Re: [Interest] qt vs web-runtime

2012-05-03 Thread Kate Alhola
On May 2, 2012, at 8:37 PM, ext Nicola De Filippo wrote: > Hi, > >Hi, > > > However, you must expect binary compatibility problems in the future. > > Intel is looking to grab a share of the market, and remember also that MIPS > > got themselves Android certified before Intel did. There may

Re: [Interest] qt vs web-runtime

2012-05-03 Thread Mandeep Sandhu
>> If you access the camera (or other local resource) from Java using the >> standard APIs, you don't need to care about binary compatibility - >> that's what the Dalvik VM does. >> > > One so wishes.  I have a camera app for Android written using plain > Android SDK and java.  It crashes on some d

Re: [Interest] qt vs web-runtime

2012-05-03 Thread Harri Pasanen
On 05/03/2012 01:17 AM, Stephen Bryant wrote: > > Hi, > > On Wednesday 02 May 2012 21:41:33 Harri Pasanen wrote: > > [...] > > > Binary compatibility with phones/tablets is more than just CPU. As soon > > > as you start accessing Camera, GPS, etc. you typically need to test on > > > device. Screen

Re: [Interest] qt vs web-runtime

2012-05-02 Thread Stephen Bryant
Hi, On Wednesday 02 May 2012 21:41:33 Harri Pasanen wrote: [...] > Binary compatibility with phones/tablets is more than just CPU. As soon > as you start accessing Camera, GPS, etc. you typically need to test on > device. Screen resolution, GPUs , RAM, storage memory all differ, so > even if you

Re: [Interest] qt vs web-runtime

2012-05-02 Thread Stephen Bryant
Hi, On Wednesday 02 May 2012 10:44:36 Jason H wrote: > Intel has the x86 Andoid problem fixed with binary translation. Your NDK > arguments are moot. I disagree. Firstly, Intel's binary translator won't help those with MIPS devices. Secondly, it doesn't work with all apps. Here's a quote from

Re: [Interest] qt vs web-runtime

2012-05-02 Thread Harri Pasanen
On 05/02/2012 09:41 PM, Harri Pasanen wrote: > On 05/02/2012 12:05 PM, Stephen Bryant wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> > in the company there's Qt Vs phonegap (and other web-runtime). >> I forgot to mention this discussion which is quite enlightening: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/phonegap/BFyBYj

Re: [Interest] qt vs web-runtime

2012-05-02 Thread Harri Pasanen
On 05/02/2012 12:05 PM, Stephen Bryant wrote: > > Hi, > > > in the company there's Qt Vs phonegap (and other web-runtime). > > > I'm obviously biased. What are the objective points in favor of Qt? > I can > > > not say anything about the Windows and Android we are not yet stable. > As usual it de

Re: [Interest] qt vs web-runtime

2012-05-02 Thread Jason H
Intel has the x86 Andoid problem fixed with binary translation. Your NDK arguments are moot. From: Stephen Bryant To: interest@qt-project.org Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2012 6:05 AM Subject: Re: [Interest] qt vs web-runtime Hi,   > in the company there&#

Re: [Interest] qt vs web-runtime

2012-05-02 Thread Nicola De Filippo
Hi, >Hi, > in the company there's Qt Vs phonegap (and other web-runtime). > I'm obviously biased. What are the objective points in favor of Qt? I can > not say anything about the Windows and Android we are not yet stable. > The native binary that you compile when using Qt will give much better

Re: [Interest] qt vs web-runtime

2012-05-02 Thread Stephen Bryant
Hi, > in the company there's Qt Vs phonegap (and other web-runtime). > I'm obviously biased. What are the objective points in favor of Qt? I can > not say anything about the Windows and Android we are not yet stable. The native binary that you compile when using Qt will give much better performa

[Interest] qt vs web-runtime

2012-05-01 Thread Nicola De Filippo
Hi, in the company there's Qt Vs phonegap (and other web-runtime). I'm obviously biased. What are the objective points in favor of Qt? I can not say anything about the Windows and Android we are not yet stable. I do not like losing... BR Nicola___