[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       userlinux-discuss
Subject:    Re: [Discuss] ISV's and Licensing
From:       rahul <rahulsundaram () yahoo ! co ! in>
Date:       2003-12-12 15:15:35
[Download RAW message or body]

Hi

>
>SDK should be LGPL'ed and ISO-9000xx certified, so it will gain
>acceptance in business.
>
>And base your next-gen DESKTOP on this new Standard-SDK.
>Let people make it multi-platform.
>
>  
>


Are you sure you have an idea about the amount of work you will have to 
do to make this possible.

>Motivation is this:
>==================
>X-Windows system won't last for ever. It should be replaced in the next
>3 years. Thou it need to support existing X-applications somehow longer.
>  
>

So?. GTK and QT can support the new platform whatever it is.

> 
>Whole human-machine GUI (desktop, windows and forms) need to be
>re-thinked or extended. 
>
>In 2005 most computers will have accelerated graphic cards as standard.
>And we are talking about 3 - 5GHZ CPU power. This power can be utilized
>by this new Standard-SKD and 3D-desktop.
>
>  
>

No.3D desktop does not automatically come into the picture just because 
we have the resources.

>- The first version of SDK will be wrapped to X and Xt libraries under X
>windows manager (as QT and GTK are today). 
>
>- Next gen SDK will deprecate X and move to it's own manager.
>  The X is out.
>
>  
>
You are wrong. X is a very flexible protocol. The implementation XFREE86 
can be improved and efforts are being taken.
Think about driver support when planning to chuck out X.

>- SDK widgets need to be 3D aware.
>
>  
>
- DESKTOP need to be 3D based as well.

No.

>- Translucency, CMYK colors, multi shaped windows etc. new stuff? is
>natural part of your new 3-DESKTOP.
>
>- If you dislike 3D rotable windows or you run << 1GHZ PC,  then just
>open desktop-settings and mark for 2D compliancy and you're back in
>2D-flat world a'la Microsoft Windows, KDE or GNOME. 
>
>------------------
>
>Food for thought.
>
>Sample toolkits:
>http://objectcentral.com 	(the absolute winner. Begin with this!)
>http://www.trolltech.com
>http://www.gtkmm.org/ (http://www.gtk.org)
>http://www.wxwindows.org
>http://www.gnustep.org
>http://www.opengroup.org/pubs/catalog/mo.htm +
>http://sourceforge.net/projects/lesstif
>http://www.fltk.org + http://sptk.tts-sf.com/index.php
>http://www.tcl.tk + http://media.wu-wien.ac.at
>http://www.sju.edu/~jhodgson/gui/implem.html
>
>Sample desktop systems:
>http://www.3dwm.org/sshots
>https://www.sun.com/bigadmin/xtreme
>
>CMYK, RGB: 
>http://www.cnet.com/Resources/Info/Glossary/Terms/cmyk.html
>
>Cheers,
>// os moma
>   -;)
>-------------------------
>
>
>
>
>On Wed, 2003-12-10 at 21:39, Mark Bucciarelli wrote: 
>  
>
>>I'm sorry to continue this thread, but I can't sit still.  I just learned that 
>>the Linux Standards Base futures project has made a similar decision on QT.
>>
>>It is ludicrous to think that a commercial software development would not pay 
>>$1,000 per developer to use a superior toolkit.  Even when you export your 
>>development jobs to India, this is a small portion of an annual salary that 
>>is more than offset by gains in productivity.
>>
>>This is supported by the facts: here's a partial list of commercial ISV's that 
>>have products on the market using QT:
>>	Opera, http://www.opera.com
>>	Moniplex, http://www.matrica.de/prodmpxwinlnx.htm
>>	VariCAD, http://www.varicad.com/
>>	QCad, http://www.ribbonsoft.com
>>	FlagShip, http://www.fship.com/
>>	aXERA & aXFAKTURA, http://www.automatix.de/indexlsh.html
>>	Riviera, http://www.aldec.com/Downloads/Default.aspx
>>	theKompany, http://www.thekompany.com/products/
>>	Scientific Computers, Ltd., http://www.scl.com/development/
>>	Adobe Photoshop Album, http://www.adobe.com/products/photoshopalbum/main.html
>>There are more on TrollTech's site, along with quotes from ISV's.
>>
>>You can run your QT app natively on OSX, Windows, GNU/Linux and port it to 
>>embedded devices using Qtopia.  In addition, TrollTech has a program to help 
>>ease the license cost for small companies just starting out.  From what I 
>>understand, QT has a top-knotch support infrastructure.
>>
>>Are there more commerical GTK2 than these two?
>>	Yahoo chat client
>>	Ximian Red Carpet
>>
>>It's ironic that the major benefit of the GNOME project, a project that was 
>>started because QT was not free software, is that more proprietary software 
>>will be written for Linux.
>>
>>Another irony is that that you can now configure the linux kernal using a 
>>graphical interface built with ... QT libraries.  It's in the kernal, but not 
>>in the LSB.
>>
>>A commercial company will choose the toolkit that saves development time.  The 
>>list of ISV's currently using QT versus GTK supports this conjecture.  Their 
>>increase in productivity and greater cross-platform support is of more value 
>>than the one-time, per-developer license fee.
>>
>>For these reasons, I do not understand Bruce's license objection (or the LSB's 
>>for that matter).  Are there any hard data to support the position that 
>>independent software vendors prefer LGPL over QT when developing for 
>>GNU/Linux?  The data I see support the opposite side.
>>
>>Regards,
>>    
>>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Discuss mailing list
>Discuss@lists.userlinux.com
>http://lists.userlinux.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>List administrator: bruce@perens.com 510-526-1165
>Perens LLC / 1563 Solano Ave. / PMB 349 / Berkeley CA 94707 / USA
>
>  
>


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]