Announcing the Qt Mobile Edition @ Qt Developer Days 2013 Berlin

Published Tuesday October 8th, 2013 | by

What an event so far! Over 600 people were jammed in to the Qt Developer Days 2013 Berlin keynote speeches this morning and the level of excitement was high. Kalle Dalheimer from KDAB gave an uplifting welcome setting the stage for 2 days of Qt love and fun.

Digia announced an extremely exciting piece of information. Tommi Laitinen, SVP International Products at Digia gave a first-glimpse announcement about the upcoming Qt Mobile Edition.

What is the Qt Mobile Edition, you ask?

The Qt Mobile Edition is a full mobile app development offering from Digia that lets indie developers, small companies and app development houses build amazing multi-platform native mobile apps for Android & iOS with one affordable Qt package.

  • Full Qt libraries and development tools for unbeatable native performance and maximum developer efficiency
  • Cross-platform environment for Android & iOS app development (plus other mobile platforms to be added soon)
  • Built-in Qt-optimized cloud data storage & user management (Enginio Qt Cloud)
  • Commercial development and deployment license simplifying application distribution
  • Unlimited application development support from Digia experts
  • Subscription-based self-service model starting at $149 per month per user license

We know Qt is the best development framework out there and we want to make sure that all developers in all corners of the world are able to easily and inexpensively get their hands on it. That is why we have designed the Qt Mobile Edition – Qt everywhere for everyone. You can easily develop, deploy and host your mobile app for the leading mobile OSs with one convenient package and at the same time avoid any legal missteps. So, all you have to focus on is creating your app and you can rest assured it will be cross-platform, conveniently hosted and easily uploaded to the leading stores.

Qt Mobile Edition will be available later this year following the release of the next major update to the framework, Qt 5.2, in December.

Don’t fear. We will provide a free trial version of the Qt Mobile Edition to make sure you have the time to evaluate just how great it is before you purchase.

To sign up to receive information about the Qt Mobile Edition and its launch, make sure to visit http://qt.digia.com/qtmobileedition.

Let us know what you think and stay tuned!

 

Did you like this? Share it:

Posted in Enginio, Events, Mobile, News, Qt, Uncategorized

49 comments to Announcing the Qt Mobile Edition @ Qt Developer Days 2013 Berlin

Lilian says:

“Full Qt libraries” – again worries. Let’s hope this means “Charts and all the additional libraries available for commercial users included + the open-source libraries”. And not “Libraries for mobile development which will not be available to the open-source community”.

What is the advantage of using Qt Mobile instead of the open-source version of Qt ? Application size ? Are there optimizations not prezent in the open-source version of Qt? A table listing the differences between the open-source Qt and Qt Mobile might be very useful.

Lilian says:

Probably the most important points would be the support(They help you with app development), the cloud subscription and the commercial license.

Katherine Barrios says:

Hi, the advantages of the Qt Mobile Edition are a)commercial license b)cross-platform environment for Android & iOS plus other mobile OS in future c)support from Digia. Additional features on tooling as well as Charts and other items in the future will also be available in the package.

Well, if you don’t clearly announce the things it’s not our fault :)
In particular, from what you say, I still don’t understand if

“b)cross-platform environment for Android & iOS plus other mobile OS in future”

is available in the opensource version or not.

Please make a clear announce with a comparison between LGPL and commercial versions of the development tools.

Cheers.

Katherine Barrios says:

Yes, definitely the Qt open source has cross-platform environment for Android and iOS.

Andreykonn says:

Nothing’s gonna work until Qt Quick starts to support natively looking ui controls for mobile OSs.

Benoit says:

I also wish it was here but in the meanwhile, you can try the approach used in the “touch” example (in QtQuickControls). It provides a simple way to have native looking Android controls.

Guys, seriously?! 1800$/year to have Qt for iOS?!

Are you aware that with the same money I can buy: 1 Mac, 1 iPhone and 1 iOS SDK developer license for 1 year?!

Good luck with it!

Luciano says:

I don’t think you are the target for this offer…
I also don’t find it particularly interesting, but that’s because I am perfectly happy with the open source edition.

Katherine Barrios says:

Glad to hear that :)

Katherine Barrios says:

Hi, you get iOS and Android for the license price.

Benoit says:

Yes, and Linux…

Lilian says:

Than you are not their target audience.
I see that being good for companies, 149$ per month and they give you tools and kind of an instructor that doesn’t get paid full salary. “He” helps you with questions but doesn’t work full time for you.

Nicola says:

+1 Cristea Bogdan serves an announce with clearer differences and advantages of the commercial version. Without this, the developers run away

Mark Constable says:

How on earth is having to pay $149/month something to get excited about?

I guess I am not the target audience and I should unsubscribe from this blog feed.

Katherine Barrios says:

Hi, indeed. The Qt Mobile Edition isn’t for all developers. Our goal is to make different offerings for different folks with different needs. We know that the OS version serves many people and we are happy about that too :)

xuxiang says:

I am willing to pay and wish to know if I subscribed certain months and completed my project, then stop subscription, could I continue to sell my software ?

@xuxiang: Yes. You can sell the created app indefinitely, even without continuing the subscription. But the cloud backend, support and other online services are not available then.

Ahmed says:

So that means I pay once and build, link statically forever

But off course I won’t get support and cloud features

Correct me if I’m wrong

Sergiy Kolokolkin says:

It looks like the price is comparable to Xamarin “Business” license, but:

- Xamarin is already a popular and very successful cross-platform tool, with a lot of 3rd party support (components). A new and unproven tool like Qt Mobile should be priced significantly less to get traction.

- Xamarin has a $299/year/developer/platform “Indie” license. Qt Mobile should also have an Indie license, and it should cost less, say $100/year/developer/platform

Stefan says:

While Xamarin surely has a lot of marketing fluff surrounding it, it is not the more successful cross-platform tool.

Qt has been arround forever, but I admit that Xamarin propably has an advantage in the mobile sector and we are talking about the Mobile Edition.

Any indie/non profit developer I would suggest to use the lgpl version. If you are in for the money and 149$ a month are a problem for you, then I suggest to reevaluate your business plan.

Also keep in mind that the 149$ include support and access to cloud infrastructure/services.

Still, if I were Digia, I would consider selling an older version of the commercial mobile edition, without support and service, at an really attractive (most likely flat) price point. This might be interesting for hobbyists and indie developer who do not like to touch the lgpl.

I’m afraid Qt Mobile Edition will be the only option for developing commercial, closed-source applications for iOS. With LGPL license no one will risk to publish commercial applications to the App Store. I don’t understand this monthly-based paying model. After I stop paying the fee, do I have to unpublish the application created using Qt Mobile Edition from the App Store ?

@Maciej: You can continue selling your app as long as you want, even without having the license in force. Online services, cloud backend, support etc are then not available, but in case you did not use those your app can live “forever” in the store.

Robin Lobel says:

I’d also love some clarification about the following points:
-Cross-platform environment for Android & iOS app development : what’s the difference with the open source Qt here ? Qt Creator is cross-platform right ?
-Commercial development and deployment license : does it mean I cannot develop a mobile application for sale with the open source Qt ? Or does it refer to something else ?

stereomatching says:

As long as I know, you could publish your apps without exposing your codes if

1 : dynamically link to the dll of Qt
2 : static link?Maybe commercial license is the only way to go?
3 : if you change the source codes of Qt, you need to share it
4 : include the license of the LGPL2.1

“you can freely use Qt under an LGPL license to create proprietary applications that dynamically link to the Qt libraries”

link of explanation
http://www.slideshare.net/qtbynokia/qt-licensing-explained

Hamid H says:

The problem is that apparently App Store doesn’t allow using shared libraries. Everything should be statically linked.

http://multinc.com/2009/08/24/compatibility-between-the-iphone-app-store-and-the-lgpl/

Isaac says:

I hope the videos from the QDD13 get uploaded soon (as some of the 12′ edition were).

They’re great resources and should be shared with as many people as possible.

We totally need a more detailed post on how different the opensource and paid versions of the iOS and Android ports are…

are we going to miss features of the ports?

or only the commercial licensing/support?

This is a critical point for independent and opensource developers…

Katherine Barrios says:

The Qt Mobile Edition is a _package_, an all-in-one offering for easier cross-platform mobile app dev, including a commercial license (useful for iOS dev & App Store submission), cloud and support. The Qt Project will always provide an open source Qt that has all the features and functions open source developers need to make successful apps. It is definitely not an intent whatsoever to make the open source version a lower quality or strip it of any functionality. It is important to note that the Qt Mobile Edition is meant to make it _easier_ more _convenient_ with added features like Enginio, some add-ons like Charts and others (already available in the Qt Enterprise version), a commercial license and support. Please rest assured that we don’t want to cripple the open source community.

Benoit says:

Sorry but you are confusion everybody when saying:

“…and at the same time avoid any legal missteps”
and
“including a commercial license (useful for iOS dev & App Store submission)”

As far as I know, developers using the open source libraries do not have to fear anything as long as they include the unmodified shared libraries in the package (which is as far as I know the recommended way of doing it, at least for Android).

I understand that the commercial package is attractive because of support, cloud services, etc… but please do not try to give wrong arguments.

That’s the thing. All these legal issues are related to the iOS platform, where it’s forbidden to publish apps with shared libraries – only linked statically. Nobody says it clear, there are many discussions behind the door about how to solve this matter in Qt. Someone must say it clear – there is only one offer right now for iOS: commercial license. I will never risk to develop iOS applications with Qt and the LGPL license for external customers. I agree that the Qt Mobile Edition is a good offer, perhaps a bit too expensive. Why it doesn’t include Windows RT ?

Maurice Kalinowski says:

@Maciej We are working on a Technology Preview for Windows RT in conjunction with the 5.2 release. Hence there is no fully supported version available for it yet, compared to iOS and Android.

We will keep you updated on the status of that port, no worries.

Darryl Wallace says:

Can you just be clear?

“…and at the same time avoid any legal missteps”
and
“including a commercial license (useful for iOS dev & App Store submission)”

Is deployment of an iOS app to the Apple App Store with the open-source LGPL license (i.e. *not* commercial*) allowed?

Please just be clear. Yes or no.

If the answer is *no* then you will likely get a lot of one-off “pay my $149 for a month so I can get a commercial license for iOS and then you’ll never hear from me again” scenarios. The remainder of people will likely choose native development.

Also, if I have no use for the cloud services then I don’t see why I would continue paying after my app has been deployed.

Lilian says:

The Apple App Store is not compatible with the open source licenses that Qt is offering.
You need to dynamically link your library to satisfy the open-source licenses but Apple App Store accepts only statically linked.
So, in case that you want to develop with Qt on iOS you will need a commercial license otherwise apple won’t let you on their market.

Matthew says:

Will it possible possible for instance, to develop on a Windows platform and deploy on iOS as it is possible for other framework such as Marmalade ?

OS and mobile OS says:

Should I worry, or not – that is the question. If the #opensource and free #Qt stays as it is, and im sync wirh the commercial so that the paid package support does not start to diverge from the base and offer better options and compatibility for cross-platform development then maybe it is ok. But if one of he other mobile operating systems to be added to this offering is going to be #WP then I think this might be very bad news to the future of Qt.. #justsayin

Kai Koehne says:

#WP – Word Perfect ? Word Press ? Wrong Person ? Well Played?

Sonu Lohani says:

Its too costly. You should think about it. I would better use the android sdk. Why should i go for this? And there is more support out there for android. So you should think about the pricing if you really want to spread it.

Katherine Barrios says:

The Qt Mobile Edition is designed for developers that want to develop cross-platform apps, currently for Android and iOS. It is an option, offering for an easier way to get what you need to develop, deploy and host plus get a commercial license. The latter useful and provides hassle-free development for iOS when submitting to the App Store. The use case will not fit for everyone, of course.

jazer says:

I had hope that Digia gets an solution for Indies. But unfortunately QtMobile misses me (as an Indie) with 150$/p, which is way to much because I don’t need most of the features. No cloud, no support, no…

What I need is a LGPL+SL version of Qt5.2, which would help me to start with cross-platform development.

QtMobile does not address Indies at all, its more for small companies.

Ionut Dediu says:

Totally agree, 100$/year without engine.io would be perfect for indie devs.

I really tried to understand the difference from the free offering, it’s a pity there’s no table and official speak is only about vague “all in one package” :/

Here’s what I think you get:
- Permission to publish for iOS App Store (due to the need for static linkage)
- Support
- Some sort of superior integrated IDE/deployment tool in the future
- Engino cloud (though you can buy it separately I think and limits are not clear)
- Permission to extend (and resell) Qt while having closed source
- App store and Google Play fees are somehow already included

*Minimal required payment for App Store*
Now the most important question for the small hobbyist who still wants to publish for App Store:
What is the minimal minimorum payment you need to pay for publishing for app store?
- Is one month subscription for the day of publication enough?
- Or for all update release dates?
- Or for whole app life in store?
- Some free Mobile Edition for free/opensource apps…

Small Fish says:

Please consider adding a lower tier price for individuals in the $300-$400 price /yr. Even if you don’t make a lot of money from this group it might feed your higher business group pricing in many ways while at the same time giving you critical mass to become a real standard in the mobile space.

Cuke says:

My thoughts:
- it’s too costly for indy developers
- lowering the price could give Qt more traction cause it’ll be more likely to be chosen by developers over competitors
- you should decouple the enginio service from the license because from what i understood i could buy the 159 license for just one month and than being able to statically link forever and deploy everywhere <— please clarify this point because in this case the mobile edition is a good option and cheap

Stefan says:

How I understood it you can do this, but you are supposed to stop active development once the licence runs out.

Still this is a super attractive offering for short term projects. You pay e.g. 300$ for two month of development and you can sell you app forever.

Also the reality is that Digia cannot look into the bedroom office of indie developers, that started using the lgpl and then chaged to the commercial edition. I would evaluate Qt using the lgpl version anyway.

andy says:

Starting $149/mon 1788/year.

I think, digia must do its research of existing cross-platform out there and compare their price besides Qt is not yet that matured in mobile when compared to other sdk out there.

You have to pay starting 1788/year without ( physics engine, in-app purchase, ads, social plugins etc, third party tools) which are standard features of existing sdk for mobile.

I been using Qt on desktop for more than 10 years, however i dont find it competitive in mobile compared to others especially with digia overpricing scheme.

private_company says:

We are a company that use Commercial version from the very beginning. We are not afraid about the price, if the support in terms of bug reporting for commercial users is prioritized.
In other words:
We pay to have QT bugs fixed ASAP because we develop commercial software.
Today, the bugs we reported via customer portal are scheduled for future, unknown version….
So, what we pay for?

Lilian says:

It would be great if Digia would add an exception to their open source licenses so people can release their software on the Apple App Store too, like VLC(VideoLAN) did.

Commenting closed.