Nokia and Digia working together to grow the Qt community

Published Monday March 7th, 2011 | by

Following last week’s releases of Qt Quick, the new Qt SDK 1.1 beta and Qt 4.7.2, the Qt community will continue to benefit for years to come from further Nokia investment in Qt, primarily focused on areas such as Qt Quick, Qt WebKit and HTLM5 in addition to the ongoing work of improving performance and stability.

The success of Qt has in part been due to a successful dual-license model, providing open LGPL and commercial license alternatives which have enabled a dynamic community of developers in 70 industries to drive a rapid evolution of the Qt cross-platform application and UI framework. The Qt Commercial licensing business is growing and has around 3500 companies, whose development and use of Qt benefits the whole community.

Many organizations which want to use Qt for their business applications choose commercial licenses, for a variety of reasons. These include restrictions in using open source licensed software in industries such as defense & aerospace, or the need to provide product warranties & indemnities such as in the medical device industry. Others choose a commercial relationship for access to Qt professional support and services to ensure successful development of their projects.

However, these professional services are not core business activities for Nokia, so since the introduction of the LGPL license for Qt in 2009 we have been actively working to grow the number of companies providing Qt services. In 2010 we began the search for a company we could work with to serve the commercial licensees in the Qt community. We have now concluded that search and chosen to work with Digia. As a consequence, Digia will acquire the Qt Commercial software licensing and professional services business from Nokia, with the transaction expected to close by the end of March 2011.

Employing hundreds of Qt experts, Digia has 7 years experience in providing top-class Qt competence, and is dedicated to continue and grow Qt Commercial relationships as well as to contribute innovation to the overall Qt LGPL and commercial community.

We expect Digia providing Qt Commercial customers with the support, professional services, and product enhancements that commercial customers require because:

  • The business is aligned with Digia’s strategy and business model.
  • Digia has the incentives, expertise and commitment to serve and grow the commercial license and services business.
  • Nokia and the Digia already have a close relationship and will cooperate in improving Qt as well as in creating developer events, new demos etc.

You can learn more about Digia and their Qt related services at qt.partner-directory/digia.

Although Digia will now be responsible for issuing all Qt Commercial software licenses and for providing dedicated services and support to licensees, Nokia’s Qt technical support team will support and work closely with Digia for the next year. We will now begin work with Digia to ensure a smooth transition of all licenses and commercial relationships.

As part of the agreement, some members of Nokia’s technical consulting services team, as well as members of the Nokia Qt Commercial sales and marketing team will transition to Digia, ensuring continuity of contacts for customers. Those teams will continue to be based in Norway and in the US and we will work with Digia to minimize disruption to customers throughout the transition period.

Digia will invest significant resources in the ongoing development of Qt as a commercial framework. In particular, their plans include emphasizing Qt in the desktop and embedded environments and exploring new support models and feature requests. Commercial customers can also expect improvements in support and functionality for older platforms that were not on the Nokia development roadmap. If you are a holder of a Qt commercial license you can expect to hear more about this soon.

We want to emphasize our long-term commitment to Qt. Nokia will drive Qt developments in support of our business needs and our investments in community building, marketing and R&D will continue to benefit all members of the Qt community. By introducing the up-coming open governance model we will also enable other companies, such as Digia, to more easily contribute to Qt, which will enrich Nokia investments in Qt and benefit and grow the Qt community as a whole.

Overall I expect that Qt Commercial software licensees and the entire Qt community including all of our Qt Partners will benefit from this change. We will continue to actively support the Qt community – including MeeGo – as we are today in activities such as active developer engagement through our online community site, events, community sponsorship and code sprints. We will also continue to provide training materials and eLearning, Qt certification exams and enhance our Qt Partner, Qt in Education and marketing programs and much more.

Sebastian Nyström
VP, Head of MeeGo, Qt & WebKit
Nokia

[UPDATE: Additional blog posts have been published on this topic.
Qt and Digia Facts and Fiction | Comment from Digia ]

Did you like this? Share it:
Bookmark and Share

Posted in Announcements, Customers | Tags: ,

82 comments to Nokia and Digia working together to grow the Qt community

Alan says:

I had never heard of Digia, but hopefully it’s going to be a good thing for the Qt community. What is certain is that I like the (re)emphasis on the desktop.

Jono says:

Woah, big news. Probably good news. Hopefully a more equal committment to desktop. Turns Qt into more of an ecosystem rather than controlled by a single company. I’m still looking forward to more innovation in mobile though, still disappointed about MeeGo :(

Rovshan says:

I think this is a very good news. For me, especially this one: “In particular, their plans include emphasizing Qt in the desktop and embedded environments and exploring new support models and feature requests”

suy says:

So, Nokia will still own Qt’s copyright, isn’t it? But how will Digia provide the commercial support with non-LGPL licenses if the copyright is still owned or controlled by Nokia? Or I’m missing something? What will change in the contribution agreement for people who want to contribute to the Open Governance?

Sorry if it’s too many questions.

@suy: Qt hasn’t required copyright assignment for code for quite a long while now (since 2009, when the initial public repository was set up for contributions). That means copyright of code in Qt is owned by whoever contributed it.

Copyright has nothing to do with commercial support, it is possible to offer commercial support for pretty much any open source project (even ones that require copyright assignment, provided my customers don’t want to keep copyright of work done on their time).

What copyright assignment provided in the past was that it essentially forced companies to go the commercial licensing route, this is no longer necessarily the case, but many companies would still rather hire experts to do the work for them (and thus have someone to blame when it goes wrong) rather than hire their own developers, train them up, and continue to pay them indefinitely.

Aron Kozak says:

@suy

Nokia still owns the Qt copyright, but we are granting Digia the right to do the commercial licensing and support. I don’t know if there will be any affect to the contribution agreement however.

suy says:

I understand that one can provide support for third party code, but my point is what will happen if someone needs a Qt version under a non-LGPL license. Is still Nokia the one to ask to? If I understood the contribution agreement right, a contributor still keeps the copyright, but grants Nokia the right to relicense under another terms.

If Digia is the one that licenses the commercial version, how can they do it without owning the copyright?

Gabor says:

According to http://fi.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digia, Digia has already been struggling with profit losses so I’m sure they have less budget than Nokia to save Qt.

Marco Borm says:

Oh my goodness!
Maybe this would be a good news if “Intel will acquire the Qt Commercial software licensing and professional services business from Nokia”, but who is “Digia”?!… What’s going on now with the development teams?!

serkol says:

@Gabor: the Wikipedia article says that Digia had losses in 2009. If you look at their 2010 balance sheet, you will see that they were profitable in 2010:
http://vuosikertomus2010.digia.com/en/financial_statement/consolidated_balance_sheet

Net profit: 11,474,344.00

I surely hope that Digia will take care of Qt for desktop… but I find the price of the commercial licence very high… I’m a single developer (one-man company), I would pay something like $200-$400, but not more. I hope that they will make their desktop improvements available for LGPL too…

max says:

@Gabor: if the commercial licence is $200-$400 I will buy a licence too.

Glenn De Backer says:

I just hope this doesn’t lead to fragmentation of an LGPL (lite) version and a commercial version with the improvements. The problem with those acquisitions is that companies tend to want a big return and fast so an good LGPL version seems to be counter-intuitive.

But overall I’m positive because I don’t trust the current Nokia any more so it is the lesser of 2 evils. The problem is that Nokia – although al the marketing fluff – is heavily involved with a company that ones describes the LGPL license as a cancer.

But I won’t lie. I would rather had a big company who really supported open standards and freedom to be 100% sure.

Andreas Aardal Hanssen says:

Aron, could you explain how Qt development in Nokia is affected by this change? Are y’all Digia employees soon to be?

Javi Moya says:

I don’t know is this is good or bad news…

please…
just one question:
the improvements in Qt made by Digia… will be available for all (Commercial and lgpl)… or only for Commercial???

thanks

Perhaps says:

I hope people stop using “commercial” when they want to say “proprietary”. It’s very difficult to understand where one ends and the other begins, or if “commercial” is just being used instead of “proprietary”.

The future of Qt is even more uncertain now. Who will be responsible for the development aspects of Qt: Digia or Nokia? Will the development continue to be made in the open? Will be made proprietary? How about a roadmap? Open governance?

Fragmentation is another danger. Creating different Qts incompatible with each other. A foundation would be a better option, a la linux kernel.

Nokia incompetence in management has torpedo not only their own products but the products of other people/companies that depend on technologies that Nokia’s own, and this includes Qt.

Another thing that Nokia has done terribly bad is informing their partners about the direction of Qt. Lacks clarity and vision!

anon says:

Maybe Nokia is doesn’t want to be known as the one who killed Qt, and is now letting Digia to be in charge. If Qt dies, history will show that it died under Digia’s reign, not Nokia’s. Nokia doesn’t want to be tainted with this kind of shame.

Just sell Qt to Intel, Intel needs software as much as Qt needs hardware. They’re a match made in heaven.

chad says:

I think it’s clear that Nokia doesn’t want to be the only one responsible for Qt library. It’s lgpl. It even supports their competitors. Noway they were an credible organisation to support Qt commercially, after they announced the MS deal. Now at least there is a company behind who has interest in expanding Qt money wise. Hopefully Open Governance happens and we see more companies investing in the Qt development. Nokia will not do this much for long. That’s for sure.

Of course if you want to think of the worst. Why Nokia didn’t sell the entire Qt to Digia or any other interested party? I am sure they could have reached agreement with KDE Free Qt foundation as well. So that would not have been the problem. What’s the next move?

SpinyNorman says:

It’d be good to get some clarification on what the implications of “Nokia.. primarily focused.. on QtQuick [/etc]” are… Does this mean that Digia, rather than Nokia, will now be primarily responsible for core/destop Qt development (i.e. anything not specifically mobile or QtQuick related)?

What platforms are Digia planning to support? Just Windows/Mac/Linux or any others too (Solaris, perhaps)?

Steven Prince says:

“Commercial customers can also expect improvements in support and functionality for older platforms that were not on the Nokia development roadmap”

I’m guessing “older platforms” includes “Desktop.” Yay, 2 different versions of Qt, one exclusively for people paying!

Guido Seifert says:

Steven Prince, not necessarily. Maybe with ‘older platforms’ the Qt 3.x branch is meant. And even if not, there were commercial solutions before Nokia and it won’t hurt Qt if there will be commercial solutions again.

Nth says:

> Just sell Qt to Intel
There’s no “sell” in its proper sense. Qt is GPL and LGPL, so anyone can contribute, develop, bring an own version in the worst case, etc.

Jack says:

“Nokia will drive Qt developments in support of our business needs”
Well, didn’t your CEO just dump Qt from the phone roadmap and reduce MeeGo to a single device? In this context, your statement is superb newspeak for saying that you will basically do no more Qt development in the future (due to no longer existing “business needs”).

With corporate communications it is sometimes just all too easy to see the elephant in the room.

JCR says:

Next step might be to fire most of the qt-related staff at Nokia.

Maybe the guys at Digia paid Nokia with shares of Microsoft.

By the way, are Digia people interested in communicating about Qt?

Steven Prince says:

@Guido Seifert:

Yes, of course there are already commercial licensing/support solutions, but the guy is talking about different “functionality.” Big difference.

Alejandro Nova says:

This looks like when NVIDIA bought the 3dfx IP and left a 3dfx carcass (this time, Digia) to take care of support and further development. Hope I’m wrong.

Guido Seifert says:

Steven Prince, yes new functionality. Perhaps a backport of some Qt 4.x stuff to Qt 3.x? I know a few projects, which are still stuck with Qt 3.x.

Jonas Rabbe says:

A quick disclaimer: All the specifics of this deal are still not known to us average software engineers, and there are probably areas we cannot comment on in any case. In this comment I may opine, all those opinions are my own and not those of Nokia.

@Perhaps: Both Digia and Nokia will contribute to Qt, as well as KDE and individual contributors as is already the case. The contributions will all go into the same Qt which is available under LGPL on Gitorious.

@anon: Nokia is not killing Qt. It has been the case since Nokia purchased Trolltech that the focus has been on Qt for mobile platforms, now we have a partner who is willing to give Qt the focus it needs on the desktop platforms as well. IMO this is a better deal for developers than selling to Intel, since the goals of Nokia and Intel overlap (both in the mobile space, and with a focus on platforms that are not on the market yet), while Digia is willing to service Qt for the existing desktop platforms.

@Steven Prince: Digia will be selling commercial licenses, but they will also be contributing to the LGPL version of Qt. The commercial licenses are a way for companies to use Qt, but with a company at the other end which will handle your support queries and work with you on issues, this is quite common for open-source products. You will therefore still be able to get your LGPL-licensed desktoppy Qt goodness on.

Guido Seifert says:

> average software engineers

Since when are Trolls average software engineers? ;-)

James Gibbons says:

> Just sell Qt to Intel

Intel doesn’t have a very good track record with software. While they have a nice C++ compiler and many optimization libraries, they do not have a huge software user base. I doubt that they would manage Qt as well as someone like Digia that appears to want to develop products using MeeGo and embedded apps. My guess is that Digia was already doing some of the MeeGo integration for Nokia and that is why they were chosen.

Bruno Tezine says:

I’d prefer to see Intel acquired the Qt Commercial Licensing. I think they would be the most interested in Qt these days and the best company for the Qt community. I wouldn’t be surprised to see that Nokia, or part of it, will be purchased by Microsoft in a few years.

zhxt says:

OMG! Does this means Digia will acquire Qt?

Ali says:

does this mean that Qt Mobility and Nokia Qt will stop progressing?! :(

anononymou says:

Google is hiring Sebastian, you better jump now , cause remember your CEO told that you are on a burning platform. He gets to keep the 1 billion microsoft paid , you get banana ya money !

Pankaj says:

A beautiful and promising framework bought, screwed and now discarded by Nokia. Jettisoning fire extinguishers (here Qt) from burning platform like this will not help douse the fire Mr. Elop. Feel sorry for Qt but will continuing programming in it. Good riddance with burning platform!

Aamer says:

“We expect Digia providing Qt Commercial customers with the support, professional services, and product enhancements that commercial customers require”
>>
If Digia is limited to support of Qt for commercial licenses, then I think its good. Also interesting is emphasis on Qt for Desktop , since this was a ignored area under Nokia to some extent.

But if Digia will also be involved in development of Qt,,, how would one manage with 2 versions of Qt ? Qt became so rapidly adopted because of the LGPL license, and more developers found they could follow their passion. But if again there is gonna be gap between the LGPL and commercial versions, I fear it will not be good for Qt :-(

Adrian Carpenter says:

Once again, a poorly timed and ambiguous statement by Nokia, I really wish you’d stop making statements until everybody involved has put together all the facts and are ready to explain what the future holds.

I way I read this statement is that the LGPL version is dead:

“Digia will invest significant resources in the ongoing development of Qt as a commercial framework. In particular, their plans include emphasizing Qt in the desktop and embedded environments and exploring new support models and feature requests. Commercial customers can also expect improvements in support and functionality for older platforms that were not on the Nokia development roadmap. If you are a holder of a Qt commercial license you can expect to hear more about this soon.”

Clearly Qt has been a massive loss leader for Nokia and they now want to dump it as quickly as possible, but there is no mention of the developers transitioning over to Digia, only marketing and sales staff. It’s like buying a pot of the worlds rarest and best tea only to find when you open it that all that’s in there is a few slugs aimlessly wandering around at the bottom.

Until we hear concrete information about Digias plan, you now have to assume that a fork of Qt is inevitable. If trolltech couldn’t make commercial licensing work for them (trolltech wern’t profitable as explained recently on here) then the only way I can see Digia making it profitable are by raising the commercial prices so that it does become profitable (and risk the possibility of shedding licensees to the LGPL model) or by lowering the price in the hope that they’ll sell a hell of a lot more licenses.

Hopefully we’ll here more about the plans for Qt soon, it’d just be nice if all concerned could get all their information straight and prepared before making half statements that scare the life out of people.

Adrian

Guido Seifert says:

> I way I read this statement is that the LGPL version is dead:

Tsk, many here wished a fork. Should it be true that Digia says that the next version of Qt isn’t LGPL anymore, the fork is there and Digia lost a huge number of developers. In a few month they stand there with a totally outdated commercial version of Qt hardly anyone wants, while the LGPL version flourishes.

Philippe says:

Excellent news from my point of view… as far as commercial license price does not increase, and espescially remains royalty free.

chad says:

No way is a fork in Digias best interests. With fork everyone loses. We are not in a hurry, let’s just see what future holds. Feel bad for the Trolls thought but i don’t believe you are in a great risk of unembloyment whit your skils.

Adrian Carpenter says:

@Guido

It depends on what happens to the Trolltech developers, do they stay at Nokia? If so, Digia just bought a turkey. If they transition to Digia, they (Digia) have struck gold (At least in the talent department, they still have to figure out a way of making money from it) and any fork is almost certainly doomed to failure.

I generally see a fork as a bad thing, but I’m more than happy (would be ecstatic) if I’m proved wrong! Oh for a rich benefactor to come in and provide proper development resources & direction for a fork.

Adrian Carpenter says:

@chad

Digias best interests lay in the commercial version, after all, that’s all they’ve purchased (well the licensing), a poor fork with no direction poses no threat to them – a fork maintained and contributed to by ex-Trolls kills Digia stone dead in the water.

It all depends on what the detail with Nokia actually entails and what Nokia will force them to do.

If they have the Trolls on board then they would take the calculated risk that any fork will be substandard and that their commercial version will flourish (as it did prior to Nokia).

I assume (LGPL legal issues aside) that Digia could sell “upgrade” licenses to allow those who were using the LGPL library to move to the commercial library, something which is currently prohibited, presumably the wording of the clause changes to prohibit dual use of LGPL and commercial licenses.

Adrian

Guido Seifert says:

> I generally see a fork as a bad thing,

Me too. But while I was very pessimistic after the Nokia/M$-Deal, and still think that Qt on smartphones is dead, I am somewhat relaxed when I think of this new Digia development.

Paul Jurczak says:

This is the beginning of Nokia’s divesting of Qt. The next step, I’m afraid, will be a devastating reduction in Qt division’s head count. I’m not sure how Qt will recover from that. So far it was supported by a large, talented and focused team, something most purely open source projects lack. Forking it will only make a bad situation worse.

Richard says:

Ok, so Digia are going to start providing our commercial support.

It’s clearly in Digia’s interest to offer good support and to fix bugs – fixing a bug reduces the cost of providing support, while poor support would risk commercial customers migrating to the LGPL licence and buying their support elsewhere.

Digia also have plenty of experience, so they will do a good job.

However – who’s going to be improving the platform itself? Who is going to be providing the updates, optimisations, and extensions to Qt?

The Digia press release and the post above says that Digia are only buying the commercial licencing and support business.

Qt developers were hoping that Qt *as a whole* would be sold to some company that considers Qt a core part of their strategy, as that would mean the ‘new owner’ would be dedicated to providing future improvements – not just bugfixes, but new stuff. (I’m sure the Trolls have some cool stuff up their sleeves, and I’d love to see it happen).

This latest press release is saying that the owner of Qt will no longer be making any revenue from Qt, yet “will continue to invest in future development of Qt for the benefit of all users, both Commercial and LGPL.”, while the company receiving revenue isn’t doing that.

Something about this arrangement seems a little strange.

stefan says:

“Just sell Qt to Intel, Intel needs software as much as Qt needs hardware. They’re a match made in heaven.”

No, please. With every Windows release, they (the dream-team of Intel and Microsoft) increase the hardware requirements.

I really hope that the hardware requirements of Qt do not increase so quickly.

David Stone says:

Hi guys
Apologies for the lack of response to your recent questions. We had an office-wide web outage this morning. We’re back online and will post some answers soon.
David (Qt)

Andrea R. says:

I hope I’m wrong but I think that Qt, or at least a part of it, will became the same like Mono(Droid|Touch).

SpinyNorman says:

The real problem here for the future of Qt is that Digia is now responsible for future core/desktop Qt development, but all the Qt developers are remaining at Nokia.

AD5XJ says:

This sounds like a weak and struggling company (Nokia) getting help from a flesh eating company (Microsoft) and then handing over responsibility of one the primary assets (Qt) to another weak and struggling company (Digia).

It may be cynical of me, but from all indications Nokia is even more fragmented and potentially weaker than before the stupid decision of getting in bed with Microsoft.

mytich says:

I hope all M$ embedded snitches will stay with Nokia and Qt will become trojan free ecosystem at last.

JCR says:

I wished that Nokia would stop playing with programmers interested in smartphones and mobile application with so much disdain. Tell us honestly and frankly that as far as Nokia is concerned, Qt is over! Clean up all those references to Qt on nokia.com and put up all the info we need to start developing the windows way.
The current Nokia’s approach of killing/getting -rid-of Qt little by little while explaining that Qt still matters and that Microsoft is the way to go is ridiculous.
For Desktop apps, I have 100% confidence that Qt will continue to grow, one way or another. Best would probably by the KDE foundation.

Javi Moya says:

JCR & others:
“I have 100% confidence that Qt will continue to grow”

that’s not so easy.
Qt is an extremely complex framework… very well designed and documented…. created by very talented and skilled guys…. and with a big team developing it 40hours/week… all year long.

Such great project need very skilled people (not amateurs)… focussed only on this… contiunisly…
I think that such great effort it must be given by a company paying wages.

———

Of course… Nokia it’s deinvesting on Qt….
(is you make cars and you are earning money selling cars… why are you going to sell part of your business to other company?? just because you are interested now in other things)

David Linenberg says:

All of this Nokia news could actually, surprisingly, be a great thing for rejuvenating QT.

With Digia’s news and now ICS’s news, there are companies rushing in to “fill the vacuum”, hoping to capitalize on Nokia’s limited mobile & desktop support of QT. It doesn’t seem like QT is going away by any means. Great engineering is recognized by enough people, and the cream will rise to the top.

Jibbering Shade says:

A lot of faulty assumptions here. Mr. Elop should put the desires of developers ahead of company owners? The Trolls will make awesome contributions to a Qt fork if the LGPL goes away? Companies are going to reach for (bet money on) a development framework that is not funded by anyone? Legalities are going to stop Nokia/Qt from being unprofitable?

I have the utmost respect for charity, but I see suggestions all over the place here that people can be expected/obliged to work without compensation or that a benefactor should be able to put funds into this without a monetary return on that investment. That just sounds unfair to me.

hb says:

Great news!

Adrian Carpenter says:

@Jibbering Shade

I think you’ve misread or misquoted stuff here.

“The Trolls will make awesome contributions to a Qt fork if the LGPL goes away?”

I didn’t say that, what I said that any fork without the Trolltech developers maintaining and contributing is doomed to failure, the only people who can reasonably keep the quality of Qt (both in code and direction) and the Trolls. Is this likely to happen? No, ergo, any fork is doomed to failure anyway.

“Legalities are going to stop Nokia/Qt from being unprofitable?”

As already stated on this blog in a previous post by a Nokia/Qt employee, Qt was not profitable prior to the Nokia decision. They couldn’t turn a profit when the only licensing options were GPL or commercial. Now they have the LGPL license to contend with, a license which provides nearly all the benefits of the commercial license but without the price tag. If it wasn’t profitable prior to LGPL, I can’t see how it can be profitable post GPL, without either selling a lot more licenses or increasing the licensings cost to existing developers on upgrades, support extensions etc.

“I have the utmost respect for charity, but I see suggestions all over the place here that people can be expected/obliged to work without compensation or that a benefactor should be able to put funds into this without a monetary return on that investment. That just sounds unfair to me.”

Oh absolutely, but there are rich benefactors who pump large amounts of money into projects and then give the results away for free, think Google, they realise that there’s more than one way to skin a cat. Are the Trolltech developers likely to maintain and contribute to a fork and keep it progressing like Qt did pre-Nokia? No, they’ve got bills to pay.

This whole thing boils down to poor communication from Nokia, creating press releases for every single event without having time to gather results and put together something which details whats happening, were we’re heading. Currently we know that digia has bought the Qt support and licensing, but we don’t know what it happening to the Trolls, who’s maintainng Qt? Who’s improving it? I suspect Qt has just lost it’s heart and soul and most valuable asset, the Trolls, because it sounds like they’re staying put at Nokia.

user says:

http://www.digia.com/C2256FEF0043E9C1/0/405001024

“Digia becomes first Microsoft Mobility partner providing business applications”

Miika says:

@user: You probably noticed that was published in 2006?

Pat says:

>> Intel doesn’t have a very good track record with software. While they
>> have a nice C++ compiler…

Intel’s C++ compiler sabotages applications. Their compiler includes a dispatcher in the executable that checks a customer’s computer to see if your software is running on an Intel brand CPU. If it isn’t, it runs an unoptimized, incredibly slow version of your application. They don’t tell you this before or after you pay for a license.

The bad track record continues…

Sucar Conny says:

Goodbye Qt based Programs, Welcome GNU,GNOME

Konstantin Tokarev says:

Pat: What you say about Intel C++ affects only old versions (<= 9). It's not the case for modern versions.

Konstantin Tokarev says:

Sucar: please find a better place for your agitation

Pat says:

@Konstantin: That’s not true. After the lawsuit, Intel now places a notice in its license that it compiles slower code on non-Intel processors. But the optimization forking is still there.

Go to the following website, download ANY product brief, and scroll to the last page of the PDF:
http://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/intel-compilers/

Jibbering Shade says:

Sounds like I misread you, Adrian. … Although I still think waiting for a rich benefactor to come along is a poor business model. Red Hat has a good strategy (of course a fully propriety approach like Apple’s is better).

Yuriy says:

Picture by oil.
At the left Intel with a huge cudgel (MeeGo), on the right Microsoft.

Intel speaks: Microsoft, you will make windows 8 for ARM you will receive a cudgel on a head. Won’t do I a cudgel I will hide, and Qt will be the user interface to refrigerators or washing machines!!

And Nokia. To buy wholesale and sell in parts – you will always get profit. Money doesn’t stink.

anon says:

Microsoft pays Nokia 1 billion to use WP7.

As previously said, MS$ is paying big bucks to the Nokia decision makers to make sure “Qt Everywhere” is dead 10 years down the road.

1 billion now saves them 10s of billions dollars tomorrow.

Nokia is already with MS$ together. Letting Qt chase around its tail for years. Lets target symbian, now it’s maemo, now meego, now lets target mobile, now lets target the desktop.

Clearly someone is misdirecting Qt in all ways to keep them from advancing.

Konstantin Tokarev says:

Pat: Right, Intel warns that their compiler does not support AMD instruction set extensions (a.k.a. “3dnow” and “3dnowext”). However, you can compile application for AMD CPU with use of SSE2 or SSE3 – they just have different optimization flags for Intel CPUs and for “any CPU”.

Erik Stoltenborg says:

Funny to see how Nokia stumble and fail again, and again… Their trategi of universal qt platform was a good one. But leaving it for Microsoft ad some dollars. As they got the new leader from ms. How can developers now trust Nokia?

Nokia did not manage to follow up the n900… Now ceo going for a new meego experiment release. No force. No Qt force. Nut. Nokia will be nothing but a microsoft window.

JCR says:

I find it hard to believe that Microsoft cares about Qt. Qt is in no way a threat to MIcrosoft! Get real, here, Qt is great but, for whatever reasons, it has never reached even the sidelines of mainstream programming. Look, Google, Adobe, and many other big names have certainly developed real applications with Qt but they have never decided to elect Qt as their dominant technology.
Maybe the guys at Nokia have realized that they would never be able to build an ecosystem around Qt even if Qt were perfect.
The idea of writing once and compiling everywhere may be impossible to implement at the degree required to be really mainstream

Julian M says:

Microsoft did that with Borland before – CEO – ex M$ guy -> next kill the company that is for reference of all Nokia shareholders. About Qt – probably slowly will go away -that is really sad -because is the best framework right now – compare with wxWidgets, .Net /Mono/ etc. If you do not have the support from commercial developers – the framework is like a hobby for bunch of talented programmers , but without clear vision where is going. Again from the history of M$ – probably the best Qt developers will go to work for M$.- reference Delphi – .Net

serkol says:

@Julian M:
Delphi was/is Windows-only dev tool. Qt is cross-platform – this is the big difference. If you need to develop a cross-platform app, you cannot use MS tools.

Commercial cross-platform now means Win+Mac – this is where you can make money. If you want great exposure for your Mac app, you should submit it to the Mac App Store. Mac App Store does not accept Mono or Java, so your only options are Qt, Real Basic, wxWidgets.

Disclaimer….

http://www.ics.com just announced a support offering for the LGPL version, which is competitive with Digia.

I decided to offer support for the LGPL version, because, it was clear to me, that even if Digia and Nokia have the best of intentions, this move is likely to lead to a fork.

Regardless of their initial intent, if the only way to get support was to buy the proprietary license from Digia, then time, money and self interest, would eventually drive them into a value add model.

The only way to stop this was to have someone (hopefully many people) offering commercial grade support for the Open Source version. This way, we provide support, but the the lgpl ensures that all enhancements are open to the community.

Forks are bad, and the main line open source version always wins. it’s time for people to switch from the commerical license to the LGPL.

Sucar Conny says:

Qt is just old Trolltech’s C library with Nokia modifications.
what we do Non Functional MeeGo (based Moblin 2.1)
Get real with GNU C and GTK (Gimp Tool Kit) and Gnome.

I have been told by our account manager that we are the biggest commercial user of Qt in the UK and have been purchasing licences on Mac,windows and linux for what must be over 7 years Now.

I personally brought Qt into my company all those years ago and we have grown together. There is no sentiment in business and I can understand why Nokia are basing their strategy on a different platform.

However what I and others cannot excuse is your managements lack of care in handling the situation. I expected some communication from digia. Nothing.

Over three days ago I emailed them and politely asked for some information and expressed that we would hopefully have a prosperous commercial future together.

No reply.

This attitude speaks volumes about your issues. You blame platforms when you should be looking at your culture. You could have made symbian work, you could have made qt work and now you are switching again.

Can I have my money back?
Basically you have taken a fantastic platform and burnt it yourselves.

Nokia are blaming the technology but you are missing the poi

@ Andrew Edwardson: I would like to clarify why you have not received a response from Digia. As the transfer of the commercial licensing and services business is not yet complete, Digia is not permitted to communicate with you as the customer relationships will not be transferred until closing. Digia is certainly eager to actively communicate with customers and has plans to do so following closing, currently estimated for the end of March 2011. If you have questions for your account representative, please reach out to that individual. It is my understanding that your account representative has already discussed with the main contact from your organization.

j says:

@ Peter Winston
Thanks for offering this service on the LGPL version, Peter. I hope your move will increase the collaboration between the proprietary development entities and the community. Good luck with the offering.

Marc van Oldenborgh says:

Will QT as a multi platform development environment now be able to comprise iOS? Hope so.

Dimitris says:

This sold out to m$ will stay in history.
No worries though, always there will be something newer and better as long as this damn planet spins around it’s self.

I kind feel sad though for the people and employees who involved in this project because they see their creation after countless human hours fade away because of ‘corporate politics’. It’s just another reminder that the industry we’re working on it’s govern by suits that they probably can’t even power on their own computers.

Anyway, sometimes management it’s like a Picasso painting. It’s ugly, expensive and it doesn’t make sense.

tonnot says:

And now …
Can be Wxwidgets an alternative ?
What is your opinion?

Commenting closed.