With the exception of iOS, a single Qt app can run on all of those platforms with minimal modification. (Except maybe WinRT, I know little of it at this point, but Qt can be used in applications for Windows, Linux, OSX, and Android.) Of course, there are all those geeks involved with KDE, which I'm presuming are inconsequential because they don't produce mobile apps? =)

That being said, we already knew Nokia was going to dump it, they already sold off the commercial support and licensing division and made a shallow claim "we're going to continue contributing to Qt," which almost always should be read by adding "until..." at the end.

I'm happy to see Qt back in the hands of someone who cares about it. Personally, I'm not much interested in whether or not Nokia plays in the sandbox.

Windows, Linux, OSX, yes, if you're writing a desktop app. That's what Qt is good at.

But Android? On devices with a completely different form factor, input schemes, and resource requirements? I don't think that is feasible, particularly from a user experience point of view.

It is absolutely feasible. Meego and Symbian devices habe about the same form factors, input methods and resource constraints and Qt works like a charm on those. It's just that few people have actually seen how well Symbian works these days.

I was responding to the claim that: "a single Qt app can run on all of those platforms with minimal modification".

And having ported a fairly successful iOS app to Symbian^3 (using mostly Qt Quick/QML), I would seriously contest the claim of 1) Qt working like a charm on Symbian and 2) how well Symbian works in general.

How is that not feasible? What makes Java innately more capable of handling varying form factors than C++ and Qt?

I'm not saying that Java is either.

Rather, that to provide the best user experience on each different type of device (i.e. to follow platform conventions and paradigms and take advantage of unique device capabilities where present), it's best to use platform specific tools and design your application to be consistent with the expected user experience for that particular device.

I'm shipping a Qt-based embedded product with >$1MM USD in revenue. If you work for a particular large restaurant chain on planet Earth you may have encountered it. Does that make me a geek, or someone concerned about Qt's roadmap for other reasons?

I think the point is that your success with Qt doesn't really have a lot of impact on the possibility of Nokia shipping a successful consumer-mobile phone that happens to have a UI written in Qt.

No, my point is that Qt is not a project that is only used or cared about by "a few geeks". Many of us use it to build and ship real products, and we could give a rat's ass what Nokia does in the future. But don't dismiss the project as a toy or trivial idea (I can point you to Java Swing if you need that).

When I said that "only a few geeks would care", I meant it as a selling point for consumers or developers. "Hey, this phone uses QT, buy it, develop for it!"

I did not mean applications like yours and never implied it was a toy.

Qt! It's Qt! ;)

Yes, but is it "cue-tee", or "cute"? =)

And for cryin' out loud, it's Qt. We few geeks care about that, too.

Okay, Qt it is!

I care about QNX too, it's such a cool RTOS.

But what can it do for RIM that can't be done by Darwin, Linux kernel or the NT kernel? As I said, us geeks by our very nature get excited by the things that the users don't, unless they can see a difference in usage.

QNX is a true microkernel that allows true scalability, multitasking, and sandboxing. Honestly, just look at the PlayBook OS and BlackBerry 10, and you can see what's possible vs. Darwin.

Also, the fact that it's POSIX compliant helps immensely when porting existing code.

Moreover, RIM is doubling-down on Qt. It's unclear what this move by Nokia does, but I think you'll see a lot of Qt developers being hired by RIM. Whether they'll pick up the project and run with it is another story.

If I was a developer that just got laid off from a sinking company I don't think my first reaction would be to jump on board to another sinking company...

(Not trying to be snarky, but I would indeed be concerned about RIM following the same path as Nokia, especially considering the massive job cuts they've recently announced.)

The "massive" job cuts are in the legacy BBOS Java side. If people couldn't be re-purposed for BlackBerry 10, they were let go because BBOS is going into maintenance mode. It's the exact same situation Nokia is in with Qt. They're moving on to Windows Phone 8, and Qt developers are not a part of that plan.

RIM may be on the decline right now with BBOS, but you simply need to look into the great work they're doing to seed the developer community with the support they need to create great apps for BlackBerry 10. I know the typical thing to spout is that RIM is dead, long live Android/iOS, but if you actually looked into it yourself, you would see that RIM is doing some really great things with BlackBerry 10. They're reaching out to FOSS communities, seeding actual hardware, and making their tools easier to use than ever.

But I know that many, maybe yourself included, will call me a fanboi, downvote me, and won't bother looking into it themselves. They'll continue spouting this nonsense about RIM's death, never changing their opinion, and taking Apple/Google's word for it. That's fine, continue being uninformed.

The rest of us developers with an open mind will happily pick up the slack on the sinking ship that is RIM. We might be wrong, and you might be right. But what happens when we're right? Where will you be?

> if you actually looked into it yourself, you would see that RIM is doing some really great things with BlackBerry 10. They're reaching out to FOSS communities, seeding actual hardware, and making their tools easier to use than ever.

That's great, but the health of a company and it's products depends on a bit more than their developer relations team. The engineers at HP/Palm were also doing great things with webOS before it got axed entirely.

> But I know that many, maybe yourself included, will call me a fanboi, downvote me, and won't bother looking into it themselves. They'll continue spouting this nonsense about RIM's death, never changing their opinion, and taking Apple/Google's word for it. That's fine, continue being uninformed.

I have no personal stake in the matter nor do I particularly care whether RIM survives or dies. I was only making the observation that if I was a Qt developer that just got laid off from Nokia, I would not want to take up a job at RIM for fear of the same situation repeating itself in 12-18 months. I mean, in the best case scenario it's a gamble that BB10 succeeds in the marketplace at all. If I had a family to support I would be looking to find a less risky proposition.

> The rest of us developers with an open mind will happily pick up the slack on the sinking ship that is RIM. We might be wrong, and you might be right. But what happens when we're right? Where will you be?

The same place I always was? RIM's success or failure is entirely irrelevant to me.

If you were a Qt core developer at Nokia, then what other employer would actually take you on? Even if it's just 12-18 more months, at least that gives you the opportunity to put food on the table while you pivot into another opportunity.