Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

cancel ×

182 comments

Anonymous Coward (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#28583087)

first?

http://img19.imageshack.us/img19/921/proudamerican (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#28583177)

Happy 4th of July, assholes!

http://img19.imageshack.us/img19/921/proudamerican.jpg [imageshack.us]

umm (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#28583097)

first

N900, please (2, Interesting)

yk4ever (1110821) | about 5 years ago | (#28583103)

That's all fun and games, but why are there no new products in the Internet Table line? C'mon, it's been almost 2 years since N810. The OS lives while the hardware was abandoned? Weird.

Re:N900, please (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#28583157)

While Internet Tables would be an interesting product line, Nokia has never publicly announced or shipped such a product. But cheer up, some of the applications for the Tablets indeed had the same error you made. But thankfully to my knowledge they weren't shipped that way.

Nokia owns Qt. (5, Informative)

Futurepower(R) (558542) | about 5 years ago | (#28583721)

Before you read too far, realize that Nokia owns Qt [arstechnica.com] . It is not surprising that Nokia products use Qt.

Re:Nokia owns Qt. (3, Funny)

PiSkyHi (1049584) | about 5 years ago | (#28584895)

Above post should be modded "-1 trolltech"

Why do they call themselves "trolls"? (1)

Futurepower(R) (558542) | about 5 years ago | (#28585081)

Nope. It's true, Nokia bought Trolltech [nokia.com] . Quote: 'Eirik Chambe-Eng, Chief Troll and co-founder of Trolltech continues "We are thrilled to join forces with Nokia." '

I wonder if the people who work with Qt (cutie) will continue the tradition of calling themselves "trolls"? A troll [thefreedictionary.com] is "an imaginary creature of human-like form, very ugly and evil-tempered".

I doubt very much that the people who work with Qt are ugly and evil-tempered. What I think they meant is that, originally, they had a feeling of not belonging.

I wonder if they will continue calling themselves trolls now that they are part of Nokia.

Re:Why do they call themselves "trolls"? (1)

PiSkyHi (1049584) | about 5 years ago | (#28585171)

Well, it might be a little tricky now that they also changed the default pronunciation to "Cute".

Re:N900, please (4, Informative)

migla (1099771) | about 5 years ago | (#28583331)

I think the RX-51, aka "N900" is due "second half of 2009". The OS for it will not be backwards compatible with the n800

For OS developments regarding n8*0, check out the community project "MER" instead: http://wiki.maemo.org/Mer_Blueprint [maemo.org]

Thank you. (1)

itomato (91092) | about 5 years ago | (#28583625)

I was really liking the Debian chroot environment, but the Maemo overhead put the squeeze on.

Re:N900, please (1)

dbc001 (541033) | about 5 years ago | (#28583771)

I'm an n800 owner and this is the first I've heard of Mer... What exactly is it? Is it a replacement OS? It looks like it's somehow related to Ubuntu MID. Is it stable enough that I should install it? Is it backwards-compatible with Maemo apps? Sorry about all the questions, but I've been anxiously awaiting some cool activity in Maemo-land!

Re:N900, please (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#28583905)

It's the OS running on the N800... Are you sure you own one? It's not a paper tablet?

Re:N900, please (1)

trampel (464001) | about 5 years ago | (#28584331)

AFAIK, it's a project to create an OS that is compatible with Maemo but entirely based on Free Software. One of the goals (IIRC) is to allow running programs using the Freemantle APIs on the semi-abandoned N800s and N810s.

Re:N900, please (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#28585363)

They do not develop new OS for it. They use Linux (or they port Symbian). The OS development is not easy. You can easily write all wanted applications for the phone, from SMS to emails and calenders and phonebook. But the OS is the most difficult to develop. Thats why Nokia use Linux (linux kernel) as their choise of the OS. It is robust, monolithic and all source codes easily available with great community support. The Qt developers already supports Linux well (not the Symbian) so porting is not necessary.

Starting over (1)

Vector7 (2410) | about 5 years ago | (#28583109)

Hardly surprising, considering Hildon really wasn't very good. Sluggish, clumsy, and tending to waste a lot of very precious screen real estate - not that I see how switching to Qt changes any of those things. Still, it sounds like they're basically throwing the whole UI and all the software written for it out, and that sucks. I've long been tempted to write a little music toy app to run on my N800, but I should probably just buy an iPhone or a Pre (given that I don't actually carry the N800 around anywhere anyway).

Re:Starting over (4, Informative)

glebovitz (202712) | about 5 years ago | (#28583337)

take a look at the new animation framework, state machine, and the declarative UI if you want to see good reasons why they are making the switch.

Obligatory (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#28583113)

The K in KDE stands for Krap

Re:Obligatory (-1, Troll)

binarylarry (1338699) | about 5 years ago | (#28583143)

YNHAY new here aren't you?

I know why.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#28583139)

Because QT was released under the LGPL, sorta recently.

Re:I know why.. (5, Informative)

Kjella (173770) | about 5 years ago | (#28583169)

I know why.. Because QT was released under the LGPL, sorta recently.

Uh, maybe because Qt was bought by Nokia? They're the ones who decided to LGPL it, but they can do anything they want with it.

Re:I know why.. (1)

interval1066 (668936) | about 5 years ago | (#28583533)

Exactly. Has nothing to do with the quality of either toolkit, some one at Nokia said "Why are we building this product with the competing technology?" I always make a point of supporting both myself where it makes sense. Even though Qt is a nutty blob of nonsense.

Re:I know why.. (1, Insightful)

mrsteveman1 (1010381) | about 5 years ago | (#28583597)

You don't think they bought Qt because they thought it was better?

Re:I know why.. (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#28583913)

What else should they do, buy FSF?

Re:I know why.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#28584363)

can you explain me why the hell Nokia would buy Trolltech with hundreds of millions of dollars and release in on LGPL while they already had GTK+ LGPL'ed?

i call it quality.

Re:I know why.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#28584969)

Exactly. Has nothing to do with the quality of either toolkit, some one at Nokia said "Why are we building this product with the competing technology?" I always make a point of supporting both myself where it makes sense. Even though Qt is a nutty blob of nonsense.

It's not like Nokia is going to say that "we did this because Gtk+ sucks" in front of a roomfull of Gnome developers.

If C+ & Gtk+ was any good, surely the Gnome developers would not be so eager to jump the ship for C# & Mono. Qt allows you to get by with C++ just fine.

linux is shit for faggots (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#28583195)

and those faggots are a drain on society that will hopefully all die soon so the real humans can get on with what we need to do instead of being held back by a bunch of aids having ass fuckers.

die faggots die!

Ubuntu? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#28583285)

Was I the only one thinking that Nokia was going to bring their N800 successors on to Ubuntu? How will they keep up?

Re:Ubuntu? (2, Informative)

Antidamage (1506489) | about 5 years ago | (#28583579)

Ubuntu is a distro. QT is more of a graphics and application framework.

I wonder about this (3, Interesting)

erroneus (253617) | about 5 years ago | (#28583307)

There is a lot of software for the Nokia N810 and below. Switching out to a new UI means a lot of stuff will either get uprooted or there will be a lot of libraries loaded into the machine's precious little memory.

Still, if the developers of software port over to the new environment quickly enough, it won't matter but I can't imagine things will be quick enough.

What can be done under Qt that can't be done under GTK? Is Qt more efficient in some way? What are advantages of Qt over GTK? I've never been clear on the differences... I just know they are different.

Nokia owns Qt (1)

iYk6 (1425255) | about 5 years ago | (#28583367)

What can be done under Qt that can't be done under GTK? Is Qt more efficient in some way? What are advantages of Qt over GTK? I've never been clear on the differences... I just know they are different.

Personally, I prefer Qt because of the superior documentation. I think Nokia prefers Qt because they own it now. It's sort of like when Microsoft bought Hotmail, and moved the servers from FreeBSD to Windows. It wasn't because it was better, but because it was theirs.

Re:Nokia owns Qt (1)

erroneus (253617) | about 5 years ago | (#28583549)

That's a really bad example... or perhaps a really dark example. In your example, that move was rather poorly done initially. They had all sorts of problems as Windows simply couldn't handle the task. Windows had to evolve to the task and as I understand it, the change was only superficial with BSD still on the back end or has that changed since I last heard?

At the very least, if you are accurate in your parallel, then that forebodes a dark and troubled time during the change over. Of course they would make up for it if while they are creating a new face, they would also create or migrate any heavily used or highly popular programs and utilities to go with it starting with a GPS map and route program that makes use of various types of map data including but not limited to openstreetmaps. I'd be rather pleased with it if it already had everything I want on it to begin with.

Re:I wonder about this (3, Informative)

abigor (540274) | about 5 years ago | (#28583413)

Qt is not just a gui framework. It provides a massive amount of extra stuff. Browse the documentation: http://doc.qtsoftware.com/4.5/index.html/ [qtsoftware.com]

Note the WebKit integration, multimedia framework (Phonon, which was a part of KDE and later folded into Qt), OpenGL support, etc. etc.

Comparing it to GTK is like comparing a full-fledged desktop like KDE or Gnome to Blackbox.

Re:I wonder about this (5, Informative)

ricotest (807136) | about 5 years ago | (#28583519)

First and foremost Qt is not just a widget toolkit. It is a full development environment: it has a build system (qmake), a fully-developed IDE and widget layout editor (Qt Creator) and many, many extra libraries. To quote just a few examples, there are classes to handle tray icons (whether in KDE, GNOME, Mac OS X or Windows), classes for running TCP servers, integration with the Phonon media framework, the WebKit browser, SVG, databases, multi-threaded code and even scripting support using QtScript, an implementation of ECMAScript (JavaScript).

Qt is written in C++. GTK attempts to do object-oriented code in C and the result is a mess of explicit casting and macros. Seriously, most GTK C code looks horrible and is far less terse than the equivalent Qt program. This is mitigated when Python or Perl is used, but then you're sacrificing speed. With Qt writing C++ is basically as easy as using Java, C# or any other 'modern' language. All of the nasty stuff is taken care of. For example, Qt code is generally cross-platform.

Its signal and slot system is also very powerful. For example, you connect a button's click() signal to the QApplication's quit() slot, and the button will cause the app to close when clicked. These signal/slot pairs can even be set via the Qt Creator IDE, just like Visual Basic! Or you might start up a webpage download and assign a slot to handle the signal sent when the page has been downloaded. Qt's signal/slots are introspective and modifiable at runtime, and you define new signals and slots just like you define new methods for a C++ class. The drawback there is that Qt programs require a pre-processing pass by moc (the meta-object compiler), in order to generate meta-data for runtime signal/slot manipulation, and to offer some syntactic sugar around Qt's features. As a side-effect, Qt adds syntactic sugar for features some might find questionable, for example adding a foreach() loop for lists.

The build system, qmake, is quite simple: you list your source files, libraries and headers to link in a short configuration file (qmake can even generate this for you). qmake then generates a makefile from this data. This is useful as it also includes the 'moc' pass, but can be constrictive in some cases. You are, of course, not obligated to use qmake in your Qt project.

As far as widgets go, Qt's are comparable with GTK or any other toolkit out there. Qt does a better job of looking good on non-Linux platforms, such as Windows. It has a simple but flexible widget system that is much easier to use than GridBagLayout or any of Swing's more poweful layouts.

The main issue with Qt was that, up until recently, it was licensed under the LGPL and before that, it was under the restrictive 'Qt license'. This is no longer the case, so jump in!

Re:I wonder about this (1)

penrodyn (927177) | about 5 years ago | (#28583555)

Having used the GUIs in Visual Basic and Qt I would quite go as far as saying that signal/slot pairs is just like visual basic (VB). With VB you just click on the component (button etc) and it takes you directly to the code. In Qt you use this amazingly inept way of connecting stuff together visually by way of wires. I've never understood why other development environments have never taken the VB (or Delphi for that matter) route in GUI design. For simple GUIs it is highly productive, meas you can focus on user experience and coding rather than worrying about to to actually layout the controls.. But what is even more amazing most developers don't even know there are simpler way to build GUIs. Having said that I would agree that Qt is a very excellent toolkit, I just wish they would modernize the GUI construction end of it.

Re:I wonder about this (3, Informative)

shutdown -p now (807394) | about 5 years ago | (#28583763)

With VB you just click on the component (button etc) and it takes you directly to the code.

It would only do that for the "default" event of the component (e.g. Click in case of Button). To wire up other events - such as KeyDown or MouseMove - you still had to edit events in the property grid.

In reality, Qt signals/slots are exactly the same concept as VB events/handlers. "Default events" are a minor convenience feature, nothing more

I've never understood why other development environments have never taken the VB (or Delphi for that matter) route in GUI design.

Er, which ones didn't? WinForms is event-driven, and very similar to VB (down to the "double-click the button to auto-generate event handler for Click" you've described). WPF is broadly similar. Swing uses different terminology (listeners), but same concept. Really, it's one of the basic OO patterns, and most UI toolkits these days use it.

The thing that VB (and Delphi) truly lacked is the way to do dynamic layout of controls - this is absolutely crucial for DPI-independent and theme-independent code (you've got to be able to reflow the UI when font size changes, for example), and it simplifies localization a lot, as well. It's why all new (or just better) UI tookits - including Qt - are centered around the concept of dynamic automatic layouts; but at the same time, it's not something that you can easily edit visually (as has been demonstrated previously in case of HTML).

That said, Qt still lets you do absolute positioning of controls in a visual designer, if you really want to have it that way (shame on you!).

Re:I wonder about this (4, Interesting)

shutdown -p now (807394) | about 5 years ago | (#28583741)

You forgot one thing: performance. Qt guys take it very seriously, and have numerous tests showing off just how fast their rendering and layout code is. I would imagine that, for resource-constrained devices, this can be a big deal.

Re:I wonder about this (2, Interesting)

Draek (916851) | about 5 years ago | (#28584097)

My main issue is that Qt is pretty strongly tied to C++, and I *despise* that language. Whereas GTK in C may be horrible, but the bindings to Python, Ruby and C# are all excellent and a newbie dev could easily believe they were designed for them from day one.

However, all the other advantages you mention are still valid, plus Nokia controls Qt so overall I support this move, it was the most logical thing they could do. They've lost me as a developer, but I don't think anyone's gonna cry over that ;)

Re:I wonder about this (4, Informative)

abigor (540274) | about 5 years ago | (#28584189)

Qt absolutely has bindings in other languages. For example, check out PyQt: http://www.riverbankcomputing.co.uk/news [riverbankcomputing.co.uk]

Re:I wonder about this (4, Interesting)

Kjella (173770) | about 5 years ago | (#28584285)

My main issue is that Qt is pretty strongly tied to C++, and I *despise* that language.

Did you try C++ with or without Qt? I must admit, I don't like C++ outside of Qt, it brings the whole platform to another level. QStrings and QByteArrays are a godsend compared to std::string and char *. Using the QObject system I easily write applications with no memory leaks because it will delete any child QObjects when it goes, making it easy even without amy garbage collector. Finally, using signals and slots makes your application more robust - screw something up and nothing will happen because the signal never reaches its destination but it won't crash hard on an invalid pointer. Granted, I've heard you can do the same with STL and boost and duct tape, but I never managed to do it.

Re:I wonder about this (4, Informative)

StormReaver (59959) | about 5 years ago | (#28584183)

> The main issue with Qt was that, up until recently, it was licensed under the LGPL....

Slight correction: until recently, it was licensed under the GPL; but is now licensed under the LGPL.

Re:I wonder about this (1)

ricotest (807136) | about 5 years ago | (#28584345)

Whoops, thanks for pointing that out.

Re:I wonder about this (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#28584809)

GTK attempts to do object-oriented code in C and the result is a mess of explicit casting and macros.

Take a look at GTKMM [wikipedia.org] , the C++ binding for GTK+, which uses:

  • signal handlers with full C++ type safety (no macros)
  • the standard C++ library (including STL containers and iterators, unlike Qt)
  • object compositing
  • automatic memory management, including for dynamically created objects
  • internationalization with full UTF-8 support and C++ std::strings
  • C++ inheritance to define your own widgets
  • everything in nicely defined C++ namespaces

The GTK+ people chose C because back then the C++ compilers were not as mature as they are now (which is why Qt uses its own language as preprocessor, to fill in the old C++ compiler gaps), and practically any language could call C libraries, but not C++ libraries (not without extern "C", anyway). GTKMM provides a nice alternative, too bad so few people choose to use it...

Re:I wonder about this (2, Interesting)

ardor (673957) | about 5 years ago | (#28585015)

gtkmm is sort of ok, but Qt is still superior. It has a much cleaner API, better documentation, a MUCH more powerful canvas widget, support for reflection of QObjects (very useful for stuff like RPC), etc.
gtkmm on its own is fine, but it suffers from having to inherit the gtk wall bangers, most prominently, the API.

Re:I wonder about this (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#28585205)

Take a look at GTKMM [wikipedia.org] , the C++ binding for GTK+, which uses:

The problem is that gtkmm is always "something to take a look at" instead of being something people actually use. Why is that? The C mentality of gnome devels? General badness of gtkmm?

One advantage of Qt is that it was C++ from birth, so C++ is the unquestioned first class citizen in the Qt world.

Re:I wonder about this (1)

dbIII (701233) | about 5 years ago | (#28583641)

There is a version of Qt for low memory devices (was called qtopia, now something else) which would give it an advantage on the platform instead of having to custom strip back the gimp toolkit. There's also the C vs C++ choice.

Re:I wonder about this (3, Informative)

umeboshi (196301) | about 5 years ago | (#28583645)

First, gtk+ is for C, while qt is for C++. Another major difference is that qt is more than just a widget toolkit, but an application runtime environment that provides widgets. This means that qt provides string handling, database connectivity, etc., although you don't have to use anything but the widgets and application objects, if you wish.

I thing maemo is mostly written in C, so some parts will probably have to be rewritten in C++.

This article may help a bit, although it only compares qt with gtkmm (the c++ bindings to gtk):
http://www.telegraph-road.org/writings/why.html [telegraph-road.org]

This article should be taken with a grain of salt, as it's pretty old, and may be inaccurate today.

I started using gtk+ with python, way back in the 1.x versions. The 2.x bindings for python were much better, allowing me to write more pythonic code using gtk+.

Later on, I decided to try out qt3, and I haven't looked back since. While it took a bit of getting used to, I found that it was easier to use qt, rather than gtk+, although I'm hard pressed to figure out exactly why.

One of the things I liked about qt over gtk+ was the separation of the layout widgets and the interactive widgets. Coming from gtk, this was something that took me a while to understand, but once I got the hang of it, I liked it, and think that it's a better way to organize the widgets. With gtk, a vbox holds child widgets, such as buttons, labels, etc. So if you want to rearrange them in an hbox, you have to destroy those widgets and make new ones in the hbox. In qt, the layout widgets are of type "layout", and you can only have layout children in layout widgets. The interactive widgets are children of the main widget (or a child widget of the main widget). These widgets are "placed" into the layout, but can be removed without being destroyed, allowing you to rearrange the layout more easily.

I also prefer the signal/slot mechanism in qt over the callback mechanism in gtk. On the average, it makes it easier to glue your widgets together, but there are a few circumstances where a callback mechanism is preferred, in which case you have to invent a new signal(s) and chain them together. This is because there is no order of slots called when a signal is emitted.

Also, the qt documentation was better, more organized, and easier to read than the gtk docs (at least around the time I switched ~2004).

Probably the largest reason why we're even having this discussion is due to licensing. Gtk gained a lot of popularity, due qt being licensed under the trolltech license, which restricted developers from using the free version in commercial products. The switch to gpl didn't do much to change this, although you could then create commercial products, but you also had to release the source for those products. So if you wanted to keep the source closed and use qt, you still had to purchase a commercial qt license.

Re:I wonder about this (3, Informative)

Eil (82413) | about 5 years ago | (#28583687)

There is a lot of software for the Nokia N810 and below. Switching out to a new UI means a lot of stuff will either get uprooted or there will be a lot of libraries loaded into the machine's precious little memory.

As it is, minor Maemo releases can (and sometimes do) break compatibility with applications while major releases are generally not expected to be backwards compatible at all. It works the same on any Linux distro or desktop environment. Development of Maemo has moved at a glacial pace, so when Nokia switches to Qt, I assure you it will be a major release.

I'm looking forward to Maemo on Qt 4 if for no other reason than it will make WebKit support a cinch. (The current official Maemo web browser uses Gecko and using it is generally an unpleasant experience.) In fact, if I recall correctly, there are some KDE folks trying to get KDE 4 ported to Maemo, with all the interface enhancements necessary to make it usable on small-screen devices.

It was either that or switch Symbian to Hildon (2, Interesting)

eean (177028) | about 5 years ago | (#28583993)

Nokia wants a common platform across their internet tablets and smart phones. Given that the Symbian is going to support Qt, and the Symbian user base is much greater, its makes sense that Maemo would want to have access to the 3rd party apps written for the user base that numbers in the millions

And really it was clear in the talk he gave that the Maemo stack is still mostly unchange, and still using most of the Gnome libraries including crucial stuff like Tracker. Really even with the change in UI toolkit, its more Gnome then KDE, especially as none of the Maemo stack actually originated from the KDE community, where as much of it did from the Gnome camp.

Re:I wonder about this (2, Interesting)

drizek (1481461) | about 5 years ago | (#28584227)

Unfortunately, the n8x0 development community has been kind of dead since the introduction of The Great One. It isn't completely gone of course, but it is a lot less active than it was a year ago. The current stable of apps aren't going to be as useful as we would like them to be. The other thing is that there never really was that many to begin with, nothing even approaching what the iPhone has. Most of the development seemed to revolve around fixing deficiencies wit hteh OS(alternate environments, media players, web browsers and other things that got done right the first time in android/iphone/pre). Also, many of the apps were just straight ports of desktop gnome/gtk apps, and it would be rather trivial to do the same thing with qt/kde apps.

Another thing is that by switching to qt you can tap in to the KDE development community. KDE devs who were never interested in writing gtk for the n800 may now get excited about the 900 and pick it up.

Re:I wonder about this (2, Insightful)

mibus (26291) | about 5 years ago | (#28584707)

Most of the development seemed to revolve around fixing deficiencies wit hteh OS(alternate environments, media players, web browsers and other things that got done right the first time in android/iphone/pre).

Fully agree. Some of my most-used apps are competitors for built-in ones (Canola and MPlayer top the list, MaemoMapper, I also used Modest in competition with its built-in email some time ago).

KDE devs who were never interested in writing gtk for the n800 may now get excited about the 900 and pick it up.

...and the existing pool of Gtk+ developers get frustrated after Yet Another API Change, and leave.

There's never going to be the glut of third-party apps that the iPhone enjoys, when the API isn't stable - and you'd have much better luck again if you could keep the ABI stable for more than a year or two...

I really love my N810 in some ways - but in others, it's fallen flat. Can't play full-res video, GPS is slow to lock, the built-in-browser is slow and painful, finger-scrolling doesn't always trigger properly (and text highlights instead), there's inconsistent use of finger-sized vs. stylus-sized controls, the touchpanel needs entirely too much pressure to be comfortable for extended use... my replacement for it will come when I (eventually) buy an Android phone.

Re:I wonder about this (1)

drizek (1481461) | about 5 years ago | (#28584743)

If the HTC Hero wasn't so ridiculously expensive to get unlocked, I would already have one. I doubt I will be upgrading to an n900 from my 800. It just isn't fun using the device. By far the most absurd thing to me, considering that this is an internet tablet, is that the browser is still running on a pre-release version of Gecko for Firefox 2, taken from svn some time around december 2007. This may have been updated in diablo, but I don't notice it. It is nowhere near the capability of webkit/3.5. Nokia really dropped the ball here. THere is no technical reason why web browsing has to be so slow with so many amazing open source rendering engines around.

Granted though, the n8xx is playing with one or two generation old technology. All it really needs is just multitouch and a faster CPU and just a tiny bit of attention to detail to the software and it could be great.

You have the dual slot SDHC, the stereo sound, high res, giant screen, excellent build quality, the kickstand and just so many things that make it stand out. Now that I have a netbook though, I don't think the n800 is worth the space it takes up in my pocket.

Re:I wonder about this (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#28584997)

...and the existing pool of Gtk+ developers get frustrated after Yet Another API Change, and leave.

I doubt there are that many hardcore Gtk+ guys working with Maemo. PyGtk is ok (and you can still use it!), but I expect most to welcome Qt with open arms. They have been using Gtk+ because they've had to.

I believe this to be just one along the upcoming *long* list of projects migrating to Qt in the future.

What's good on Hildon/Maemo? (1)

itomato (91092) | about 5 years ago | (#28584253)

Can you name three apps that are available for Maemo that you would honestly miss?

The mail app blows, the browser sucks, the media player is lousy, and the application manager is beta-quality, at best.

Don't get me wrong, I love my n810, mostly for the hardware - Maemo is a drag.

-

Qt vs GTK: http://slashdot.org/askslashdot/01/11/21/0227206.shtml [slashdot.org]

Re:What's good on Hildon/Maemo? (1)

erroneus (253617) | about 5 years ago | (#28584291)

Not three... but one -- the GPS mapping and routing app. But as someone else was describing how Qt covers a wide range of functions including SVG rendering, I think that perhaps such map software might be improved with a port from the existing Maemo to the future Maemo.

Just about any other apps that follow, I'm sure, will be acceptable. It plays music. It plays video. It plays some simple games. It's a portable device. It does what I wanted it to do and I am sure under a new environment, it might well be improved. It would be good to see some new life in my old toy.

Re:I wonder about this (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#28585207)

> What can be done under Qt that can't be done under GTK?

By the time Maemo Harmattan is released, probably a feature unique to Qt will be a development environment that will allow developers to take a main platform (e.g. Maemo) and port easily to Symbian, Windows Mobile, perhaps other mobile Linux distributions and the main full desktop environments including Windows and Mac OS X.

Quim Gil

The move is less about the technical possibilities of Qt vs GTK+ and more about how useful each toolkit is when aiming to target millions of users.

Qt != KDE, GTK+ != GNOME (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#28583333)

It seems like they're still planning on using a lot of GNOME components [vuntz.net] , but putting a Qt skin on it. I just wonder if it is the best of both worlds, or the worst of both worlds...

Re:Qt != KDE, GTK+ != GNOME (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#28583651)

Some of these "GNOME" components are in fact used by KDE apps so it's probably closer to the best of both worlds

example? (1)

eean (177028) | about 5 years ago | (#28584011)

I can think of a couple like GStreamer and Telepathy, but in both cases the support isn't 100% yet. And both are really crossdesktop from the beginning (Telepathy is just a DBus spec after all)

Re:Qt != KDE, GTK+ != GNOME (1)

FooBarWidget (556006) | about 5 years ago | (#28585143)

Why would it be worse of both worlds? They're just libraries; mix and match however you like.

GNOME (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#28583439)

GNOME needs to follow suit, and soon, if GNU/Linux is to ever gain relevance on the desktop. For anyone who doesn't believe me, see the First Principles of Interaction Design [asktog.com] and how many of those principles are broken by having two different toolkits that behave slightly differently, but are expected to co-exist (KDE apps on GNOME and vice-versa). QT is the logical choice for the One True Toolkit as it has the best development tools [qtsoftware.com] of the GNU/Linux ecosystem.

What's that, you don't care whether GNU/Linux gains traction in the desktop market? That's funny, you're one of the ones advocating it to people, either fix GNU/Linux or stop advocating.

GNOME just need to die (4, Insightful)

metamatic (202216) | about 5 years ago | (#28584045)

With the Mono infection and the reliance on GTK, the best thing would be for GNOME to go away. It started because Qt wasn't LGPL. That no longer applies, so let it die.

Re:GNOME just need to die (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#28584311)

With the Mono infection and the reliance on GTK, the best thing would be for GNOME to go away. It started because Qt wasn't LGPL. That no longer applies, so let it die.

If you want GNOME to go away, there first has to be a halfway decent Qt-based desktop environment. Even after a year and a half after it's initial release KDE4 isn't up to par.

KDE4 needs to die.

Re:GNOME just need to die (2, Insightful)

ardor (673957) | about 5 years ago | (#28585021)

I am using KDE 4.2 right now, and it is amazing. Everything works well, no bugs, no problems. The underlying tech is easily superior to gnome as well.

Honestly, how many KDE4 bashers have actually *tried* it?

+1 Insightful (1)

itomato (91092) | about 5 years ago | (#28584443)

Flamebait, maybe. These kids today do not respect a healthy, if inflammatory point. Makes sites like Digg a nightmare.

The reason GNOME was started is nearly the same the reason it should fade away. Because KDE relied upon (the then closed) Qt, GNOME was started, as a workaround using the GIMP Tool Kit. It's a similar situation with Mono, but hairier.

This is actually something to remember, thanks!

"I mailed Richard Stallman to let him know that this interesting project existed. KDE was licensed under the terms of the GNU GPL. I got a reply back from both Erik and Richard pointing out that KDE dependency on Qt resulted in a piece of non-free software. Qt did not end users the right to modify, redistribute nor distribute modifed copies of the code and violated the terms of the GNU GPL."

From The Story of the GNOME project [ximian.com] .

Re:GNOME (1)

Kjella (173770) | about 5 years ago | (#28584419)

Pretty much everything I've done with Qt tells me KDE should be a much better desktop than Gnome. But the truth is that most of the large desktop distributions use Gnome, Ubuntu is much bigger than Kubuntu and same goes for the others. None of the big three hitters Firefox, OpenOffice or GIMP are KDE applications - ok not all are Gnome apps either but there's not many "killer KDE apps" around. Don't get me wrong, they're all perfectly okay but nothing really rocks the boat.

Sometimes I just want to shoot the people that did usability studies for KDE, like for example making dolphin's file transfer dialogs into notifications that disappear whether they're done or not. When I'm moving a file it's very often a point to know when it's complete, and it irritates me to no end that every time I must click the notifications icon to know when it's really done. To be honest, I think I'd love to see Gnome/Qt. Maybe we'd see more head-to-head competition - or even more shared components? That's kind of hard today, both need to invent the wheel in C/C++ respectively.

Re:GNOME (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#28584667)

> but nothing really rocks the boat

Mostly agreed, but there are some really nice ones. DigiKam is great, as is K3b.

Anyway, I don't know that QT widgets are any better than GTK widgets, but I *do* think that the KDE desktop kicks the ever loving crap out of the Gnome desktop. Gnome is so dumbed down that it feels like Windows 95.

Re:GNOME (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#28584823)

Where to start...

Ubuntu bigger than Kubuntu? Hardly surprising. Look at the number of people and the amount of resources/marketing that goes into each... and then realize that Kubuntu quite possibly is the *worst* "KDE based" distribution out there. Almost _always_ when people have some KDE problem they are using Kubuntu, it seems.

As for the big hitters, depends on what you're doing: If you're doing layout for example, Scribus is probably the best free tool available. (No, it's a Qt app and not KDE, but the conversively the same applies to firefox, OpenOffice etc, as you noted). Kdenlive is the best videoeditor I've found so far, and it's improving. Koffice 2 isn't there yet, but I think pouring resources into the monster that is OpenOffice and starving Koffice might be one of the biggest mistakes in the history of the Free Desktop. The 2.0 serie is still in heavy development, but it shows great promise IMO, and considering the small number of people working on it it beats the crap out of openoffice. If music is your poison, Amarok can't be beat. Finally, the reall killer feature IMO that is constantly underrated is the incredibly tight integration of the entire kde environment, that gnome just can't compete with.

That notifications are kept indefinitely, minimized in the notifications icon is annoying, but if you look at it form a "helicopter view" KDE is all in all considerably less annoying than GNOME, more complete and better integrated, so these notifications are not worth turning into showstoppers.

Re:GNOME (0, Troll)

QCompson (675963) | about 5 years ago | (#28585043)

Where to start...

I know what you mean.

If music is your poison, Amarok can't be beat.

I guess you haven't tried the 2.0 version yet. It most certainly can be beat.

KDE is all in all considerably less annoying than GNOME, more complete and better integrated, so these notifications are not worth turning into showstoppers.

Are we talking about KDE4 here? Because I'd hardly call KDE4 more complete than GNOME at this point. In fact it seems like KDE now prides itself on incompleteness, what with the new desktop paradigm and all (translation: lots of desktop widgets and buggy as hell). I don't mean to judge too quickly though... perhaps in 2 or 3 years KDE4 might even have all the features of KDE 3.5.x, which would make it a pretty nice desktop environment.

Re:GNOME (1)

Super_Z (756391) | about 5 years ago | (#28585231)

I recently moved from KDE 3.5.* to KDE 4.2 on my desktop at work. I find it pretty stable and so far I'm happy with the components I have used. The big exception is Amarok which is .. not that good.

Re:GNOME (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#28585419)

Are you basing your opinions on 4.0 or maybe 4.1? 4.2 was a huge, huge step forward, and the soon to be released 4.3 is another one, if not quite so obviously so. Anyway, I was refering to "completeness" in a more fundamental way; KDE is a highly integrated, cohesive environment, whereas GNOME mostly is a desktop, a file manager, a few applets and a bunch of assorted applications that happen to use gtk for drawing their ui stuff.

Re:GNOME (2, Insightful)

Daniel Phillips (238627) | about 5 years ago | (#28585327)

Pretty much everything I've done with Qt tells me KDE should be a much better desktop than Gnome. But the truth is that most of the large desktop distributions use Gnome, Ubuntu is much bigger than Kubuntu and same goes for the others. None of the big three hitters Firefox, OpenOffice or GIMP are KDE applications - ok not all are Gnome apps either but there's not many "killer KDE apps" around. Don't get me wrong, they're all perfectly okay but nothing really rocks the boat.

The think I like least about each of Firefox, OpenOffice and GIMP is the user interface, for which I blame GTK. For example, Firefox's application chooser dialog makes me want to slit my wrists.

This sounds wrong (1, Insightful)

BRSloth (578824) | about 5 years ago | (#28583601)

Fromt TFA: "Nokias motivation for this move as being mostly driven through the desire for easier cross-platform-development, citing Maemo, Symbian and the desktop as examples."

One thing that sounds incredible wrong to me is the fact that they are saying that Qt was chosen to make "easier cross-platform-development". The applications that were ported directly from desktop to Maemo (Xchat is the first one the comes to my mind) have an incredible bad look in the device. Building an interface for a device that runs in a small screen (4.1 inches) with a small resolution (800x480) that also uses a large pointer (e.g., most of the screen is designed to thumb usage) is not the same as building an interface for normal computer screens and resolutions.

The move is simple political: Nokia controls Qt now, so they will use their own toolkit. It's not based on merits of the toolkit (or problems of the other.) But hey! Why tell people the truth, right?

Re:This sounds wrong (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#28583675)

Well of course Nokia would use the toolkit they bought. But surely they had a reason for buying Qt in the first place.

Re:This sounds wrong (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#28583689)

But what about writing software for Maemo and Symbian? None of the issues you mention apply and there's a strong demand for this since Symbian has a large installed base and no future.

Re:This sounds wrong (2, Insightful)

Yokaze (70883) | about 5 years ago | (#28584769)

> One thing that sounds incredible wrong to me is the fact that they are saying that Qt was chosen to make "easier cross-platform-development". [...]
> The move is simple political: Nokia controls Qt now, so they will use their own toolkit. It's not based on merits of the toolkit (or problems of the other.) But hey! Why tell people the truth, right?

And the reverse couldn't be possibly true: That Trolltech Qt was bought based on the merits of the platform and because Nokia expected easier cross-platform-development. Why do you think Trolltech started porting Qt to the S60 platform?

> Building an interface for a device that runs in a small screen (4.1 inches) with a small resolution (800x480) that also uses a large pointer (e.g., most of the screen is designed to thumb usage) is not the same as building an interface for normal computer screens and resolutions.

Yes, it isn't. But I doubt, having larger entry barrier by having to learn a whole new API (Android, Symbian OS) or even language (iPhone OS) makes it easier to create a good application.

Re:This sounds wrong (1)

JohnFluxx (413620) | about 5 years ago | (#28585285)

I think it came across slightly wrong in the wording.

The point is not that you can take a full desktop application and run it on the maemo. The point is that you can develop it on the desktop. You don't need special hardware, you don't need an emulator etc.
You can use your normal environment, use Qt Creator for the IDE, and write your program. You can use your normal debugger and profiller, and so on, since it's all native code.

Then at the end of the day, you can just click and button and it recompile it for the arm for the machine.

This is the Death of Maemo,if it really ever lived (2, Interesting)

keithpreston (865880) | about 5 years ago | (#28583795)

I can tell you right now, this will kill Maemo. QT is a pretty good GUI toolkit, but this is going to draw in QT Embedded (QWS server and such). I personally have been working on an Embedded QT device for 2 years and can tell you, QT Embedded is horrible. Nothing more then a Demo written by Trolltech to try and expand the market share. The biggest pain with QT, is that since it tries to be cross platform is it re-implements everything (Networking, Audio, Mutexs etc... etc..). They make it fairly easy to use their bad, slow code, while the "beautiful" non-standard signal slot system makes it a pain to integrate with real C or C++ code. If they wanted C++ they should of gone with GTKmm.

Re:This is the Death of Maemo,if it really ever li (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#28583825)

It's unclear what they actually wanted or didn't want. But the thing that kills Maemo IMO has nothing to do with the toolkit. I'm a big fan of GTK+ and use it a lot, and I recognize that Qt is pretty badass in its own ways.. but the reason Maemo and the Nxxx platform has never been interesting is simply that I have no use for those devices, and I never have. If it had been a phone from day one that also included this stuff, I would have loved it.. but I just don't need an Internet tablet device enough to warrant carrying around yet -another- device. Phone, maybe an mp3 player, and then this wifi net device? The sad thing is that people have been screaming for this now for years, and Apple essentially delivered it first. And then we got Android, and it seems that Intel is interested in pushing Moblin into the mix. For Nokia to start over from scratch now is akin to the mistakes made by OpenMoko with all their ridiculous switching.. except at least they were attemping to make a useful device from day one, while Nokia has totally let that ship sail into Apple's hands.

Re:This is the Death of Maemo,if it really ever li (5, Informative)

chill (34294) | about 5 years ago | (#28584353)

...except at least they were attemping to make a useful device from day one, while Nokia has totally let that ship sail into Apple's hands.

Is that Kool-Aid good?

Nokia sells 4x more smartphones than Apple does, with over 40% of the worldwide market. Nokia has won more design awards for phones than Apple, by a long shot. They even have smartphones (n97) that handily beat the iPhone. The problem is, Nokia caters to users NOT phone companies and thus the North American carriers don't sell their smartphones. All you can really get in the U.S. is their standard phones.

They're trying to get a bigger presence in the U.S. market, and are examining how to leverage QT, Symbian and Linux in doing that. At least they aren't sitting on their collective asses (like Motorola) and getting crushed.

Don't write them off.

http://money.cnn.com/2009/01/12/technology/hempel_nokia.fortune/ [cnn.com]
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-10245339-37.html [cnet.com]
http://www.nokiausa.com/find-products/phones/nokia-n97/specifications [nokiausa.com]

Re:This is the Death of Maemo,if it really ever li (1)

thatkid_2002 (1529917) | about 5 years ago | (#28584977)

They even have smartphones (n97) that handily beat the iPhone.

I have a n96. Hands down the WORST phone I have ever seen. It is the buggiest and slowest piece of crap and I blame it on a Symbian implementation which has been hacked to death. I prefer the $100 AUD LG phone I picked up two years ago.

However, I really like the idea of maemo (it seems exactly like what I want, except it doesn't have 3G built in or a phone yet) and so far I would happily give it a design award, and I think that QT will only make it better.

However, they really need to be careful or they will end up like OpenMoko - which is damn near dead. They switched tookit 3 times IIRC.

Re:This is the Death of Maemo,if it really ever li (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#28585049)

I have a n96. Hands down the WORST phone I have ever seen. It is the buggiest and slowest piece of crap When I first got mine I was not exactly enamored by the battery life or UI responsivity. Switching off wifi scanning gives me 2.5 days on a charge now and switching off UI effects has made the UI quite usable. I really thought I'd made a bad buy in the beginning but I'm quite happy now. Plus, not even in Linux have I found a podcast client as good as the one in the N96.

Re:This is the Death of Maemo,if it really ever li (2, Insightful)

omz13 (882548) | about 5 years ago | (#28585189)

Nokia has won more design awards for phones than Apple, by a long shot.

Yes, but Nokia has been in the phone business for how many years compared to the short time Apple has been there... so its hardly surprising they have more awards.

Re:This is the Death of Maemo,if it really ever li (2, Insightful)

ceallaigh (584362) | about 5 years ago | (#28584289)

The real story is the Nokia / Intel announcement of cooperation on Atom/mobile products. Intel seems rather focused on Mobilin for MID with a long term strategy for handsets. While Nokia will be pushing their Ovi stores/maps/content with a new UI for Symbian. I doubt that Nokia ever looked on Maemo for more than an R&D effort. Commercially it was never a success nor a viable consumer product - a geek toy yes, a popular consumer product never. Maemo is irrelevant. The real thing to watch is the Intel/Nokia relationship on handsets - see how that evolves from processor choice to OS. Sean

Re:This is the Death of Maemo,if it really ever li (1)

Capt. Beyond (179592) | about 5 years ago | (#28584521)

I can tell you right now, Maemo will not use Qt Embedded.

'Bad code' is very subjective, and I would like you to prove Qt is slower than Gtk. Just because you say it's so, does not make it as such.

One reason they are going with Qt, is because they bought Trolltech. They could not have that much control over gtkMM, however ancient and unmaintained that code is.

Re:This is the Death of Maemo,if it really ever li (1)

RaymondKurzweil (1506023) | about 5 years ago | (#28584625)

They could not have that much control over gtkMM, however ancient and unmaintained that code is.

Because all these things are LGPL licensed, they could have the exact same level of control.

And are you insinuating that gtkMM has an ancient and unmaintained code base? Funny that, as it is a heavily auto-generated binding based off of GTK+. The rest of it is still currently maintained, it is based off the latest release of GTK+.

Re:This is the Death of Maemo,if it really ever li (1)

Capt. Beyond (179592) | about 5 years ago | (#28584675)

oh ya, I just love working with auto generated c++ code.

Nokia's ownership of Qt was the only reason Qt got re-licensed under the LGPL, and no, just having an LGPL license does not mean someone has full
control over it's development. So the two are very different things.

Re:This is the Death of Maemo,if it really ever li (1)

gnud (934243) | about 5 years ago | (#28585301)

All the auto generated code is boring, boilerplate stuff that you could easily write by hand if you for some sadistic reason wanted to.

Have a look at a moc_*.cpp file some time, it's not rocket science. But I'm glad I don't have to remeber the order of the (integer) values in the meta data array - moc generates it automatically.

Re:This is the Death of Maemo,if it really ever li (1)

johannesg (664142) | about 5 years ago | (#28585031)

You seem to know what Maemo actually is. Since the summary doesn't care to enlighten us, could you maybe do the honors?

Re:This is the Death of Maemo,if it really ever li (1)

ardor (673957) | about 5 years ago | (#28585039)

I have personally worked on QT embedded projects as well, for well over a year. Some platforms weren't supported out of the box, yet I didn't find it to be particularly painful. Neither was the signal/slot-system. I did use GTKmm before Qt though, and had to endure all the braindead API designs inherited from gtk.

Re:This is the Death of Maemo,if it really ever li (1)

ultrabot (200914) | about 5 years ago | (#28585121)

The biggest pain with QT, is that since it tries to be cross platform is it re-implements everything (Networking, Audio, Mutexs etc... etc..). They make it fairly easy to use their bad, slow code, while the "beautiful" non-standard signal slot system makes it a pain to integrate with real C or C++ code.

This "biggest pain" of yours is what makes it cross platform.

You know what? You don't need to use these "slow" wrappers, you can use the file descriptors directly if you wish, and call to posix to your hearts content, if you don't care about running the code outside Linux. Good luck explaining that to your manager though.

I invite to you to investigate how "slow" these wrappers are by just reading the code:

http://tinyurl.com/loerlj

They make it fairly easy to use their bad, slow code, while the "beautiful" non-standard signal slot system makes it a pain to integrate with real C or C++ code.

PIBKCAP, probably.

Re:This is the Death of Maemo,if it really ever li (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#28585367)

PIBKCAP

Make that PIBKAC.

Re:This is the Death of Maemo,if it really ever li (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#28585173)

Why is this informative? RTFA they don't use QWS or QT embedded. And GTKMM is worst of both worlds (gtk and c++). The main reason to use GTK+ is if you do not want to use C++ and you don't like QT's license.

Re:This is the Death of Maemo,if it really ever li (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#28585339)

Well, Nokia did screw up a platform once already. Anyone remember EPOC before it was turned into Symbian? They used to have a rocksolid platform on the Series 5 Psions, but somehow it was turned into the unstable mess that inhabits most of Nokias phones. Not to mention that you have something like five more or less incompatible variants of Symbian OS nowadays. So it sounds like Maemo will be getting a similar treatment.

Source (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#28583835)

Sadly I couldn't find any connection able to upload the 22Mb audio file of the keynote, but I'll try again tomorrow.

In the meantime you can check the slides at http://www.slideshare.net/qgil/maemo-harmattan-qt-and-more [slideshare.net]

Quim Gil

Definition of "Quim" (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#28584361)

quimââ/kwÉm/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [kwim] Show IPA
Use quim in a Sentence
â"noun Slang: Vulgar. vagina; vulva.

Origin:
1725â"35; orig. obscure

Gtk+ is not Nokia's problem (3, Interesting)

jipn4 (1367823) | about 5 years ago | (#28585045)

Nokia has its own lightweight GUI library that they use with Symbian--and their UIs suck. They have built applications with Gtk+--and their UIs suck. They have build Windows and OS X desktop apps--and their UIs still suck. I think the problem Nokia has with GUIs and software has to do with how they develop software, not whether they use Gtk+ or Qt.

Another problem with their choice is that it ties them to C++; the trend in mobile development, however, is towards other languages, like Javascript (Pre), Java (Android), Objective-C (iPhone), and C# (Windows Mobile). Only Symbian steadfastly clings to C and C++. That would be fine if Symbian actually ended up being the fastest and having the best UI of the bunch, but it's actually the slowest and least responsive of the bunch.

Re:Gtk+ is not Nokia's problem (2, Insightful)

ultrabot (200914) | about 5 years ago | (#28585163)

Another problem with their choice is that it ties them to C++; the trend in mobile development, however, is towards other languages, like Javascript (Pre), Java (Android), Objective-C (iPhone), and C# (Windows Mobile).

Actually, I think this will end up being a competitive advantage in the long run. If Nokia smartphones end up being the *only* smartphones that run (mostly) raw native code compiled straight for the metal, they will end up being the fastest in the long run, given equivalent hardware.

That would be fine if Symbian actually ended up being the fastest and having the best UI of the bunch, but it's actually the slowest and least responsive of the bunch.

The problem with Symbian isn't C++ - it's C++ done horribly wrong, and series of unfortunate technical choices (e.g. pervasive client-server architecture).

Re:Gtk+ is not Nokia's problem (1)

jipn4 (1367823) | about 5 years ago | (#28585201)

Actually, I think this will end up being a competitive advantage in the long run. If Nokia smartphones end up being the *only* smartphones that run (mostly) raw native code compiled straight for the metal, they will end up being the fastest in the long run, given equivalent hardware.

No, they won't. C++ is fast for small inner loops because programmers there can take full advantage of its features. Big applications end up being slow and bloated in C++ because programmers simply cannot manage the complexity anymore: all their time goes into chasing pointer bugs and dealing with include files, and little remains for performance tuning and algorithms.

And what is this "long run" you're speaking of anyway? If it takes 5 years for Nokia to optimize their current C++ applications, do you think anybody will care? Few of the PDA applications from five years ago are even remotely up to date today. There is no "in the long run" for software; what counts is what you can deliver in 3-6 months, not in a few years.

Re:Gtk+ is not Nokia's problem (3, Insightful)

ultrabot (200914) | about 5 years ago | (#28585299)

No, they won't. C++ is fast for small inner loops because programmers there can take full advantage of its features. Big applications end up being slow and bloated in C++ because programmers simply cannot manage the complexity anymore: all their time goes into chasing pointer bugs and dealing with include files, and little remains for performance tuning and algorithms.

That's bollocks. C++ is not really that much less productive than Java/C# if you have a good platform toolkit to go with it (Qt). With Qt, you don't really manage your memory manually most of the time, the classes do it themselves through implicit sharing.

Admittedly, C++ is much less productive than Python & other dynamic languages, but that's not the issue at table here; we are comparing against Java, C#, ObjC.

And what is this "long run" you're speaking of anyway? If it takes 5 years for Nokia to optimize their current C++ applications, do you think anybody will care?

The phone applications easily have a life span of several years. They get improved, but rarely rewritten.

This applies even more so to "platform" level stuff. If you write more of that in C++ than Java, you'll have a faster platform, given equivalent algorithms.

There is no "in the long run" for software; what counts is what you can deliver in 3-6 months, not in a few years.

It seems Nokia was able to turn a profit with Symbian, even if Symbian is widely dreaded as the least productive programming environment in existence. I believe they will do great with Qt, and attract a great deal of third party interest as well.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...