On 9-4-2010 10:11, Oliver.Knoll@xxxxxxxx wrote:
> Werner Van Belle wrote on Friday, April 09, 2010 9:36 AM:
>> ... Nowhere do I see
>> this 'explicit prohibition' of yours ? Or is there something I don't
>> understand here ?
> "Applications that link to Documented APIs through an intermediary
> translation or compatibility layer or tool are prohibited."
> Your app: whatever
> Compatibility layer: Qt
> So your app would not directly target the "Documented API" (but the Qt API
> instead) -> Apple forbids this, at it seems.
> That is how I understand it.
> Cheers, Oliver
I would understand it like that as well, but the situation is not 100%
clear. Would that separation still really be there if you'd link Qt
statically in your app? I guess it depends how Apple interprets it's own
rules. The problem is: Apple makes the rules as well as judges if apps
fit them. If they do, but they don't want the apps to fit them, they
simply change the rules.
I understand that a firm like Nokia is not enthousiastic about investing
into such an uncertain market where your whole investment could be wiped
away by a third party at any time. I would not.
I also agree with an earlier post that stated that you should not
overestimate the usefulness of Qt on that platform. I think the UI
warrants separate code on a platform like apples, but there may be a
market for a solid base in terms of the core Qt, networking and similar
API's. This would enable you to easily port over the core of an
application, and develop a UI that really fits the platform on top of
that. An intermidiary GUI layer like QtGUI is very nice on the desktop
(and even there there are problems of fitting into the platform
properly), but I think that on mobile devices, this gap is just a bit
too wide. But perhaps the Trolls can amaze us all once again :-)
Qt-interest mailing list