Ask HN: Should Qt be considered in the place of electron?

Re:Ask HN: Should Qt be considered in the place of electron? by Memosyne on Wednesday January 16, 2019 @04:20PM (#18925398)

As much as I enjoy working with Qt, I wouldn't bet on it for the future. QML support still seems a bit iffy and being told QWidgets are being phased out is disheartening. The framework is in a sort of limbo stage where newcomers don't really know how to proceed. The lack of popularity (outside of some niches) doesn't help either.

I hate working with web frameworks but the network effect is real and not in favor of Qt. Perhaps there was a time when Qt was thriving and innovating, but right now it seems like it's just a bunch of fortune 500 companies paying 1-2 Qt developers to maintain legacy software.

Sometimes I wonder if there is an alternate universe where Qt won "the battle" and made the world a better place. Sadly for us, that didn't happen here.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Ask HN: Should Qt be considered in the place of electron? by RantyDave on Thursday January 17, 2019 @04:14AM (#18929422)

I believe "old school" Qt has a number of professional niches that wouldn't dream of using anything else. Certainly visual effects software is Qt heavy.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Ask HN: Should Qt be considered in the place of electron? by iqy on Wednesday January 16, 2019 @06:07PM (#18926479)

QWidgets are being phased out? What???

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Ask HN: Should Qt be considered in the place of electron? by Data_Junkie on Wednesday January 16, 2019 @06:34PM (#18926719)

No, they are just mostly finished and aren't seeing a lot of new feature work being done ,if any. Qml is a way better way so that's what they are working on. It gets better every release, and that guy doesn't have a clue. Sorry. Just for the record, QML is awesome.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Ask HN: Should Qt be considered in the place of electron? by Memosyne on Wednesday January 16, 2019 @09:47PM (#18927876)

> they are just mostly finished

Yeah, I don't know how much experience you have with Qt but widgets are far from being "finished". There's plenty of things that could be improved if their focus wasn't on Qt Quick.

The use of Qt Widgets is declining (albeit slowly), as stated in http://blog.qt.io/blog/2019/01/14/qt-customer-survey-2018/. You're telling me that they're going to support two different technologies that do the same thing without giving preference to the newer, technically superior one?

Qt Quick is intended to replace Qt Widgets, but it isn't currently at a stage where that's feasible -- hence my apprehension.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Ask HN: Should Qt be considered in the place of electron? by Data_Junkie on Thursday January 17, 2019 @01:27AM (#18928809)

Yeah, that's not true. They have said that Qt4 widgets are feature finished, and not being deprecated. Obviously eventually there will be little use of the older way, but they have repeatedly said they are not deprecating them. Believe what you want.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Ask HN: Should Qt be considered in the place of electron? by Memosyne on Thursday January 17, 2019 @09:07AM (#18930815)

I'm aware that they aren't being deprecated, but that doesn't mean they aren't being phased out. When I say it is being "phased-out" I'm referring to how it will no longer be advertised as the optimal solution to a problem. Perhaps we're just arguing semantics at this point?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Ask HN: Should Qt be considered in the place of electron? by Data_Junkie on Thursday January 17, 2019 @02:12PM (#18933584)

You can use the tool until it's deprecated. Everything is constantly being "phased out".

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Ask HN: Should Qt be considered in the place of electron? by iqy on Thursday January 17, 2019 @09:21AM (#18930916)

Phasing out is the same as sunsetting, i.e., terminating: https://whatis.techtarget.com/definition/sunsetting

From the first post, I assumed the commenter meant something like, "in Qt 6 QWidgets will stop working", which is insane.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Ask HN: Should Qt be considered in the place of electron? by Memosyne on Thursday January 17, 2019 @09:34AM (#18931000)

I guess it was poor wording on my part then, sorry. I only meant that it was not going to be the focus of the product anymore.

[ Parent | on HN ]

[dead]

Re:Ask HN: Should Qt be considered in the place of electron? by throwawaymath on Thursday January 17, 2019 @12:44AM (#18928657)

Can you try a more constructive rebuttal? Your comment isn’t exactly compelling.

[ Parent | on HN ]

[dead]

Re:Ask HN: Should Qt be considered in the place of electron? by Memosyne on Thursday January 17, 2019 @09:27AM (#18930957)

Most of my points above are personal opinions, so I don't know how I could be spreading misinformation. I'm describing things through my own perspective and I may or may not be categorically correct.

Maybe Qt is full of potential in your country? Perhaps Qt is booming in your industry? I haven't had those experiences. If my sentiments are misplaced, just inform me with reasonable arguments and I'll gladly change my view. Telling me that I'm just wrong doesn't help anyone.

[ Parent | on HN ]

[dead]

Re:Ask HN: Should Qt be considered in the place of electron? by throwawaymath on Thursday January 17, 2019 @02:51PM (#18933964)

So do you have any intention of trying to explain why that commenter is wrong, or are you just going to keep condescending them about being wrong without any substantiation? You haven't refuted a single claim made in this thread with a source, an example, documentation or even your own anecdotal experience.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Ask HN: Should Qt be considered in the place of electron? by Data_Junkie on Friday January 18, 2019 @02:05PM (#18941918)

Takes none of those things to say the truth. I stated a fact, not that I was making a case. You are not the judge. So what your saying is I have to prove what I said was true, but he can say what he wants without challenge ? Really ?

[ Parent | on HN ]