Posted by: Anonymous Coward
on November 29, 2003 04:20 AM
I've had exactly the opposite experience. GTK has been the nicest toolkit to work with when using the C++ bindings. It doesn't rely on primitive borked preprocessors, and it fully supports the STL rather than rolling its own half-backed classes.
Far superior... the only place it was slightly behind was documentation, and that was pretty good, just not quite as complete as Qt's. I'm a little tired of reading the assumptions that "Qt improves productivity over GTK, so it's worth $3000 for every developer you have working on a Qt app."
In my experience, GTK2 and GNOME2 have been every bit as *productive* as Qt/KDE, and my boss (like most) is a profoundly tight-fisted individual who would baulk at shelling out the sort of money to develop closed-source apps with Qt.
I'm not surprised that Largo is considering switching.
Learn about Linux
Download Linux
Get Linux help
Re:Novell?
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on November 29, 2003 04:20 AMFar superior... the only place it was slightly behind was documentation, and that was pretty good, just not quite as complete as Qt's. I'm a little tired of reading the assumptions that "Qt improves productivity over GTK, so it's worth $3000 for every developer you have working on a Qt app."
In my experience, GTK2 and GNOME2 have been every bit as *productive* as Qt/KDE, and my boss (like most) is a profoundly tight-fisted individual who would baulk at shelling out the sort of money to develop closed-source apps with Qt.
I'm not surprised that Largo is considering switching.
#