That brings up another issue.  I don't know about Gtk, but QT is extremely 
cross-platform, you get libraries for and recompile it on Mac and Windows.  
But if I'm not mistaken, the non-Linux platforms don't have free versions, 
and all of the commerical licenses are quite expensive - somewhere around a 
thousand bucks.   A cheaper alternative for commercial QT projects is to use 
Borland's Kylix, which embeds the QT libraries.  Kylix has a free version and 
a commercial version (around $300 or so) and you can use either C++ or their 
Delphi-style Object Pascal.  Support is pretty crappy, though - you have to 
pay extra for just about everything, and good Kylix books are hard to find.   
Even so, it's fairly powerful, and with a little digging you can usually find 
solutions on the Web.  Another downside is that Kylix apps have a pretty big 
memory footprint, starting at 8MB when you first fire them up.   Despite the 
fact that Kylix is a reasonably good IDE, I'll probably try something else on 
my next project.  I'd like to go with Qt, especially since I prefer C++ - but 
due to cost issues, if it's a commercial thing I'd be inclined to go with 
Gtk+.

Vaughn Treude
Nakota Software, INc.


On Friday 28 November 2003 21:17, you wrote:
> Another thing regarding QT:
> It is one of the most common GUI systems in embedded apps..Sharp
> Zarious, for instance, uses QT..though they are using the Embedded
> versoin, which costs dollars.
>
> On Fri, 2003-11-28 at 17:38, Kurt Granroth wrote:
> > On Nov 28, 2003, at 12:26 AM, Nathan England wrote:
> > > Has anyone come across any comparative articles discussing benefits of
> > > Gtk+,
> > > QT, and the benefits of one over the other?
> > > I'm interested in any good articles. Any recommendations?
> > > I'm not talking about KDE vs. Gnome. I want just the library
> > > information.
> >
> > There are lots of reasons for going with one or the other.. but in my
> > experience, it always comes down to the these two:
> >
> > 1. Gtk+ is C, Qt is C++
> > 2. Gtk+ is free to use for commercial projects, Qt isn't
> >
> > For instance, I tend to always gravitate towards C++ given a choice.
> > I've done some Gtk+ programming over the years (mostly back in the day
> > during my attempts at cross-desktop interoperability) and I've always
> > found it extremely frustrating.  It's a PITA to do any kind of
> > programming using Gtk+ while Qt makes it nearly trivial... to me.  I've
> > run across scores of people that had the exact opposite reaction,
> > though.  C is the only language to use while C++ just adds unnecessary
> > cruft.  I haven't run across all that many people that have liked BOTH
> > Gtk+ and Qt, though.
> >
> > Really, both a very full-featured.  Get a few tutorials on programming
> > for both and try them out yourselves.  I'd bet that you'd discover
> > pretty quickly which one you preferred.
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------
> > PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
> > To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change  you mail settings:
> > http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>
> ---------------------------------------------------
> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change  you mail settings:
> http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss