Failure to understand QT. You can build 300 kb and smaller applications using QT with no lib dependance or runtime. Compiler of course is important something that can static link and link time optimize well reduces the problem. QT is also can be a platform. People fail to notice how the numbers work 4.3.1 4.2.2 Drop the last number 4.3.x all of them are compatible with each other. 4.2.x all of them are compatible with each other. Last number is bug fix of something that does not match Qt documentation. Gets even better. 4.2.x applications work in 4.3.x Incompatibles where new cannot run old only happens when the first number change. Ie 3.x.x to 4.x.x That was a api change. So yes shared lib solution could be done. This number layout is formal to QT design. So only 2 installed versions of qt are required on Linux platforms. Ie latest QT4 and QT3. QT2 and QT1 applications will work with QT3 with compatibility libs. Due to the api differences between QT4 and QT3 it was decided not to fix this. The non standard part and size are a fools argument against QT. 300 net-book has a bigger processor and ram than what you normally use QT Embedded on. People use QT without even knowing it. Due to the reason it can static link out of existence. At this stage there is no advantage on windows or mac for developers to leave QT programs dynamic. Android interface is java. Its torture to get stuff done compared to QT. http://wiki.forum.nokia.com/index.php/Porting_Android_%28Java%29_applications_to_Qt_for_Symbian Even .net is huge code to get basic stuff done. Remember larger the code more risk of human error and problems. > This was the concept behind Java, and we all know how far that has gone LOL Java is second to PHP in web development. The GUI coding is Java has been long and painful and ugly. Nothing to do with the idea if api is crap it dies. Android is another attempt at the Java idea. Maybe they get the GUI right this time. Laughing at GTK I can understand its not designed to static link out of existence so creating highly optimized code for platform. .net has the same problem. Qt is far more a different fish. > Lots of marketing to whom? Programmers? They don't have the time to service a small and shrinking market or to learn the tricks of a new interface. Exactly why there is currently research to use QT on android. So Programmers don't have to learn to code for different market segments. > It's been around for a long time and several games WERE written to use OpenGL. Just is, it is a moving target and the system does not fully support 3D graphics capabilities. Same with Direct X by the way. Most new engines are duel Opengl and Direct X. New features between Direct X releases get exposed in opengl first. At time of a Direct X release some new features get exposed in Direct X first. This is the way it always has been. Coding in either is style. > Then sell this to the Linux distributions. Try to sell it to Apple. Then sit back and bask in your rejection letters. YOU will have to sell this. And your marketing URL is disgusting. That is from someone who has been here for a while. No need to sell it to Linux, Freebsd or Solarias Distributions. Solution for them is simple all third party developers get unite decide on a loader for libs and say stuff distributions. Remember the Linux kernel does not know how to dynamic link. Its a little static userspace program that does dynamic linking. I don't think OS X can dynamic link in kernel either and think it will support multiable loaders as well. So you might not need to do a single deal with any OS maker. Instead force them to take what ever you give.
