|
Kent Sharkey wrote: Add me to the list of people unaware of Qt.
It has a natural cause: Qt was first developed as a framework for Nokias' old Symbian system and just became in the past few releases a good framework for other (Desktop) environments. It has a steep learning curve at the start, but after you get familiar with the Qt Gui designer and IDE and learnt the basic of their Signals and Slots mechanism you basically can start developing your first simple app (took me about 8 working days - if you have any questions while exploring Qt feel free to leave a comment under any of my forum messages or below this forum message).
Kent Sharkey wrote: Time to look into it.
It is. Qt became somehow a platform independent .Net framework for Linux, Windows and Mac. The time you take for looking into is worth it because you'll learn a way of how you can develop an app which works platform-independent and without Java.
|
|
|
|
|
Marco Bertschi wrote: Qt was first developed as a framework for Nokias' old Symbian system and just became in the past few releases a good framework for other (Desktop) environments.
As a long term Qt user, I believe this to be untrue. Qt started over ten years ago as a cross platform tookit for windows, linux, solaris, irix etc (I have used it to release on all these platforms). It was more recently (say five years ago) ported to Symbian (after Nokia bought the company) windows CE and Mac X. Then a year or two ago Nokia sold the company to Digia, who are more like the original development company Trolltech.
|
|
|
|
|
M Towler wrote: As a long term Qt user, I believe this to be untrue.
You are right, I was plain wrong because I haven't known about Trolltech.
|
|
|
|
|
probably a confusion with Tk ?
|
|
|
|
|
Ah, yeah, not Tcl, Tk. Thanks.
--------------
TTFN - Kent
|
|
|
|
|
Kent Sharkey wrote: Whenever I heard the name before, my brain kept hearing "Tcl"
Funny - my brain keeps hearing "QuickTime" 
|
|
|
|
|
I actually like the Qt Framework, as it is rather easy to use and is VERY powerful.
I also like Python, and the PyQT bindings are super cool.
Bob Dole The internet is a great way to get on the net.
 2.0.82.7292 SP6a
|
|
|
|
|
Nearly, but not quite.  Qt was created by Trolltech. It(Trolltech) was later acquired by Nokia, who have since sold it(Qt) to Digia.
Qt was my first foray into cross-platform UI development. It certainly makes Java look like the abomination that it is. (though it does have that funky way of setting out the code of the application's classes in hpp files, rather than cpp ones - though pre-compiled headers at least ease that pain somewhat)
Make it work. Then do it better - Andrei Straut
|
|
|
|
|
How would that be a solution? The security issues with Java are exclusively with the browser plugin - AFAIK Qt has no equivalent. Also Qt requires that the program be recompiled for every platform, so it is cross-platform at the source code level, not the executable level.
-Shon
|
|
|
|
|
svella wrote: Java are exclusively with the browser plugin
IMO Java Browser Applications will be replaced by newer technologies such as HTML5 and JQuery.
svella wrote: Also Qt requires that the program be recompiled for every platform, so it is cross-platform at the source code level, not the executable level.
This is not a real matter - In Qt you have no Virtual machine which uses additional power on the machine and you can redistribute all you need without verifying that there is Java installed on the users' machine. And you do not have to force your customer to install anything else than your software.
|
|
|
|
|
Marco Bertschi wrote: which uses additional power
Nonsense.
There are many things wrong with the implicit ideas contained within it.
First of course is completely ignoring the fact that in the vast majority of business domains language choice has no impact on the solution. Business requirements and developer experience/skills moves language choice impact below the noise level.
Marco Bertschi wrote: And you do not have to force your customer to install anything else than your
software.
Nonsense as a general statement. There are business domains that require external sources, such as any busienss product that requires persistent storage and products that are intended to work with other products.
It also ignores the fact that complex problems require complex solutions which often require distinct products.
|
|
|
|
|
I used Qt when I had a Nokia N8 and wanted to make a compass for it (which lacked from the Ovi store).
Symbian^3 main app development is done with Qt. Loved it! I never thought I would love C++ again as much.
To alcohol! The cause of, and solution to, all of life's problems - Homer Simpson
----
Our heads are round so our thoughts can change direction - Francis Picabia
|
|
|
|
|
Ask toolbar.
Running on 2.9 billion devices.
Success. Ask toolbar is awesome. How could anyone live without it?
(super sarcasm, of course)
|
|
|
|
|
I wonder if it is just the wide spread of Java which makes it a favorite target for hackers. If Java went away, and, say, QT took its place, QT might very well suffer the same fate. At least the fate of being targeted more frequently...
|
|
|
|
|
Stefan_Lang wrote: QT might very well suffer the same fate. At least the fate of being targeted
more frequently...
Absolutely no doubt about it.
|
|
|
|
|
It's funny that everyone "hung in there" with windows, even through all the patches and getting hacked, until finally they have a decent product (windows 8)... but most people I hear from these days are just ready to bail on Java.
I used to program in java almost exclusively. I really like the language. But, that was before Mono. Now I program in c# most of the time.
I just find humor in seeing long term windows users bashing Java.
If it moves, compile it
|
|
|
|
|
I was thinking the same thing, although if one had said, "After so many hacks, why won't Windows just go away", there probably would have been a lot more sentiment defending Windows.
I think Java's probably easier to like the less GUI work you do with it, but that might be my own bias .
|
|
|
|
|
Well, I do write this on my Mac, so not everyone "hung in there". However, I do think it is a sign that Oracle needs to do what Microsoft did over a decade ago: pause and do a complete security sweep. I don't see them doing it though, but that might just be my Oracle-hate typing.
--------------
TTFN - Kent
|
|
|
|
|
The corporation I work for (nearly a $Billion/year in Revenue) bases their entire product line on the Java platform. If corporations that size are dependent on it I don't think it's going anywhere. That it is under attack as a platform is no surprise, is it? The Windows platform is constantly under attack because it is still #1 in the market. (I'm not including the mobile market). Tomatoes get thrown at the most visible players in any market.
I don't write Java myself (I'm a .Net developer) so, obviously, I prefer that platform for development. Oracle is just going to have to stay on top of the situation and everybody is going to have to roll with the punches, that's all.
Declaring the platform "obsolete" or "dead" is ridiculous. The pundits love to do that anytime something goes wrong with something. Just ignore it. Java isn't going to "go away", the platform is here to stay, just as .Net is. Prognosticating on why "X is DEAD" is a waste of time. Maybe it would be better to prognosticate on what can be done to fix it, instead of declaring it dead, perhaps? There are many people making a living based on that technology that the author of this silly article wants to "go away".
|
|
|
|
|
The trouble is what do we mean by Java.
Do we mean Java on the Brower? Yep, it's a problem. They've been finding all sorts of hacks for it and it needs work.
Java WebStart / Auto-Update? Problems, but less so.
Java on the Server? Unlikely to go anywhere. .NET is still (imho, Mono not-withstanding), primarily a Windows-Only VM. It won't run on a Unix/Linux box.
|
|
|
|
|
If we're talking about in the browser, aren't we talking about Javascript as opposed to Java? It's my understanding that the're really two different animals.
I'm not concerned that .Net doesn't run on Linux. At-least for desktop applications, Linux doesn't matter.
-CB
|
|
|
|
|
Nope. Java used to run in the browser as applets or (occassionally) as a signed application.
When they're talking about disabling Java, they're primarily talking about disabling on the Client (ie: browser).
Javascript is an entirely different Beast (ECMAScript) and it's not going anywhere.
--
And I agree that Linux is irrelevant on the Desktop. It's presence is on the Server and Mobile.
|
|
|
|
|
Oh yeah, right ... applets. Gotcha.
Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
Long before these latest major security holes, the common use of java applets (the main problem) did go away (mostly I believe it died out very early in java's life, after the novelty wore off). Unfortunately, installing java also still installs the plugin by default in most cases (just in case someone has an applet I guess). Remove/disable/never install the browser plugin and things are generally no less secure than using native OS applications. In reality it is still more secure, since a java application (not applet) itself isn't as vulnerable to common native issues, like buffer overflows (baring flawed implementations in a _specific_ VM code base -- i.e. Sun/Oracle JVM security holes vs some clean-room JVM implementation).
|
|
|
|
|
I think this is the perfect answer to those problems, and to probably 99.9% of the complaints about Java. Definitely agree.
Yes, when was the last time I saw a (useful) Java applet that wasn't someone's thesis project?
--------------
TTFN - Kent
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
