Gods have finally heard my prayers. What have they been waiting for all this years?
Nokia bought Trolltech in early-to-mid 2008 (initial offer announced in January, purchase finalized in June). The iPhone SDK had been announced in October 2007 and been made available in February, Android 1.0 would only be released in September (though the beta had started in November 2007), the Windows 7 RTM would only happen in 2009 and W7P in 2010 so the Windows world was still "old windows" (on which regular Qt worked) and Windows Mobile 6.
One can easily assume that, as soon as the deal was announced and likely to go through, Trolltech had little reason to work on porting Qt to non-nokia platforms (out of the 2 months or so they'd have had for the Android beta, and negative 2 months for iOS).
And once Trolltech/Qt was part of Nokia, why would Nokia fund Qt/Android or Qt/iOS? The original plan was to build Nokia's own "next-generation platform" Maemo with it after all.
As to third parties, they did attempt porting Qt (ultimately fizzling out, for the most part):
* qt-iphone (Qt/Cocoa Touch) http://www.qt-iphone.com/Introduction.html
* Necessitas (Qt/Android) http://sourceforge.net/p/necessitas/home/necessitas/
Actually, I expected they'd do exactly that, and was disappointed when they didn't. It's basically the same reason why Sun created Java. They made Java so that software developers could make software that ran on Windows and Linux. Oh eh, and on Sun computers. Which were very much losing the server OS wars at the time. You might say that Java didn't save Sun, but I like to think that maybe instead Java postponed its demise by many years.
I think the same could've happened with Nokia. If Nokia sponsored the best way to make fast, snappy, great apps, in little time, that work comfortably and with a native feel on iOS and Android (oh eh, and also Nokia's current OS hobby), people'd churn out Nokia versions of their apps without much extra work. This might've significantly increased the app ecosystem for Nokia phones, which might have made more people buy the phones. A lot of people (and very much not just the geeks) do care that their favourite apps are supported and decent on a particular handset.
I never understood why they didn't do this. At the time when many developers were still a bit nervous about learning Objective-C just to support one single platform, a good, company-supported Qt-for-all-phones could've made Qt the leading app toolkit by far. Qt sure had the head start, Nokia sure had the resources, and the Qt team sure had the skills. Sad.
However, this is not all it takes to escape the uncanny-valley feeling. For example, the dialog layout still has to be correct, and lots of developers don't make the effort to achieve this.
How many times have you seen an app that is suppose to look 100% like an iOS app badly ported over to android where everything "works", but doesn't fit in.
Its really hard to get running. Supporting android and allowing cross platform QT based applications would be an amazing step in the right direction for QT, and quite frankly, android.
Having said that, I'm both extremely happy and excited that Digia have bought Qt entirely and that they plan to support both iOS and Android, something I've been wishing would be supported for a couple of years now but didn't see as something that could happen under Nokia's ownership.
Power of QT + Productivity of QT Creator + Simplicity of Python = Amazing, IMHO.
PySide-powered python scripts can be frozen into binaries with various tools such as cxFreeze, that's a good thing.
BTW, QT Creator is one of my inspiration sources for my new text editor with a Firebug-like UI for testing css/html in real-time (http://liveditor.com).
Having said that, if Digia were to officially support Python/PySide in QtCreator/QtSDK, that would be really really awesome.
Url is http://www.kauppalehti.fi/5/i/porssi/tiedotteet/porssitiedot... if you want to hand it to Google Translate
Edit: I guess it's an accounting trick where you don't
categorise acquisitions as an expense. But still
leaves the 125 salaries...
Now the question is how much actual development Digia can actually afford to keep.
That's my concern as well. Hopefully they will develop it and not just do token work to prevent the license from going to BSD. They may also just be trying to protect their previous investment by keeping Qt with a pulse.
However, now Qt is in the hands of a company that does seem to understand the technology and has a realistic and executable business plan. That's a good thing.
You get a credible consumer OS by SHIPPING.
Nokia lacked focus. Just note the Maemo/Meego rewrite. This is like MS saying they're merging Windows with ReactOS and delaying Windows 7 for 3 years
They could have beaten Android by 3 years, but didn't because they were organisationally incapable of doing so.
Intel and Microsoft... good partners - but only with each other :)
The hate was aimed at Nokia (their management and Elop especially), not the nokia Qt devs themselves as far as I can see.
QT usually refers to apple's QuickTime.
Somehow it looks like this whole open governance transition of Qt was aimed to lessen disturbance of the inevitable sell off.
If you're writing Objective-C then you're only writing for iOS or OSX, so you might as well use Cocoa and get native look and feel.
Adding a platform specific language binding doesn't seem within the scope of creating a cross-platform C++ library.
With this acquisition Digia will have an increasing responsibility to the global Qt community, not just the commercial licensing business. We believe in the power of the Qt dual license. It is a great value for Qt that it can be used under an open source and commercial license, since customers have different needs and the licenses have different purposes. Digia wants to continue the good co-operation with different individual contributors and companies working together in the Qt Project. We also are committed to continuing the special relationship Qt has with the KDE community via the KDE Free Qt Foundation. We believe that this symbiosis is valuable for everyone involved.
They could then proceed to make their maintained version as incompatible as possible to the open source version.
The outcome will likely be a very two very different versions of a toolkit.
One based on BSD qt, maintained by the KDE project, more and more losing its cross-platform features (why would KDE care about platforms it doesn't run on).
The other will be the commercial continuation of old qt. Incompatible with the open source version, but keeping its cross-platform features and seeing heavy development and feature additions.
Of course this is just speculation, but it is at least conceivable.
I think there are a ton of partiess that would be interested in developing a BSD modern GUI framework like Qt 5.