Poll: Cross Platform GUI
-
ed welch wrote: a) Just ignore your Macintosh and Linux markets and let some other company get the profits. I didn't suggest that. ed welch wrote: b) Write completely seperate applications and fork your code base. You don't need to write completely separate apps. Just separate the UI layer from the rest of the app. So, you can have one UI layer for Win32, one for the MAC etc. Keep the business logic in portable code.
You could do that, but then you have to use the GUI toolkit from both platforms, instead of just one cross platform one. Even though using a cross platform toolkit still means you have to do write some platform specific code, it is a *lot* less work than recoding the entire GUI.
-
No one claims that cross-platform GUIs work perfectly, but it's better than the alternatives: a) Just ignore your Macintosh and Linux markets and let some other company get the profits. b) Write completely seperate applications and fork your code base.
ed welch wrote: Just ignore your Macintosh and Linux markets and let some other company get the profits. Mac maybe, but I am not aware of any profitable GUI application for Linux.
My programming blahblahblah blog. If you ever find anything useful here, please let me know to remove it.
-
I do not. Every effort I have seen has not been productive. It is far better to really seperate the business code from the presentation and develope the presentation for the enviroment. I do not mind getting old. It beats all the other options that I can think of.
wxWidgets can use what's called XRC to seperate the GUI from the code, which is very much like XAML. Jeremy Falcon
-
I vote for Qt. It is open source. Version 4 was reciently launched and now free version is available for Windows.
-
The trouble with Qt (which I think is a fine lib too) is that commercial development isn't free. :~
-
Uhm, how many people here think cross-platform GUI programming is actually a good idea?
Cross-platform GUI programming isn't all that bad. I think Qt does a good job, unlike Java. The only objections I have is when for example an app looks like a windows app, when it's running on Mac or Unix. As long as the platform's look'n'feel is preserved (without horrible performance penalties!), then there's no problem really...? Good music: In my rosary[^]
-
Not me! I've always thought that the entire cross-platform argument was a crock mainly because it's impossible. There's always something that platform A can do that platform B can't. Whereupon the code base compiled for platform B grows a conditionally compiled excressence to fake something. And then the code base for platform A grows a similar excressence to compensate for the things IT can't do... And that way madness lies... Rob Manderson I'm working on a version for Visual Lisp++ My blog http://blogs.wdevs.com/ultramaroon/[^]
If system A supports the WIMP-idiom and system B as well, then it is quite possible (which I believe Qt demonstrates quite well). However, when you start to abstract away the operating system (of which the GUI is only a small part), then you end up with a very bad lowest common denominator. Good music: In my rosary[^]
-
They have to make money somehow. And it's not all that much money, if you compare the cost of the needed effort to write your own GUI abstractions. Good music: In my rosary[^]
-
They have to make money somehow. And it's not all that much money, if you compare the cost of the needed effort to write your own GUI abstractions. Good music: In my rosary[^]
-
It's around $4000 per developer. That's makes it unfeasable for any small scale projects that wouldn't be expected to generate a lot of revenue.
But then again.. what small scale projects are cross-platform? Just to support more than one platform requires quite an organization. Just supporting the 9x and the NT sides of Windows requires more than you'd want. Good music: In my rosary[^]
-
But then again.. what small scale projects are cross-platform? Just to support more than one platform requires quite an organization. Just supporting the 9x and the NT sides of Windows requires more than you'd want. Good music: In my rosary[^]
-
True, but there wouldn't be much point in it, would it? Unless, of course, you find the features in the library well worth the money. :) Good music: In my rosary[^]
-
I am also using it currently, and it rocks, but I am not sure of its future. It has still a long way to grow and mature enough like MFC, where you want a control and just search codeproject, finish... http://www.priyank.in/
That's a reasonable doubt, but if authors continue their work like they did till now..the future looks good:cool: --- YOU KNOW WHAT YOU ARE BLONDIE!?!? YOU'RE JUST A SON OF A BA A A A AAAAAAAAAA!!!!! http://sprdsoft.cmar-net.org