

Nokia to developers: no Qt for Windows Phone development - tomh-
http://www.engadget.com/2011/02/11/nokia-notifies-developers-that-qt-is-out-for-windows-phone-devel/

======
CrLf
Well, this shows just how good are these buyouts by big corporations:

    
    
      1. create great product
      2. get people on board
      3. success
      4. get bought by BigCo
      5. ???
      6. get crushed when BigCo focuses on something else

~~~
rodh257
Where was the success? If Nokias application development strategies were such
a success they would not be doing this.

~~~
CrLf
The success was at Trolltech, before they got bought by Nokia.

------
forgotAgain
Learning moment: developers can't be wedded to a particular technology. Qt is
fantastic but it's not the business. We can't invest ourselves in companies
that are floundering and Nokia has been floundering for a number of years.

If you find yourself investing your talents in a company that has multiple
directional changes you need to consider the likelihood that the company will
ever return to good times.

~~~
borism
so by that logic:

\- if you develop for Palm WebOS, you're relying on company whose main
business is selling printer ink

\- if you develop for Android, you're relying on company whose main business
is selling ads

\- if you develop for iOS, you're relying on company whose main business is
selling audiovisual content and portable players for it

then Microsoft IS the only company that you can rely on, since it's primary
business is selling software?

~~~
forgotAgain
_if you develop for Palm WebOS, you're relying on company whose main business
is selling printer ink._

Yes, I would not develop for WebOS at this point.

 _if you develop for Android, you're relying on company whose main business is
selling ads_

Yes but you are helping them to sell ads.

 _if you develop for iOS, you're relying on company whose main business is
selling audiovisual content and portable players for it_

Yes, but you are adding value to their main product.

 _then Microsoft IS the only company that you can rely on, since it's primary
business is selling software?_

I don't think so. In markets where Microsoft does not have a monopoly it has
been quite willing to change directions irregardless of its impact on
developers. For example Silverlight. In markets where they do have a monopoly
well they have a monopoly. You can make money serving that monopoly with
consulting but you can't do much with independent products.

------
nl
Qt Android port: <http://code.google.com/p/android-lighthouse/>

------
tomh-
So, what will happen?

1) Qt c++ devs will invest in Visual Studio and learn silverlight/XNA

or

2) Qt c++ devs simply switch to c++ development for iOS + Android

~~~
JonoW
I thought neither iOS or Android use C++?

~~~
tomh-
Android now offers the possibility to create entire apps in C++ using the NDK.
On iOS you can also use C++.

~~~
JonoW
I did not know that :) So if you can use C++ on iOS, why the hell are people
using the horror that is Objective-C?

~~~
mambodog
On iOS C++ is generally only used when you don't need to make much use of the
Cocoa Touch APIs. If you do, you will be using the hybrid 'Objective-C++'
language, and you will still need to use some Objective-C.

See this Stackoverflow answer:
[http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3804219/what-is-the-
diffe...](http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3804219/what-is-the-difference-
between-c-objective-c-and-objective-c/3804297#3804297)

Basically, it's probably easier and less messy to just learn Obj-C.

------
drink
Isn't Qt covered under GPL? Could someone else run with it for their
development platform? Or would there be patent problems etc?

~~~
eitland
I think Nokia even relicensed it under LGPL
(<http://qt.nokia.com/products/licensing>). And Qt is made by a Norwegian
company, and as far as I know at least the Norwegian patent office doesn't
grant software patents. They might have patented it in other countries,
though.

Makes me happy. Would be sad if a nice (commercial with GPL option) product
had ended up as unusable for everything but GPL-ed applications.

------
hasenj
I just hope Qt doesn't die.

~~~
wladimir
I don't hope so either. Although GTK is starting to look pretty nice with
version 3, I've always preferred QT from both a a programming and UI
perspective.

Nokia seems truely cluesless.. every day, another strategy

\- Maemo was GTK based

\- Nokia bought TrollTech

\- Maemo was said to be ported to QT

\- Maemo was abandoned for Meego

\- Now they're giving up Meego, and going to MS...

 _sigh_

~~~
stcredzero
Word to the wise: When you're flailing, that's when self awareness is the
hardest. It's also when it's most valuable.

------
dchest
Related discussion, 111 days ago:
<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1820320>

------
djhworld
Why didn't they choose Android?

~~~
rodh257
SE, Samsung, Motorola, HTC are all heavily invested in Android and are miles
ahead of Nokia. They can chose to run an outside lane in that race, or they
can lead up Windows Phone 7. All people with WP7 devices are just token
efforts, Dell, LG aren't major players like the aforementioned companies are,
HTC owe everything they have to Android. Nokia can take WP7 and become the
market leader, with Microsoft investing heavily and Nokia providing world
class hardware they can provide a point of differentiation as opposed to
becoming one of the crowd.

~~~
potatolicious
I wouldn't say Samsung, Moto, and HTC are "miles ahead of Nokia". They're
running essentially stock Android with crappy tack-ons that nobody cares for
(when's the last time _any_ OEM's take on Android has received praise instead
of complaint?), being glacially slow with updates...

With stock Android as a starting point and, well, a clue, Nokia can easily
overtake Samsung, Moto, and HTC. Just by keeping good time with Google's own
updates, and developing a customized Android UI that _doesn't suck_ , Nokia
can pull ahead.

That being said, I think the WP7 choice isn't a bad one. At MS Nokia would be
customer #1. At Google Nokia would be just another OEM.

~~~
jcitme
you forget that carriers decide updates, not the manufacturer.

~~~
potatolicious
Not for Apple. OTA updates are great, but if the carriers don't play ball
customers should still be able to plug their phones in and easily upgrade.

WP7 has the advantage of having Apple-style end-to-end integration, giving
them a _very_ natural place to issue non-OTA updates.

------
leon_
No native code on WP7 is for me a major downturn. To port my apps to WP7 I'd
have to do a complete rewrite - and that's work I won't do for an unproven
market/platform.

