From kde-core-devel Tue Jan 22 16:23:39 2002 From: David Faure Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 16:23:39 +0000 To: kde-core-devel Subject: Re: Qt-only KDE applications X-MARC-Message: https://marc.info/?l=kde-core-devel&m=101171664213141 On Tuesday 22 January 2002 16:55, Neil Stevens wrote: > On Tuesday January 22, 2002 04:45, Matthias Ettrich wrote: > > Opinions? Do you think that would be useful at all? > > I think it'd discourage KDE application development, encouraging instead > Qt application development, because it'd make people think that Qt apps > could be "close enough" for KDE users to tolerate. So it'd be harmful to > KDE. I think this is quite far-fetched. Qt-only development is already encouraged by the fact that Qt-only is Windows-only whereas KDE isn't. Those who make this choice currently don't care much about their Qt app look like in KDE - or if they care, at least they decided that Windows portability is more important. What Matthias suggests is that in such a case, where portability is _already_ weighted as more important than KDE functionality, the app will at least look more integrated into KDE, that's all. > Ultimately, it won't ever make Qt apps be real KDE apps anyway, so KDE > users lose. Of course not, since they'll get more apps. > Who wins? Application developers aimed at securing the largest possible > audience. This allows them to get a raft of KDE services, without > abandoning their core Windows market. ... which means we'll have more specialized (probably commercial) applications running under Linux, with a nice Qt/KDE look-and-feel. I don't think this enters in competition with free software (which doesn't care much about running on Windows, most of the time). We all know that KDE covers the basic needs of a desktop, the general purpose applications, but we're very far from having a KDE (or even Linux) replacement for every existing commercial Windows application!! To make Linux a viable replacement, we need to see those specialized applications becoming available, and this is going to happen sooner with a cross-platform toolkit than if we require people to maintain two different versions of their application. Trying to keep qt-only apps away from KDE look-n-feel sounds like a proprietary approach to me, along the lines of "it's our stuff, you're not allowed to look like it, if you're not really it". I don't think this fits very well with the idea of freedom we're trying to convey, nor with the effort of integration/consistency that KDE is all about. I wish every app out there would be a real Qt+KDE app, and every OS would be a free Unix. But that's just not the case, and never going to happen (a good proportion maybe, but 100%, never). -- David FAURE, david@mandrakesoft.com, faure@kde.org http://people.mandrakesoft.com/~david, http://www.konqueror.org KDE 3.0: Konquering the Desktops