example, please tell me how I would quickly use Qt to
> develop the apps shown in
"Sales Dashboard" - Oh PLEASE, c'mon! Some nicely rendered "business charts"
with "flushy flushy" mouse-over effects don't make an application yet! That is
the problem when comparing toolkits: "managers" and other "decision makers" are
so easiliy blended with these "sexy GUI" elements. Just add a few widgets with
"compelling visual effects" and there you go: "We NEED this technology"! nah...
> I honestly hope you can, because I would far rather use Qt than .NET
> to develop these kinds of apps.
Agreed: Qt does not offers these "out-of-the-box" "Manager/salespeople" widgets
- and I hope it never will!Because it is so easy to build them by yourself (and
yes, in my former company they DID this ribbon crap easily with Qt.)
And I am sure you could easily increase performance in your
[you-name-it]-toolkit with OpenGL by simply replacing the target widget, just
like Qt can? Or you can draw any QWidget with OpenGL, just as with Qt
But IMHO the best part of Qt has not yet been discussed: the CLEAR separation
of generated (UI) code and the actual implementation! Everything you create
with Qt Designer is put into a separate file/namespace and you never see it
mixed. And the simple power of signals/slots is so much more appealing than
this observer-pattern in Java, for example (define an Observable-interface, add
add/delete-observer methods, etc. - everything that is done automatically by
the moc in Qt for you).
> But I don't know how.
As everyone knows: "You never stop learning in your life."
Dipl. Informatik-Ing. ETH
COMIT AG - ++41 79 520 95 22
Qt-interest mailing list