Why GTK+ will prevail, and what needs to be done

James Richard Tyrer tyrerj at acm.org
Sat Jan 29 06:57:08 GMT 2005

andrew kar wrote:
> On Fri, 2005-01-28 at 10:45 -0700, James Richard Tyrer wrote:
>>I have to wonder if they will use either of these (Qt or GTK+) since
>>would be much easier to just use MainWin:
> This is the sort of product that may be suitable for vertical market
> apps where each end user pays $3000/per quarter for support maintenance
> and upgrades but it is hardly a solution for the average developer.
> Apart from that it seems to be a bit of a con; A system that allegedly
> produces native linux apps yet they need the mainwin runtime??? Its like
> calling the visualbasic runtimes "VB virtual machines!
> Never fear Oz-con software enterprises is releasing WinMainliner (tm) it
> works just like winmain but with wine renamed to 'winmainliner runtime
> and *IT* doesnt need 6 months to port your windows code.

Actually, MainWin works like WineMaker, except that because MainSoft has 
a Windows source code license, it should work better.  So, it only takes 
  a day or so to port the Windows code with either of them.  That is if 
it works -- and it probably won't work 100% without some tweaking.  So 
you will need to do some debugging and probably make changes in the 
Windows code. :-(

Yes, you are correct that you need a library to run a program compiled 
with either of these unless you statically link the application.  But, 
Qt and GTK+ applications also require libraries to run.  No matter which 
widget set you use, you will produce code that is dependent on that 
library.  If you go farther an make a native KDE or GNOME application 
you are going to have even more library dependencies.

This message is from the kde mailing list.
Account management:  https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde.
Archives: http://lists.kde.org/.
More info: http://www.kde.org/faq.html.

More information about the kde mailing list