This doesn't look very unbiased. It shows the "HTML5" version being slow in terms of scrolling through a page, clicking on a tab, and using a slider. Most websites, even on really old phones, scroll just fine, and the same applies to tabs. The slider thing seemed like a very valid concern, but then I googled "range slider" and clicked on the very first link (rangeslider.js.org) and it worked absolutely perfectly on my phone.

There were also two things they said the HTML5 version didn't have at all - a virtual keyboard and clicking on an image. Tapping on images is something people have been doing in HTML for a very, very, very long time. It's not that hard, and it works just fine. I'd say it's probably pretty difficult to mess up.

I think the real advantage shown in the video was the virtual keyboard. I just googled "virtual keyboard" and tapped on the first link on my phone, and the experience was awful.

It's running on a Raspberry Pi, not a phone.

I'm not sure which Raspberry Pi, but assuming it's the latest one (this is the latest one, right?), here are its specs: https://www.raspberrypi.org/products/raspberry-pi-3-model-b/

Here are my phone's specs: http://www.gsmarena.com/apple_iphone_6s-7242.php

IMO they aren't super different. Sure, my phone runs at 1.84GHz while the Pi runs at 1.2GHz, but the Pi also has twice as many cores. My phone does have twice the Pi's RAM, but I don't think RAM is what made a difference here.

Here's the whitepaper

https://cdn2.hubspot.net/hubfs/149513/Whitepapers/WHITEPAPER...

Yes, it's a Raspberry Pi 3.

No, it's not comparable to an iPhone 6s.

An iPhone 6s is about 5 times faster.

http://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/3444316

http://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/3496162

A Raspberry Pi 3 is about equivalent to a Samsung Galaxy S III (a five year old phone.)

http://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/search?page=1&q=galaxy+s...

You're totally right. Those geekbench scores are quite different! Scrolling and tabs with different information were still very fast on my iPod Touch (this was 5 years ago), and I could always tap on images like logos and they would work. But I don't have any 5 year old devices to try the range slider, so that could very possibly be another thing (in addition to the virtual keyboard) where QML totally outperformed HTML5

You were probably not using js heavy sites on your iPod touch 5 years ago.

Qml is part of QT so when they say Qml app it's pretty clear that the app is running on some version of QT.

But HTML5? Was it an SPA running in Chrome? Or maybe something using Cordova? Or what exactly was this HTML5 demo?

This isn't even comparing apples and oranges. This is apple with fruit comparison :)

They are comparing QML with AngularJS. HTML5 doesn't even have a chance

Apparently, the HTML5 version was built with AngularJS. They didn't even give it a fighting chance.

"The AngularJS framework for HTML5 is relatively new, and a valid concern is whether it will be replaced by a new framework in the future." I'd say AngularJS is pretty battle tested at this point... Not to mention that it's now considered old for the industry and is not necessarily performant.

I get that this is put out by qt and is pretty obviously bias, but it seems like they should have given html5 a stronger chance...

Angular 2 was released in 2017. QML was released in 2009.

So what he said was true... but misleading. A more fair comparison would be to compare QML to HTML5's release date of 2014, or HTML 2.0's release date of 1995.

Sure Angular may get replaced, but in 20 years HTML is going to still be around.

For the Dutch: wij van wc-eend...

And for the non-Dutch: this refers to a classic series of blatantly biased TV commercials (as an attention grab) with the slogan: 'we, at company X, recommend... company X'.

[deleted]

It's licensed as LGPL, not GPL. A commercial license is also available for companies that want to do static linking without releasing source.

lol. Well I stand corrected. Now I feel silly. I'll give it a second look.