[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Too late! Window hasta la vista 5308 is now fully operational.

From: Peter Köhlmann
Subject: Re: Too late! Window hasta la vista 5308 is now fully operational.
Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 20:45:51 +0100
User-agent: KNode/0.10.1

Ian Hilliard wrote:

> On Sat, 25 Feb 2006 20:01:43 -0800, Rex Ballard wrote:
>> The irony is that Linux actually had easier to use tools.  Tools like
>> Python, Perl/TK, GTK, and Java AWT made it really easy to create really
>> simple and effective GUI interfaces to Linux applications.  On the
>> other hand, coding GUI interfaces in C or C++ with core toolkits was a
>> bit more challenging.  Microsoft was also really promoting the
>> dailights out of Visual Basic as the primary interface - partly to make
>> sure that applications could not be easily ported to Linux.
> Back in the mid-90's, Unix had X11 and Motif. There was a clone of Motif
> for Linux, but it was on very shakey ground. It was expected to be banned,
> as an illegal copy, at any time. Programming X11 directly was a great
> recipe for insanity. Motif was a little better, but not much.
> Microsoft came out with Visual Studio, where it was possible for a
> programmer, who didn't really understand about programming graphics, to
> produce reasonable looking GUIs. That sold Windows to the developers.
> Unfortunately, Linux still lacks a tool like Visual Studio, which makes
> the development of GUI software a matter of putting the bits where you
> want them and then compile, all in the same IDE. I know Borland had Kylix,
> which was supposed to do this, but it seems to have been still born. To
> that, QT has quite a high seat cost, if you want to produce commercial
> software. WxWidgets seem to insist on including GTK, which instantly makes
> it GPL.
> The managers of most software houses will not release their software under
> GPL, as this would permit the competition, which had not gone GPL to steal
> all their know-how and gain a competitive advantage. If Linux wants to
> become main-stream, this is an issue which needs to be settled, rather
> sooner than later.
> Ian

No, it doesn't.
Anyone producing commercial, non-free software can easily foot the licence
costs for QT
Anyone else doing in-house programming can use the GPL version.
As can all the guys who do not write software the commercial way
FLASH!  Intelligence of mankind decreasing.  Details at ... uh, when
the little hand is on the ....

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]