Page 2 of 3 1 2 3
Reply
Thread Tools
uvatbc is offline uvatbc
2011-02-21 , 23:36
Posts: 1,048 | Thanked: 979 times | Joined on Mar 2008 @ SF Bay Area
#11
Originally Posted by Capt'n Corrupt View Post
I know the API segments these things, but isn't the full QT needed to run QT apps? More layers, man. Layers.
Yes and that is in the process of change. I recall seeing a bunch of Qt Troll blogs basically moving in the direction of modularity where a distinct separation of modules is being done so that you can actually make use of the smallest component of Qt that your application/appliance needs. I think it is targeted towards the embedded market, but what works for embedded almost always is good for phones.
__________________
qgvdial: Google Voice client. All downloads
qgvtp: Phone integration for the n900 that dials out and sends texts using qgvdial.
mosquitto: message broker that implements the MQ Telemetry Transport protocol version 3.
qgvnotify: Google voice and contacts notifier for diablo and maemo.

If you want to thank me, click the Thanks button.
If you'd like to thank my applications, vote to move them to extras.
 

The Following User Says Thank You to uvatbc For This Useful Post:
AndiThebest is offline AndiThebest
2011-02-22 , 00:06
Posts: 203 | Thanked: 152 times | Joined on May 2009 @ Austria
#12
Did you never heard about the Android-lighthouse project?
http://code.google.com/p/android-lighthouse/
The Qt-Creator integration is nice
__________________
//Try DrinkCounter from extras-devel
 
uvatbc is offline uvatbc
2011-02-22 , 00:11
Posts: 1,048 | Thanked: 979 times | Joined on Mar 2008 @ SF Bay Area
#13
Originally Posted by AndiThebest View Post
Did you never heard about the Android-lighthouse project?
http://code.google.com/p/android-lighthouse/
The Qt-Creator integration is nice
Huh? That's what this entire thread is about.
__________________
qgvdial: Google Voice client. All downloads
qgvtp: Phone integration for the n900 that dials out and sends texts using qgvdial.
mosquitto: message broker that implements the MQ Telemetry Transport protocol version 3.
qgvnotify: Google voice and contacts notifier for diablo and maemo.

If you want to thank me, click the Thanks button.
If you'd like to thank my applications, vote to move them to extras.
 
droll is offline droll
2011-02-22 , 00:44
Posts: 958 | Thanked: 483 times | Joined on May 2010
#14
i have my doubts.

if i'm a developer for Qt, i would target this platform. huge market. but how many Qt developers are there?

if i'm a developer on Android, why would i pickup this skillset when i already work on Android natively?

unlessssssssssssss Qt is so much simpler to developer on Android than that weird voodoo magic thing Google is touting as the Android development experience. however, if this happens, why would Google allow Qt to run? it would be undermining their own effort.

thoughts?
 
uvatbc is offline uvatbc
2011-02-22 , 01:08
Posts: 1,048 | Thanked: 979 times | Joined on Mar 2008 @ SF Bay Area
#15
Originally Posted by droll View Post
if i'm a developer for Qt, i would target this platform. huge market. but how many Qt developers are there?

if i'm a developer on Android, why would i pickup this skillset when i already work on Android natively?
Because if you do you might, just might be able to target more than just one platform?
__________________
qgvdial: Google Voice client. All downloads
qgvtp: Phone integration for the n900 that dials out and sends texts using qgvdial.
mosquitto: message broker that implements the MQ Telemetry Transport protocol version 3.
qgvnotify: Google voice and contacts notifier for diablo and maemo.

If you want to thank me, click the Thanks button.
If you'd like to thank my applications, vote to move them to extras.
 

The Following User Says Thank You to uvatbc For This Useful Post:
Kangal's Avatar
Kangal is offline Kangal
2011-02-23 , 04:54
Posts: 1,789 | Thanked: 1,699 times | Joined on Mar 2010
#16
Originally Posted by wmarone View Post
No, because now NOKIA is dependent on a Google-controlled OS layer.
So you would rather NOKIA have no control over their operating system, rather than some??

Besides, I much prefer Google's influence on Nokia, rather than Microsoft's (I guess the lesser of two evils).

And even if the N900 successor had stock android user interface its an okay ux, compared to WP7 which is is quite poor (although buttery smooth).
And don't forget with Android you could personally customize it, something like MIUI ROM is killer.
 
Peet is offline Peet
2011-02-23 , 05:23
Posts: 302 | Thanked: 254 times | Joined on Oct 2007
#17
Originally Posted by Kangal View Post
So you would rather NOKIA have no control over their operating system, rather than some??

Besides, I much prefer Google's influence on Nokia, rather than Microsoft's (I guess the lesser of two evils).
Exactly. Until recently Nokia - famed for their logistics - ruled over all other major handset makers (except Apple with their private garden) when they were all running the same "commodity platform" Symbian (which was originally closed but later opened).

Now they're using that 'commodization' as an argument against Android?

Does. not. compute.

Android is open enough so what prevents the major manufacturers from either forking Android or at least forcing Google to play ball with them (e.g. in terms of competitive/alternative components for certain features)??

Now I don't think Google are becoming evil yet, but every sentient player in the mobile food chain feels that they are becoming increasingly arrogant and frankly too powerful.

So why not revive the Symbian partnership but this time around a snapshot of Android code and then start hacking away... If the largest handset makers unite, Google is quite likely to suddenly start listening.

If Qt is a better framework than Dalvik/Java and both can be used side by side Nokia doesn't need to abandon years worth of development and control of their platform. And as a bonus they can let that elop person go and enjoy his loot elsewhere.
 

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Peet For This Useful Post:
wmarone is offline wmarone
2011-02-23 , 16:26
Posts: 1,746 | Thanked: 2,100 times | Joined on Sep 2009
#18
Originally Posted by Kangal View Post
So you would rather NOKIA have no control over their operating system, rather than some??
Huh? When the OS is controlled by a neutral 3rd party it's a lot easier for Nokia to direct where it goes on their handsets. Google has a vested interest in pushing the platform in ways they want it to go, and since they're the only major force putting work into the layers below the GUI, if they quit then suddenly Nokia (and anyone else using it) has to scramble to find people to maintain it.

And don't forget with Android you could personally customize it, something like MIUI ROM is killer.
Sure "customize" it, but I'm not after mere customization.

Originally Posted by Peet View Post
Android is open enough so what prevents the major manufacturers from either forking Android or at least forcing Google to play ball with them (e.g. in terms of competitive/alternative components for certain features)??
Because Google controls the trunk, and is the only company doing primary development. MeeGo dodges that as the entire OS is already being worked on for other purposes. Whereas forking Android would require investing in resources capable of maintaining a divergent fork.

If Qt is a better framework than Dalvik/Java and both can be used side by side Nokia doesn't need to abandon years worth of development and control of their platform.
Well, going with Android you do abandon years worth of development and (thus far) control of the platform. Essentially, you toss all of the FOSS that makes your average Linux distro on to the fire and go for something unique to Google, which gains you effectively nothing except a reduced development effort.
 
Capt'n Corrupt's Avatar
Capt'n Corrupt is offline Capt'n Corrupt
2011-02-23 , 19:46
Posts: 3,524 | Thanked: 2,958 times | Joined on Oct 2007 @ Delta Quadrant
#19
Originally Posted by wmarone View Post
Well, going with Android you do abandon years worth of development and (thus far) control of the platform. Essentially, you toss all of the FOSS that makes your average Linux distro on to the fire and go for something unique to Google, which gains you effectively nothing except a reduced development effort.
In 1991, this would have made a wonderful argument against the system that you're advocating; A full 3 years before the Linux kernel's inception (v0.01), a FOSS BSD was already at version 4, was established, and moving aggressively towards POSIX compliance.
 

The Following User Says Thank You to Capt'n Corrupt For This Useful Post:
wmarone is offline wmarone
2011-02-23 , 19:54
Posts: 1,746 | Thanked: 2,100 times | Joined on Sep 2009
#20
Originally Posted by Capt'n Corrupt View Post
In 1991, this would have made a wonderful argument against the system that you're advocating; A full 3 years before the Linux kernel's inception (v0.01), a FOSS BSD was already at version 4, was established, and moving aggressively towards POSIX compliance.
The GNU utilities and GCC were already widespread by that time, and both BSD and GNU had very different licensing schemes. They've also traded ideas back and forth and BOTH are more open than Android in terms of who controls it. Doesn't help that BSD also got beset by copyright lawsuits (which is what really helped GNU/Linux take off.)

Going between FreeBSD and Linux, for instance, is way easier than going from a regular Linux system to anything running Android, and there's lots of crosstalk and compatibility. See Debian GNU/kFreeBSD.

You could have made the argument, but it would have been a weak one. With Android you're burning 30+ years of development and forsaking a much larger development "team" and not gaining much.
 

The Following User Says Thank You to wmarone For This Useful Post:
Reply
Page 2 of 3 1 2 3

Tags
bada rox, let qt rip, qt rulez!

« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 02:34.

Contact Us - Home - Archive - Top