> So the argument is to add another huge toolkit because GTK is too big? I can > remember someone else explained that situation before... on the other hand you > can take the device and run your own Qt based filesystem on it. But then you > won't need to port the tookit but port your applications to work with the 770 > hardware capabilities.
No, the argument is not to blame QT for beeing huge and also using using another bloated toolkit as basis. The real argument for QT would be to allow applications to run on the 770 which wouldn't work otherwise - nobody talks about including it into the default distribution but if you need program x/y I think you'll happily install QT if it allows to do what you want. Maybe linking it statically isn't a bad idea if its just used by one single program > Compared to fltk and fox GTK is much more > powerful and comes with a complete system abstraction layer and - if someone > doesn't like C - almost independent from the language used. Well I could say the same about QT + it has an almost complete class library so I don't need any time wasting with unix broken apis ;) In _my opinion_ QT is even more powerful than GTK+ but who matters, I think this power is not needed on such devices at all and think both toolkits are not really suited for embedded use (so I would not prefer a QT based 770). If I look at the tons of Hildon/GTK based program's I've installed on my 770 I see _none_ of them using any advanced features of GTK - just basic ui like buttons, tables and lists (uhh, slow scrolling) and some images here and there. Exactly the same could be archived with one of those ultra-slim high-performance toolkits available with about 1/10 of size/footprint and 2x the performance. However, peace ;-) lg Clemens _______________________________________________ maemo-developers mailing list maemo-developers@maemo.org https://maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
