[haiku-development] Re: Haiku, Qt and apps, oh my!

Stippi Said: 
> On 2009-03-29 at 19:31:06 [+0200], Jorge G. Mare <koki@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; wrote:
> > IMHO, all this will do is open the gate to multiple toolkits and this
[snip a lot of good stuff from Jorge]

> You definitely have a point. I am just curious, though, what made you "draw
> the line" (so to speak) here, and not already when the OpenJDK port was
> initiated? I may remember it wrong, but it seemed you even actively
> supported it. But it is 100% the same problem.

The Java port was something that was never considered to be part of Haiku. 
BeUnited sponsored it. 
 
> The thing is, the choice may be between these two evils: Is Haiku doomed
> because it's not catching up fast enough? Or is it doomed if we "take
> leaps" in application and feature support via something like a Qt port (for
> the reasons you pointed out)? Different people will weigh these problems
> differently.

I don't think that it is doomed at all. :-) Actually, I think that every other 
camp is 
pretty stalled. I haven't seen much new in Windows lately except (finally) 
moving 
to vectors with WPF and an OK web services layer with WCF (if you don't know 
what
I am talking about, it isn't any great deal). Oh, I guess Vista is new. :-/ 
Linux is what it
has always been and always will be - a great server that some people have tried 
to 
slap a UI into. Note that I have professionally developed for all three major 
platforms. :-)

Actually, the more I use other platforms, the more I really see the promise of 
Haiku.
In my social circles, people are always telling me about all of the problems 
that they 
are having with their computers. Too many issues, things just stop working, 
etc. This is 
WinXP and Vista. There is still a huge hole in the "market" for an OS that 
"just works".

Anyway, knowing Stippi, I know that he didn't mean that Haiku is doomed. I just 
had 
to throw that part in. :-)

I always thought and still think that ports and trying to be like everyone else 
is a losing game.
POSIX compatibility, even, is only somewhat important.

> Saying "no" to any effort to port a major tool kit will be a major
> challenge. It's simply doable by anyone with enough dedication and skill.

Sure. The difference is in the message. Look - you can write Windows apps in 
Logo. Microsoft
doesn't support it. That is the difference. 

> You might say these ports will be done anyways (just look at that GTK
> screenshot (nice work, btw!)). So what is the smartest thing to do? Keep
> them out of the "original Haiku distribution" and thereby encourage
> development of native apps (at least by intention)? Or would that mean that

Yes! Yes! Yes!

> most Haiku users would use Haiku via another distribution which includes
> these toolkits for convenience? Or should we try our best to make sure

We always faced that issue. The concept was always that the Haiku-named distro
would be small, fast and pure. Let others add Java and other "stuff" as they 
wished.

> there is at least one really feature complete port (and "encouraged"
> toolkit for cross-platform development)? A toolkit who's API is like an
> alternative to using the Be API, but otherwise just as tightly integrated?
> Maybe it isn't going to be that nice. Axel already pointed out some things
> about Qt which aren't perfect. Would they improve over time? Are they
> really that bad and arn't there bad things about the Be API? Is it a
> problem that we have no real control over the Qt API? Maybe that last point
> alone will make sure that there will always remain the Be API. Anyways,
> just some food for thought.

You are very polite, thoughtful  and diplomatic as always. :-)

I have always been "anti" ports. VLC is an example of software that has been 
brought 
up here as something that has a nice UI. Under Windows, at least, I think that 
the UI is 
terrible. The tool tips don't work like native tool tips (they don't pop up as 
easily or often). 
It doesn't really look like a native app and it certainly doesn't feel as nice 
as native apps. 
Personally, I find the UI to be terrible, certainly compared to MediaPlayer. 
Maybe just MHO.

Anyway - consider this a vote to keep Haiku, itself, pure. If others (including 
Ingo, for whom
my respect knows no bounds) want to port GTK, QT, Wx, WPF or some other 
framework, I don't 
think that anything official or not should stop them. But I think that Haiku 
itself should remain 
as is. Adding on is as easy as a download. Others (and I know that there will 
be some) will create 
distros. Karl already has one (Hi Karl!). This is a slippery slope. Once you 
include QT, how can you
reasonably exclude wx? Or GTK (especially since it looks somewhat complete 
already!)? Or the
"industry leader" winforms or WPF? Think how much software Haiku would have if 
Mono were 
ported! And Objective C/Cocoa! EVERYTHING could run on Haiku! :-) Seriously - 
Pure Haiku. Let
others "slap on" whatever stuff they want. I want my 80mb or so Haiku install 
that I can then add to.

Michael

Other related posts: