subject:"RE\: \[NF\] PyQT for desktop applications"

Re: [NF] PyQT for desktop applications

2017-06-08 Thread Charlie-gm




On 6/3/2017 2:46 PM, Thierry Nivelet wrote:

Your experience is biased by your rejection of the Web model.

If HTML/CSS was so 'inconsistent' across browsers, frameworks like 
Bootstrap would be impossible. Bootstrap works perfectly, not only 
for what you call 'general public' web pages, also for business 
application, internal or not; on any browser and any device; and is 
customizable.


What do you want? Should I itemize the inconsistencies that I've seen 
between browsers and even the same browser between applications? It is 
pretty rude to say someone's "experience" is biased. That's like 
saying I cannot see what is clearly in front of my face. I definitely 
admit I have biases, but I do know how to make observations and listen 
to people - especially when it is part of my job assignment. And I 
thought it was pretty clear I did NOT uniformly reject the Web model. 
I've developed many applications that USE the Internet - just not 
within a browser. Perhaps you are the one that is biased because you 
want everyone to buy your "browser based" product?


And this has nothing to do with a particular Web framework. Maybe the 
dev teams are using .Net, maybe JBOSS, maybe JQuery, maybe something 
else. Would you prefer to retract your previous statement that the 
developers are CSS dummies (paraphrased) and say instead the 
enterprise is stupid because it has not standardized on Bootstrap?


If users preferred desktop applications, as you seem to argue, the 
web-based Salesforce would not have forced the fastest growing 
company of the 90's -- Siebel systems -- to a quasi bankruptcy in the 
early 2000's, pushing them to be bought by Oracle.


I seriously doubt a "browser app" is what gave one company a boost 
over another. More likely they had a better centralized data model and 
feature set. Or maybe the loser just had a snobbier attitude toward 
clients: that seems to be a frequent issue.


I'll give you another example from ACTUAL experience: with FoxInCloud 
we can have the very same application, running the very same code 
against the very same data, on the desktop and/or in the browser. One 
of our clients, US based, has such an


If you are saying the users have access to a "rich client" application 
and a "browser based" application, and those applications look almost 
identical, and those applications have the same functions, and those 
applications access same data, and that the browser-based application 
is slower. I find it very hard to believe the end users would prefer 
the browser-based application if they knew the desktop one was 
available. I am pretty confident that the user base at my organization 
would be exclusively using the rich client one. A constant complaint I 
hear from users at my company is the applications (all browser-based) 
are too  slow - which is why they just jump to the 
Excel-export function and do their work in Excel (which, as a side 
note, I think is pure poison to an enterprise - spreadsheets should be 
out-right banned - they create islands of information, protected 
data-turfs, etc but getting rid of spreadsheets is s a difficult 
sell to users while all the  browser-based applications are 
so  slow).


As for large companies investing millions in latest techs, sorry to 
write that, and I do have an ACTUAL experience with a billion-dollar 
company, they're just like dinosaurs compared to what startups can 
achieve.


So, what the hell, lets be clear. I'm talking about AT&T: that's the 
company I'm working for now. So they're at 150+B/yr I think. They are 
not a software company (although they claim they have made the 
transition). And because of their size they spend far more on software 
projects that most software-exclusive companies. And ooh yes, they 
are a dinosaur (I find it ironic that Bell-labs gave the world "Unix"  
- and compare that to AT&T today ). They have horrific, terrible, 
software development practices which I'm trying to help change 
(forest fire>). And even AT&T is now taking a lot of their web pages 
and creating "rich client" apps out of them for mobile devices (so 
yeah, repeating the creation and maintenance of "GUI" programming 3 or 
more times over). Of course, even if "desktop" designs would be the 
standard, that multiplicity would still have happened because of major 
platform differences. But the point is "browser world" promised we 
would never have to do that again. They LIED (hahahaha, just 
kidding, it was more naive thinking than malicious intent to get paid 
to do the same thing over and over again... well, at least I hope 
"most" people were not thinking that).


But remember what started this thread: "... does anyone even look for 
desktop applications any more..." I rephrased that to "rich client" 
applications because I think that is the really the point. And I think 
that yes indeed, those kinds of applications are very much in demand - 
if the user base knows they could get them. And from a technical poi

Re: [NF] PyQT for desktop applications

2017-06-05 Thread Charlie-gm

On 6/3/2017 2:46 PM, Thierry Nivelet wrote:

Your experience is biased by your rejection of the Web model.

If HTML/CSS was so 'inconsistent' across browsers, frameworks like
Bootstrap would be impossible. Bootstrap works perfectly, not only for
what you call 'general public' web pages, also for business
application, internal or not; on any browser and any device; and is
customizable.

What do you want? Should I itemize the inconsistencies that I've seen
between browsers and even the same browser between applications? It is
pretty rude to say someone's "experience" is biased. That's like saying
I cannot see what is clearly in front of my face. I definitely admit I
have biases, but I do know how to make observations and listen to people
- especially when it is part of my job assignment. And I thought it was
pretty clear I did NOT uniformly reject the Web model. I've developed
many applications that USE the Internet - just not within a browser.
Perhaps you are the one that is biased because you want everyone to buy
your "browser based" product?

And this has nothing to do with a particular Web framework. Maybe the
dev teams are using .Net, maybe JBOSS, maybe JQuery, maybe something
else. Would you prefer to retract your previous statement that the
developers are CSS dummies (paraphrased) and say instead the enterprise
is stupid because it has not standardized on Bootstrap?

If users preferred desktop applications, as you seem to argue, the
web-based Salesforce would not have forced the fastest growing company
of the 90's -- Siebel systems -- to a quasi bankruptcy in the early
2000's, pushing them to be bought by Oracle.

I seriously doubt a "browser app" is what gave one company a boost over
another. More likely they had a better centralized data model and
feature set. Or maybe the loser just had a snobbier attitude toward
clients: that seems to be a frequent issue.

I'll give you another example from ACTUAL experience: with FoxInCloud
we can have the very same application, running the very same code
against the very same data, on the desktop and/or in the browser. One
of our clients, US based, has such an

If you are saying the users have access to a "rich client" application
and a "browser based" application, and those applications look almost
identical, and those applications have the same functions, and those
applications access same data, and that the browser-based application is
slower. I find it very hard to believe the end users would prefer the
browser-based application if they knew the desktop one was available. I
am pretty confident that the user base at my organization would be
exclusively using the rich client one. A constant complaint I hear from
users at my company is the applications (all browser-based) are too
slow - which is why they just jump to the Excel-export
function and do their work in Excel (which, as a side note, I think is
pure poison to an enterprise - spreadsheets should be out-right banned -
they create islands of information, protected data-turfs, etc but
getting rid of spreadsheets is s a difficult sell to users while all the
browser-based applications are so slow).

As for large companies investing millions in latest techs, sorry to
write that, and I do have an ACTUAL experience with a billion-dollar
company, they're just like dinosaurs compared to what startups can
achieve.

So, what the hell, lets be clear. I'm talking about AT&T: that's the
company I'm working for now. So they're at 150+B/yr I think. They are
not a software company (although they claim they have made the
transition). And because of their size they spend far more on software
projects that most software-exclusive companies. And ooh yes, they
are a dinosaur (I find it ironic that Bell-labs gave the world "Unix" -
and compare that to AT&T today ). They have horrific, terrible,
software development practices which I'm trying to help change (of me with an eye-dropper of water in front of a 10,000 acre forest
fire>). And even AT&T is now taking a lot of their web pages and
creating "rich client" apps out of them for mobile devices (so yeah,
repeating the creation and maintenance of "GUI" programming 3 or more
times over). Of course, even if "desktop" designs would be the standard,
that multiplicity would still have happened because of major platform
differences. But the point is "browser world" promised we would never
have to do that again. They LIED (hahahaha, just kidding, it was
more naive thinking than malicious intent to get paid to do the same
thing over and over again... well, at least I hope "most" people were
not thinking that).

But remember what started this thread: "... does anyone even look for
desktop applications any more..." I rephrased that to "rich client"
applications because I think that is the really the point. And I think
that yes indeed, those kinds of applications are very much in demand -
if the use

Re: [NF] PyQT for desktop applications

2017-06-05 Thread Thierry Nivelet

Browser can only access printers.

It may propose user to save a file, the latter decides where 

Thierry Nivelet
http://foxincloud.com/
Give your VFP app a second life in the cloud

> Le 5 juin 2017 à 17:01, Alan Bourke  a écrit :
> 
> Thierry
> 
>> Why? To get rid of the installation / maintenance / versioning hassles,
>> and set up news labs quicker (developing country).
> 
> Absolutely a big advantage of the browser-centric application, in a
> single-tenant installation at least.
> 
> You say 50 reports - how do you implement that? Render to PDF and let
> the browser handle it from there? How do you design them?
> 
> What if you needed to access local printers or file systems directly?
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
>  Alan Bourke
>  alanpbourke (at) fastmail (dot) fm
> 
[excessive quoting removed by server]

___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/c0098294-4eef-42dd-98b8-ad3de8fff...@foxincloud.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: [NF] PyQT for desktop applications

2017-06-05 Thread Thierry Nivelet

FWIW, Web and/or FoxinCloud supports this scénario 

Thierry Nivelet
http://foxincloud.com/
Give your VFP app a second life in the cloud

> Le 5 juin 2017 à 17:51, Stephen Russell  a écrit :
> 
> We are retiring many of our reports in SSRS and replacing them with Data
> Cube access to the data.  We had 140 reports at last upgrade in 2015 and
> now planning for our next upgrade that number will fall to 50-60.  All the
> data is crunched in Excel at the user's need.
> 
> BI is such a major aspect of business nowadays.  Keeping your customers
> current in information is helpful in keeping customers as well as getting
> new ones.
> 
> On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 10:01 AM, Alan Bourke 
> wrote:
> 
>> Thierry
>> 
>>> Why? To get rid of the installation / maintenance / versioning hassles,
>>> and set up news labs quicker (developing country).
>> 
>> Absolutely a big advantage of the browser-centric application, in a
>> single-tenant installation at least.
>> 
>> You say 50 reports - how do you implement that? Render to PDF and let
>> the browser handle it from there? How do you design them?
>> 
>> What if you needed to access local printers or file systems directly?
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> --
>>  Alan Bourke
>>  alanpbourke (at) fastmail (dot) fm
>> 
[excessive quoting removed by server]

___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/1a7027f7-907d-4f26-965d-3e7910bb5...@foxincloud.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: [NF] PyQT for desktop applications

2017-06-05 Thread Thierry Nivelet

PDF displayed in either a sub form within the same tab, a new tab or a new 
browser window

http://foxincloud.com/tutotest/report.tuto

Thierry Nivelet
http://foxincloud.com/
Give your VFP app a second life in the cloud

> Le 5 juin 2017 à 17:51, Stephen Russell  a écrit :
> 
> We are retiring many of our reports in SSRS and replacing them with Data
> Cube access to the data.  We had 140 reports at last upgrade in 2015 and
> now planning for our next upgrade that number will fall to 50-60.  All the
> data is crunched in Excel at the user's need.
> 
> BI is such a major aspect of business nowadays.  Keeping your customers
> current in information is helpful in keeping customers as well as getting
> new ones.
> 
> On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 10:01 AM, Alan Bourke 
> wrote:
> 
>> Thierry
>> 
>>> Why? To get rid of the installation / maintenance / versioning hassles,
>>> and set up news labs quicker (developing country).
>> 
>> Absolutely a big advantage of the browser-centric application, in a
>> single-tenant installation at least.
>> 
>> You say 50 reports - how do you implement that? Render to PDF and let
>> the browser handle it from there? How do you design them?
>> 
>> What if you needed to access local printers or file systems directly?
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> --
>>  Alan Bourke
>>  alanpbourke (at) fastmail (dot) fm
>> 
[excessive quoting removed by server]

___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/acf5345c-6cb7-421b-b6ab-d03d7dba4...@foxincloud.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: [NF] PyQT for desktop applications

2017-06-05 Thread Stephen Russell

We are retiring many of our reports in SSRS and replacing them with Data
Cube access to the data.  We had 140 reports at last upgrade in 2015 and
now planning for our next upgrade that number will fall to 50-60.  All the
data is crunched in Excel at the user's need.

BI is such a major aspect of business nowadays.  Keeping your customers
current in information is helpful in keeping customers as well as getting
new ones.

On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 10:01 AM, Alan Bourke 
wrote:

> Thierry
>
> > Why? To get rid of the installation / maintenance / versioning hassles,
> > and set up news labs quicker (developing country).
>
> Absolutely a big advantage of the browser-centric application, in a
> single-tenant installation at least.
>
> You say 50 reports - how do you implement that? Render to PDF and let
> the browser handle it from there? How do you design them?
>
> What if you needed to access local printers or file systems directly?
>
>
>
> --
>   Alan Bourke
>   alanpbourke (at) fastmail (dot) fm
>
[excessive quoting removed by server]

___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/cajidmykwzpk8snxs94xrf4gol6b_wour4fzr4u2uqvf8vxf...@mail.gmail.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: [NF] PyQT for desktop applications

2017-06-05 Thread Alan Bourke

Thierry

> Why? To get rid of the installation / maintenance / versioning hassles,
> and set up news labs quicker (developing country).

Absolutely a big advantage of the browser-centric application, in a
single-tenant installation at least.

You say 50 reports - how do you implement that? Render to PDF and let
the browser handle it from there? How do you design them?

What if you needed to access local printers or file systems directly?



-- 
  Alan Bourke
  alanpbourke (at) fastmail (dot) fm

___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/1496674869.3030001.999204384.043b1...@webmail.messagingengine.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: [NF] PyQT for desktop applications

2017-06-05 Thread Stephen Russell

On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 9:00 AM, Dave Crozier  wrote:

> This is a similar argument as the one about 20 years ago as to whether
> posting into tables interactively was preferable to posting transactions in
> the traditional mainframe batches.
>
> I hated Sage and other "post it now" accounting systems at first but as
> hardware and network reliability improved this is now the defacto standard
> for most software.
>
> I guess we are suffering from dinosaur syndrome to a certain extent in
> that old habits die hard
>
> (Retreats back into his stone age cave)
>
>
>
>
Are you calling us old?

Bad __Steve
-- 
Stephen Russell
Sr. Analyst
Ring Container Technology
Oakland TN

901.246-0159 cell

--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/alternative
  text/plain (text body -- kept)
  text/html
---

___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/cajidmyjfz-c5+azvl0ykvp2ozrc_-a64o83rhvzhlbe4hia...@mail.gmail.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

RE: [NF] PyQT for desktop applications

2017-06-05 Thread Dave Crozier

This is a similar argument as the one about 20 years ago as to whether posting 
into tables interactively was preferable to posting transactions in the 
traditional mainframe batches. 

I hated Sage and other "post it now" accounting systems at first but as 
hardware and network reliability improved this is now the defacto standard for 
most software.

I guess we are suffering from dinosaur syndrome to a certain extent in that old 
habits die hard 

(Retreats back into his stone age cave)

Dave


-Original Message-
From: ProFox [mailto:profox-boun...@leafe.com] On Behalf Of Thierry Nivelet
Sent: 05 June 2017 10:18
To: profox@leafe.com
Subject: Re: [NF] PyQT for desktop applications

Hi Alan,

I wish you could be a little more specific so that we can learn from your facts 
and figures.

What I can say for sure, as it's real life, current experience, that a 
biological analysis company, client of FoxInCloud, manages ALL its operations, 
end to end from order entry to accounting, including capturing measures from 
its bio analysis devices, through a web app running on a remote server (only 
desktops and internet connection in the premises); 100k patients, 250k 'orders' 
(MD ordonnances), 2M 'order lines' (unit examination), 70 forms, 50 reports, 
300 users

Why? To get rid of the installation / maintenance / versioning hassles, and set 
up news labs quicker (developing country).

Grids and data are the only limiting factor we've seen so far, that requires 
some workaround:
- more than 3 grids on the same form: move to subforms
- more than 1000 lines in a grid: use the grid pager supplied with FoxInCloud.
- light views that take more than .2 sec. to requery: use a cursor instead; if 
view is updateable, use getfldstate and update back end yourself

Especially when updateable, grids almost count for as many controls as the 
number of cells in it: takes some server time to manage the state. 

Thierry Nivelet
http://foxincloud.com/
Give your VFP app a second life in the cloud

> Le 4 juin 2017 à 11:47, Alan Bourke  a écrit :
> 
> trying to implement
> everything in a browser remains impractical for many use cases


___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/e9242b2a-0710-415e-af6c-ce8342559...@foxincloud.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/18725b8cd2d5d247873a2baf401d4ab2b4665...@ex2010-a-fpl.fpl.LOCAL
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: [NF] PyQT for desktop applications

2017-06-05 Thread Thierry Nivelet

Hi Alan,

I wish you could be a little more specific so that we can learn from your facts 
and figures.

What I can say for sure, as it's real life, current experience, that a 
biological analysis company, client of FoxInCloud, manages ALL its operations, 
end to end from order entry to accounting, including capturing measures from 
its bio analysis devices, through a web app running on a remote server (only 
desktops and internet connection in the premises); 100k patients, 250k 'orders' 
(MD ordonnances), 2M 'order lines' (unit examination), 70 forms, 50 reports, 
300 users

Why? To get rid of the installation / maintenance / versioning hassles, and set 
up news labs quicker (developing country).

Grids and data are the only limiting factor we've seen so far, that requires 
some workaround:
- more than 3 grids on the same form: move to subforms
- more than 1000 lines in a grid: use the grid pager supplied with FoxInCloud.
- light views that take more than .2 sec. to requery: use a cursor instead; if 
view is updateable, use getfldstate and update back end yourself

Especially when updateable, grids almost count for as many controls as the 
number of cells in it: takes some server time to manage the state. 

Thierry Nivelet
http://foxincloud.com/
Give your VFP app a second life in the cloud

> Le 4 juin 2017 à 11:47, Alan Bourke  a écrit :
> 
> trying to implement
> everything in a browser remains impractical for many use cases


___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/e9242b2a-0710-415e-af6c-ce8342559...@foxincloud.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: [NF] PyQT for desktop applications

2017-06-04 Thread Charlie-gm


On 6/3/2017 11:29 PM, Ed Leafe wrote:
On Jun 3, 2017, at 1:46 PM, Thierry Nivelet  
wrote:
One of our clients, US based, has such an application. Initially the 
Web version was designed for the external partners -- suppliers and 
clients -- to interact with the company. Guess what, nowadays **all 
employees** of the company use the Web 

I built something like this in VFP several years ago.

Remember when those "small form" laptops first came out? One of them was 
EE PC or something like that: running Windows XP and I think a 9 inch 
screen (nifty little devices: 8 hour battery life easy, quick 
"suspend/resume" - as in close the lid, open the lid). In this case they 
were driving around neighborhoods checking houses, etc. The app could 
use the built-in camera to take pictures, manage notes, get special 
instruction, blah blah blah. The system would connect to wifi if 
available, otherwise it would just "buffer up" the info until the wifi 
was detected. A background app took care of syncing stuff they did or 
stuff they needed.


We could have done a full-on web-enabled app but the owner did not want 
to initially spend the money on the cellular cards and service . 
There would have been a lot of other cool things that could have been 
done with an always-on internet connection. Anyway, it worked great and 
the users really liked the sub-second response time on the functions in 
the application.


-Charlie

___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/5958a1ce-c3b4-a293-c07e-c5f73488b...@gmail.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: [NF] PyQT for desktop applications

2017-06-04 Thread Alan Bourke

That's the point I was trying to make. As of today trying to implement
everything in a browser remains impractical for many use cases. For many
others it is ideal. 

-- 
  Alan Bourke
  alanpbourke (at) fastmail (dot) fm

On Sun, 4 Jun 2017, at 08:05 AM, John Weller wrote:
> As always it's horses for courses!  The major benefit of bespoke systems
> is that they can be tailored to suit the task and there are undoubtedly
> some where the web application is best and others where a desktop
> application wins.
> 
> John
> 
> John Weller
> 01380 723235
> 079763 93631
> Sent from my iPad
> 
> > On 4 Jun 2017, at 04:29, Ed Leafe  wrote:
> > 
> >> On Jun 3, 2017, at 1:46 PM, Thierry Nivelet  
> >> wrote:
> >> 
> >> One of our clients, US based, has such an application. Initially the Web 
> >> version was designed for the external partners -- suppliers and clients -- 
> >> to interact with the company. Guess what, nowadays **all employees** of 
> >> the company use the Web version, though it's undoubtedly slower. They all 
> >> have a shortcut to the desktop application and no way, they use the web 
> >> version.
> > 
> > Years ago I had a VFP client who ran an inventory system I had helped to 
> > write. I had an opportunity to visit the site once, and in the warehouse 
> > they had a PC at several locations for the workers to enter their 
> > information. Since it was a dusty place, the PC and keyboard were covered 
> > with these yellowing plastic covers. The workers would fill their order, 
> > then find the nearest PC and enter what they did.
> > 
> > Thinking about that now, imagine if they could have had a mobile device, 
> > such as a tablet or smartphone, and could have entered their information as 
> > they filled their order, instead of having to go to one of the PCs nearby. 
> > If I were to create an inventory system like that today, there is no way 
> > that I would for a second consider creating a desktop app. Mobile 
> > capabilities are critical in most things, whether an inventory system for a 
> > warehouse, or a POS system for a small business. I went to the local 
> > farmer's market this morning, and many of the vendors had tablet-based 
> > systems that took credit cards. You just can't do things like that with a 
> > PC-only app.
> > 
> > 
> > -- Ed Leafe
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
> > multipart/signed
> >  text/plain (text body -- kept)
> >  application/pgp-signature
> > ---
> > 
[excessive quoting removed by server]

___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/1496569677.2693245.998081688.34f3e...@webmail.messagingengine.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: [NF] PyQT for desktop applications

2017-06-04 Thread John Weller

As always it's horses for courses!  The major benefit of bespoke systems is 
that they can be tailored to suit the task and there are undoubtedly some where 
the web application is best and others where a desktop application wins.

John

John Weller
01380 723235
079763 93631
Sent from my iPad

> On 4 Jun 2017, at 04:29, Ed Leafe  wrote:
> 
>> On Jun 3, 2017, at 1:46 PM, Thierry Nivelet  wrote:
>> 
>> One of our clients, US based, has such an application. Initially the Web 
>> version was designed for the external partners -- suppliers and clients -- 
>> to interact with the company. Guess what, nowadays **all employees** of the 
>> company use the Web version, though it's undoubtedly slower. They all have a 
>> shortcut to the desktop application and no way, they use the web version.
> 
> Years ago I had a VFP client who ran an inventory system I had helped to 
> write. I had an opportunity to visit the site once, and in the warehouse they 
> had a PC at several locations for the workers to enter their information. 
> Since it was a dusty place, the PC and keyboard were covered with these 
> yellowing plastic covers. The workers would fill their order, then find the 
> nearest PC and enter what they did.
> 
> Thinking about that now, imagine if they could have had a mobile device, such 
> as a tablet or smartphone, and could have entered their information as they 
> filled their order, instead of having to go to one of the PCs nearby. If I 
> were to create an inventory system like that today, there is no way that I 
> would for a second consider creating a desktop app. Mobile capabilities are 
> critical in most things, whether an inventory system for a warehouse, or a 
> POS system for a small business. I went to the local farmer's market this 
> morning, and many of the vendors had tablet-based systems that took credit 
> cards. You just can't do things like that with a PC-only app.
> 
> 
> -- Ed Leafe
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
> multipart/signed
>  text/plain (text body -- kept)
>  application/pgp-signature
> ---
> 
[excessive quoting removed by server]

___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/c0f01f24-c3c0-4cc4-b08d-7791dd64a...@jbweller.force9.co.uk
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: [NF] PyQT for desktop applications

2017-06-03 Thread Ed Leafe

On Jun 3, 2017, at 1:46 PM, Thierry Nivelet  wrote:
> 
> One of our clients, US based, has such an application. Initially the Web 
> version was designed for the external partners -- suppliers and clients -- to 
> interact with the company. Guess what, nowadays **all employees** of the 
> company use the Web version, though it's undoubtedly slower. They all have a 
> shortcut to the desktop application and no way, they use the web version.

Years ago I had a VFP client who ran an inventory system I had helped to write. 
I had an opportunity to visit the site once, and in the warehouse they had a PC 
at several locations for the workers to enter their information. Since it was a 
dusty place, the PC and keyboard were covered with these yellowing plastic 
covers. The workers would fill their order, then find the nearest PC and enter 
what they did.

Thinking about that now, imagine if they could have had a mobile device, such 
as a tablet or smartphone, and could have entered their information as they 
filled their order, instead of having to go to one of the PCs nearby. If I were 
to create an inventory system like that today, there is no way that I would for 
a second consider creating a desktop app. Mobile capabilities are critical in 
most things, whether an inventory system for a warehouse, or a POS system for a 
small business. I went to the local farmer's market this morning, and many of 
the vendors had tablet-based systems that took credit cards. You just can't do 
things like that with a PC-only app.

-- Ed Leafe

--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/signed
  text/plain (text body -- kept)
  application/pgp-signature
---

___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/14303e98-748a-4571-8351-662f7d41a...@leafe.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: [NF] PyQT for desktop applications

2017-06-03 Thread Thierry Nivelet


Your experience is biased by your rejection of the Web model.

If HTML/CSS was so 'inconsistent' across browsers, frameworks like 
Bootstrap would be impossible. Bootstrap works perfectly, not only for 
what you call 'general public' web pages, also for business application, 
internal or not; on any browser and any device; and is customizable.


If users preferred desktop applications, as you seem to argue, the 
web-based Salesforce would not have forced the fastest growing company 
of the 90's -- Siebel systems -- to a quasi bankruptcy in the early 
2000's, pushing them to be bought by Oracle.


I'll give you another example from ACTUAL experience: with FoxInCloud we 
can have the very same application, running the very same code against 
the very same data, on the desktop and/or in the browser. One of our 
clients, US based, has such an application. Initially the Web version 
was designed for the external partners -- suppliers and clients -- to 
interact with the company. Guess what, nowadays **all employees** of the 
company use the Web version, though it's undoubtedly slower. They all 
have a shortcut to the desktop application and no way, they use the web 
version.


As for large companies investing millions in latest techs, sorry to 
write that, and I do have an ACTUAL experience with a billion-dollar 
company, they're just like dinosaurs compared to what startups can achieve.


Thierry Nivelet
FoxInCloud
Give your VFP app a second life in the cloud
http://foxincloud.com/

Le 03/06/2017 à 15:22, Charlie-gm a écrit :

On 6/3/2017 6:05 AM, Thierry Nivelet wrote:

[Lots of text snipped out below - trying to get to just key points]

Compared to browser incompatibilities, bizarre rendering that experts 
could not figure out, security snafus, and did I mention pathetic 
performance
browser incompatibilities 
Again, this is from the past; except very advanced HTML5/CSS3 
features, all browsers now follow the standard, including IE 10+ or Edge 


This is not true in my ACTUAL experience. Even inside an huge 
organization that spends 10's or 100's of millions of dollars a year 
on internal software development.


And maybe I did not make something clear before: I'm talking about 
internal enterprise applications. Not "general public" web pages. This 
thread started with someone asking if anyone is even "looking for" 
desktop applications any more. And my contention is if users actually 
saw "rich client/desktop" applications in action, you better believe 
they'd be begging for more (especially for internal enterprise 
applications).


bizarre rendering that experts could not figure out 
Your experts were in fact amateurs. Rendering is made by an algorithm 
based on CSS: the browser’s CSS and your CSS. Each CSS directive has 
a priority based on specificity and location in the CSS flow. Items 
can either be rendered top-down or left-right (or 


And there it is, just like I predicted. Someone would just blame the 
developers as being stupid and not doing "HTML/CSS/AJAX/.NET?" 
correctly. They've been doing it for over 2 decades (25+ years), 
including big hiring direct out of college where I would think all 
that grand HTML/CSS/AJAX/.NET "standard"  stuff is taught, yes? So if 
you want to call all those people stupid, ok, fine by me. It does not 
change the reality of terrible browser-based application results.


pathetic performance 
Here is the truism; running a single application, on the single 
machine, for a single user, will always be faster that running an 
application that is shared across users, reachable through a 
worldwide network, through a bunch of protocols. The real question is 
the trade-off between: easily access from anywhere using any device 
through any browser — desktop and/or handheld without any 
installation, almost no training, no on-site maintenance, etc. 
deploying on multiple workstations / synchronising databases 


I'll reiterate I'm talking about internal enterprise applications. 
Most "public" web pages in the world do work pretty well for a 
specific purpose such as selling products, information publishing, 
etc. Internal business applications that attempt to produce a lot of 
specialized "business logic" value are what fails in my experience. 
And, from what I've seen, the trend for mobile users IS NOT 
browser-based any more. They build "custom" (aka rich-client) apps 
that run on IOS or Android. For example, my bank DOES NOT force me to 
use their web page on my phone: they created an app for me, as a 
customer, to use. Why do you think they did that when they already had 
web pages built?


Anyway, the main point is, inside an enterprise, where desktop 
configurations are tightly controlled, it really is much more logical, 
cost-effective, and cheaper to have rich client applications. You can 
still access the data "from anywhere" - heck, even the internal 
company web pages cannot be accessed unless I log in through VPN, etc.


And you did agree on a key point, but

Re: [NF] PyQT for desktop applications

2017-06-03 Thread Charlie-gm


On 6/3/2017 6:05 AM, Thierry Nivelet wrote:

[Lots of text snipped out below - trying to get to just key points]

Compared to browser incompatibilities, bizarre rendering that experts 
could not figure out, security snafus, and did I mention pathetic 
performance
browser incompatibilities 
Again, this is from the past; except very advanced HTML5/CSS3 
features, all browsers now follow the standard, including IE 10+ or Edge 


This is not true in my ACTUAL experience. Even inside an huge 
organization that spends 10's or 100's of millions of dollars a year on 
internal software development.


And maybe I did not make something clear before: I'm talking about 
internal enterprise applications. Not "general public" web pages. This 
thread started with someone asking if anyone is even "looking for" 
desktop applications any more. And my contention is if users actually 
saw "rich client/desktop" applications in action, you better believe 
they'd be begging for more (especially for internal enterprise 
applications).


bizarre rendering that experts could not figure out 
Your experts were in fact amateurs. Rendering is made by an algorithm 
based on CSS: the browser’s CSS and your CSS. Each CSS directive has a 
priority based on specificity and location in the CSS flow. Items can 
either be rendered top-down or left-right (or 


And there it is, just like I predicted. Someone would just blame the 
developers as being stupid and not doing "HTML/CSS/AJAX/.NET?" 
correctly. They've been doing it for over 2 decades (25+ years), 
including big hiring direct out of college where I would think all that 
grand HTML/CSS/AJAX/.NET "standard"  stuff is taught, yes? So if you 
want to call all those people stupid, ok, fine by me. It does not change 
the reality of terrible browser-based application results.


pathetic performance 
Here is the truism; running a single application, on the single 
machine, for a single user, will always be faster that running an 
application that is shared across users, reachable through a worldwide 
network, through a bunch of protocols. The real question is the 
trade-off between: easily access from anywhere using any device 
through any browser — desktop and/or handheld without any 
installation, almost no training, no on-site maintenance, etc. 
deploying on multiple workstations / synchronising databases 


I'll reiterate I'm talking about internal enterprise applications. Most 
"public" web pages in the world do work pretty well for a specific 
purpose such as selling products, information publishing, etc. Internal 
business applications that attempt to produce a lot of specialized 
"business logic" value are what fails in my experience. And, from what 
I've seen, the trend for mobile users IS NOT browser-based any more. 
They build "custom" (aka rich-client) apps that run on IOS or Android. 
For example, my bank DOES NOT force me to use their web page on my 
phone: they created an app for me, as a customer, to use. Why do you 
think they did that when they already had web pages built?


Anyway, the main point is, inside an enterprise, where desktop 
configurations are tightly controlled, it really is much more logical, 
cost-effective, and cheaper to have rich client applications. You can 
still access the data "from anywhere" - heck, even the internal company 
web pages cannot be accessed unless I log in through VPN, etc.


And you did agree on a key point, but I'll phrase it a little 
differently: rich client applications will always perform better than 
browser based applications. Even going across the web. Because rich 
client applications, by design, require less "traffic through the wire" 
- rendering data, script "data", etc. None of that has to be transmitted 
and then reinterpreted by some intermediary layer (aka a browser). You 
can just pull "raw" data only. Therefore, rich client will always be 
faster and yield a better experience to the end user.


And I'm afraid you are wrong regarding "training": the enterprise web 
pages I've seen require massive training. In fact, most of my time in my 
current company is "helping" people use the  web pages. 
Surely, you are not saying a hyperlink is "easier to understand" than a 
button? Of course, any UI can be poor - it's just I've seen the poorest 
designs in web pages.


discussing what alternative desktop dev. language we could choose 
instead of VFP. The end decider is always the user. Each year 2.5 % 
new users enter the work force (and almost as many retire) — what do 
these people expect for the future? That we


To be clear, I am not pushing for VFP in this thread: in fact, since it 
is still a closed, proprietary dev tool, I would not recommend it for a 
new developer. I'm trying to make the conceptual point that rich client 
applications are better for the user, especially when the platform (aka 
the PC) is strictly controlled by an enterprise. And it seems quite odd 
to me that that same strict control cannot yield a

Re: [NF] PyQT for desktop applications

2017-06-03 Thread Thierry Nivelet

Le 3 juin 2017 à 00:33, Charlie-gm  a écrit :
> 
> Compared to browser incompatibilities, bizarre rendering that experts could 
> not figure out, security snafus, and did I mention pathetic performance

> browser incompatibilities

Again, this is from the past; except very advanced HTML5/CSS3 features, all 
browsers now follow the standard, including IE 10+ or Edge

> bizarre rendering that experts could not figure out

Your experts were in fact amateurs.
Rendering is made by an algorithm based on CSS: the browser’s CSS and your CSS.
Each CSS directive has a priority based on specificity and location in the CSS 
flow.
Items can either be rendered top-down or left-right (or RTL) based on the 
‘display’ directive; it may also combine with ‘float’ directive that make items 
flow around others, the kind of option Word offers for images.
Each block has a border, a padding and a content.
Dimension can be taken either from the border of a block, or for its contents, 
depending on the ‘box-model’ directive.
Once you fully understand the CSS block model and CSS selectors priority rules, 
you’re able to fully control the rendering.
It’s obviously not simple; too many people believe they can just ‘play with 
CSS’ to make it happen. In fact nothing happens until you fully understand what 
you’re doing.
The CSS you build in fist shot is often quite complex and you need some further 
refining steps to make it reliable: plain debugging / refactoring, just like 
you'd do for a professional software.
On top of that you can alter rendering using JavaScript (plain or through a 
framework like jQuery); this again can contradict what CSS does.

Good news: you now have (free) CSS/JS frameworks such as Bootstrap; you just 
need to follow a standard HTML structure, assign classes like explained and, in 
most cases, it displays as expected. I write ‘in most cases’ because, here 
again, and despite the immense quality put into these frameworks, you still 
need some CSS tweaks to cover all possible use cases.

That’s a classic story: HTML/CSS/JS is a Formula 1 Ferrari that you need years 
of experience — or having started when you were 14 —  to fully master. As any 
powerful tool, you can do almost anything, provided you reach the suitable 
level of understanding. If you’re curious, Google the various CSS tricks you 
can find here and there: for specific situations, some guy spend days to find a 
simple CSS instruction (or hack), and share with others.

> pathetic performance


Here is the truism; running a single application, on the single machine, for a 
single user, will always be faster that running an application that is shared 
across users, reachable through a worldwide network, through a bunch of 
protocols.

The real question is the trade-off between:
easily access from anywhere using any device through any browser — desktop 
and/or handheld without any installation, almost no training, no on-site 
maintenance, etc.
deploying on multiple workstations / synchronising databases across sites (how? 
security?) / installing RDP and paying for adequate servers, connections and 
licenses, managing upgrades, forcing users on a specific OS or develop multiple 
versions across OSs, etc.

Route 2 is what one we’ve practised for years and we know best.
Route 1 is what younger generations expect as they’ve been in that bath since 
there teenage years.

Both routes impose compromises and/or adaptations to go with. Using route 1 
requires a ‘lighter’ application, with less controls on each form/page, lighter 
lists, etc. It’s more a matter of making it smarter than more simple:
instead of displaying a full client list in a grid, just add some search/filter 
controls on top of it (Google-like or enumerated selections) and display the 
list as soon as the number of records is acceptable
instead of a 10-page pageframe with 100 controls in each page, build a 
container class out of each page and display in a child form.
etc.

We need to consider the question from a high level point of view, rather than 
discussing what alternative desktop dev. language we could choose instead of 
VFP.
The end decider is always the user. Each year 2.5 % new users enter the work 
force (and almost as many retire) — what do these people expect for the future? 
That we develop desktop apps in Python rather than VFP?

Thierry Nivelet
FoxinCloud
Give your VFP app a new life in the cloud
http://foxincloud.com/



--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/alternative
  text/plain (text body -- kept)
  text/html
---

___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/851a5bc4-0762-4bde-8dfb-f6c07da4d...@foxincloud.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated

Re: [NF] PyQT for desktop applications

2017-06-02 Thread Charlie-gm


On 6/1/2017 5:10 PM, Andrew Stirling wrote:

Care to enlarge on this please.
" Simple file shares (dare I say even "sharepoint"?) make rich client 
distribution fall-off-a-log easy and secure. "


The basic principle is:
- create a "startup" application that checks a "file share" for updates 
and downloads them (all kinds of ways to do this - I myself never relied 
on "file timestamps")
- the "file share" can be anything: FTP site, even using HTTP,  and 
Sharepoint can be used because you can access files via http links there 
(although it is a MS product so gotta be careful :) )
- the main app also checks the file share for updates to the "startup" 
app and downloads as necessary (can't overwrite an .exe in use... well, 
not easily anyway)


From there you can add all kinds of security checking of the .exe 
content, etc, to ensure someone did not compromise the file share. And 
in one very paranoid case, we had a "secret sever" monitoring the 
"visible/published" file share, comparing it to it's own version - and 
if something was out of sync, log it, and copy over it from the "secret 
server". But really, if someone hacked the enterprise network deep 
enough to copy files around, figuring out where and what .exe to 
substitute is probably not even a thought.


Using this approach I also added a little logic inside the .exe to 
detect the operating system version and existence of other resources 
(one program actually used MS Powerpoint via Automation - to my 
chagrin... but that's what they wanted). I believe at one time I had an 
application running on desktops with Windows 98, XP, Vista (which was a 
pain in the a), 7, all at the same time.


Compared to browser incompatibilities, bizarre rendering that experts 
could not figure out, security snafus, and did I mention pathetic 
performance desktop application distribution was a dream.


-Charlie

___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/925cf84c-ff6e-ff5c-8111-b1724fd57...@gmail.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: [NF] PyQT for desktop applications

2017-06-02 Thread Stephen Russell

SharePoint does a great deal of simple work for you if you let it.  We fill
internal SP lists, orders to be shipped, with data from the ERP.  We then
have mainly stagnant lists, Customers per say, and in SP we set a drop-down
list for the customer and it filters the orders, needing to go out today or
when it did leave, in the view list.  Real simple and the control works
across all of our many plant's sites.

On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 9:01 AM, Andrew Stirling 
wrote:

> I was really asking Charlie about how he proposed to get the 'desktop' bit
> working easily.
> 'And before people start slobbering themselves with "... but... but... the
> DISTRIBUTION OMG!! How could you DISTRIBUTE a rich client
> application..." - really, don't bother. Simple file shares (dare I say even
> "sharepoint"?) make rich client distribution fall-off-a-log easy and
> secure.'
>
> Kind regards
>
> Andrew Stirling
>
>
> On 02/06/2017 14:49, Stephen Russell wrote:
>
>> Posting a document to Sharepoint is so simple.  Setting the library to
>> hold
>> it is real easy as well. Keeping versions for me on the file is
>> tremendous.  Having a recycle section for me to republish what you didn't
>> think you were screwing up is pretty good too.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 8:05 AM, Laurie Alvey  wrote:
>>
>> Charlie,
>>> +1
>>> Laurie
>>>
>>> On 1 June 2017 at 22:10, Andrew Stirling  wrote:
>>>
>>> Care to enlarge on this please.
 " Simple file shares (dare I say even "sharepoint"?) make rich client
 distribution fall-off-a-log easy and secure. "

 Andrew Stirling

>>>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>
>
[excessive quoting removed by server]

___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/cajidmyjpa4zpst_038johd7mttezndtnfn5_0nb_vxb8tpp...@mail.gmail.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: [NF] PyQT for desktop applications

2017-06-02 Thread Andrew Stirling

I was really asking Charlie about how he proposed to get the 'desktop' 
bit working easily.
'And before people start slobbering themselves with "... but... but... 
the DISTRIBUTION OMG!! How could you DISTRIBUTE a rich client 
application..." - really, don't bother. Simple file shares (dare I say 
even "sharepoint"?) make rich client distribution fall-off-a-log easy 
and secure.'


Kind regards

Andrew Stirling


On 02/06/2017 14:49, Stephen Russell wrote:

Posting a document to Sharepoint is so simple.  Setting the library to hold
it is real easy as well. Keeping versions for me on the file is
tremendous.  Having a recycle section for me to republish what you didn't
think you were screwing up is pretty good too.



On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 8:05 AM, Laurie Alvey  wrote:


Charlie,
+1
Laurie

On 1 June 2017 at 22:10, Andrew Stirling  wrote:


Care to enlarge on this please.
" Simple file shares (dare I say even "sharepoint"?) make rich client
distribution fall-off-a-log easy and secure. "




Andrew Stirling


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/9e9ef14e-71c9-b0c5-b4c2-b584de6b8...@calcpay.co.uk
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: [NF] PyQT for desktop applications

2017-06-02 Thread Stephen Russell

Posting a document to Sharepoint is so simple.  Setting the library to hold
it is real easy as well. Keeping versions for me on the file is
tremendous.  Having a recycle section for me to republish what you didn't
think you were screwing up is pretty good too.

On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 8:05 AM, Laurie Alvey  wrote:

> Charlie,
> +1
> Laurie
>
> On 1 June 2017 at 22:10, Andrew Stirling  wrote:
>
> > Care to enlarge on this please.
> > " Simple file shares (dare I say even "sharepoint"?) make rich client
> > distribution fall-off-a-log easy and secure. "
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Andrew Stirling
> >
> > ---
> > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> > https://www.avast.com/antivirus
> >
> >
[excessive quoting removed by server]

___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/cajidmy+4eg85a6+phbbzd40dsdurzgt3ysqc-57d2dnhuln...@mail.gmail.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: [NF] PyQT for desktop applications

2017-06-02 Thread Laurie Alvey

Charlie,
+1
Laurie

On 1 June 2017 at 22:10, Andrew Stirling  wrote:

> Care to enlarge on this please.
> " Simple file shares (dare I say even "sharepoint"?) make rich client
> distribution fall-off-a-log easy and secure. "
>
>
>
>
> Andrew Stirling
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>
>
[excessive quoting removed by server]

___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/CAMvTR9fbBOVxi-WZE2dfwgDVEpYO2x3FWGLNMMvSY9q2S=k...@mail.gmail.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: [NF] PyQT for desktop applications

2017-06-01 Thread Andrew Stirling


Care to enlarge on this please.
" Simple file shares (dare I say even "sharepoint"?) make rich client 
distribution fall-off-a-log easy and secure. "





Andrew Stirling

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/b3346e1b-6e7e-8232-474f-b1e9d34e0...@calcpay.co.uk
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: [NF] PyQT for desktop applications

2017-06-01 Thread Charlie-gm


On 5/30/2017 2:33 PM, Ed Leafe wrote:
Just responded to Ed's post saying that a desktop UI still kicks ass 
over a web page UI. 
Ten years ago I would have wholeheartedly agreed with you. Five years 
ago I wouldn't have been too sure about that. Now think that the 
Javascript tools and frameworks have advanced so that they can do as 
much or more than desktop widgets, and they totally kick ass when used 
on mobile platforms. 

...

Rich client will always be a better user experience than dumb terminal.

Note that "javascript" is essentially "rich client thinking" - albeit 
rich client as rendered within a "browser platform". Most "mobile apps" 
that are "good" do not use "browser" technology: they implement their 
own form of "rich client". Essentially, what we're witnessing to a 
degree is a return to "rich client" design and processing.


What amazes me is the horrific browser-based incompatibilities that 
still exist. Even within a single enterprise... sometimes we have to 
turn on IE's "View in Compatibility Mode" sometimes not - and don't even 
try to view the same web pages in firefox, IE, and Chrome and expect 
similar results. There is no web page that is truly responsive: every 
web application where I work (which is quite a large company) is 
pathetically slow. All their "browser-based" applications have 
essentially turned into "Excel-export" engines because the user 
experience is so horrible. That's after 100's of millions of dollars 
were sucked into creating those supposedly wonderful browser-based 
applications.


So, while javascript, silverlight, and whatever else have gotten us 
close to where we were in the 1990's in regards to user interfaces, I 
hope folks can understand my negativity. Just imagine where our UI's 
would have been if we had avoided the decades jump backward of "browsers"


Note my views have NOTHING to do with "the internet" or "centralized 
data" or "connecting to everything", etc. Accessing, sharing, publishing 
data securely "across the internet" can, and does, work just fine 
without any browser involvement.


In fact, I'm planning on building the web pages for this Automated Data 
Dictionary concept for my company. Most of the functionality will be in 
the "API" (aka stored procedures in the database). I'm going to also 
build, on my own time, a VFP integration into that API. I'll show both 
of the UI's and let them decide which is the better experience. I have a 
very strong suspicion that the user population simple does not realize 
how much they're being hampered by web browsers.


And before people start slobbering themselves with "... but... but... 
the DISTRIBUTION OMG!! How could you DISTRIBUTE a rich client 
application..." - really, don't bother. Simple file shares (dare I say 
even "sharepoint"?) make rich client distribution fall-off-a-log easy 
and secure. I have seen more browser-based "distribution" problems than 
I've ever seen with my "desktop" distributions.


I imagine the usual MS-heads, or browser-pundits, or whatever will 
say... "oh, it sounds like your web developers are just too STUPID to 
know how to do things right..." Whatever. They're all "MS-certified" 
"Web page designer-certified" developers. So it seems a little fishy 
that "certified experts" working in the field for 2 decades still cannot 
do it well (I'm being a little facetious here - based on my experience, 
I realize "certifications" mean almost nothing in the real world of 
software development).


-Charlie





___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/10215537-4824-ed41-bad2-0bccff472...@gmail.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: [NF] PyQT for desktop applications

2017-06-01 Thread Alan Bourke

The other thing is the j-word. Any language that needs the likes of
CoffeeScript or Typescript to impose sanity on it was an unfortunate
language to end up being the one built into browsers. 

-- 
  Alan Bourke
  alanpbourke (at) fastmail (dot) fm

On Wed, 31 May 2017, at 09:19 PM, Thierry Nivelet wrote:
> Today's Browsers follow standard
> 
> https://caniuse.com/
> 
> Thierry Nivelet
> http://foxincloud.com/
> Give your VFP app a second life in the cloud
> 
> > Le 31 mai 2017 à 21:30, Gene Wirchenko  a écrit :
> > 
> > At 07:55 2017-05-30, Alan Bourke  wrote:
> > 
> >> On Tue, 30 May 2017, at 12:05 PM, Stephen Russell wrote:
> >> > On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 3:07 AM, Alan Bourke 
> >> > wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > > In 2017, how many users are looking for desktop apps?
> >> > >
> >> > > Still plenty.
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > Seriously?
> >> >
> >> >
> >> 
> >> Seriously. Anything that needs any sort of meaningful interaction with a
> >> local file system or devices, or a rich UI for example.
> > 
> >  1) Snappiness, too.
> > 
> >  2) The UI limitations of browsers are a bother.  Oh, yes, there are some 
> > solutions, but unfortunately, there is no standard.  And many of the richer 
> > features require security compromises.
> > 
> >  3) When something fails, is it due to a bug?  A wrong browser version?  
> > Security blocking?  It is much simpler when only one thing can fail.
> > 
> > Sincerely,
> > 
> > Gene Wirchenko
> > 
> > 
[excessive quoting removed by server]

___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/1496302033.46520.995078672.281ae...@webmail.messagingengine.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: [NF] PyQT for desktop applications

2017-05-31 Thread Gene Wirchenko


At 13:19 2017-05-31, Thierry Nivelet  wrote:

Today's Browsers follow standard https://caniuse.com/


 Unfortunately, many *Websites* do not.

 I very much dislike coming across a Website which has weird 
dependencies and where I have to jump through hoops to get it to 
work.  It happens all too often.  And, the chance is rather high that 
there is no one to contact about it.


 The latest example was when UT switched to 
levelextreme.com.  It gives me this:

Important message
Your browser has way too much security in place. Presently, it is 
running with a high level of security which disables the javascript 
support. This site makes use of advanced functionalities and requires 
the browser to maintain its average security settings. Basically, you 
will not be able to log in and do much on this site for as long as 
this is not rectified. We encourage you to proceed at our 
Troubleshooting 
page to look at possible causes which could be in effect. Once your 
browser security adjusted normally, this message will go away 
confirming you that everything should be ok for you to work on this site.


 Their support E-mail did not exist when I tried it.

[snip]

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko


___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/e1c3733141e9cdf0ff57f79beea13bcc@mtlp85
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: [NF] PyQT for desktop applications

2017-05-31 Thread Thierry Nivelet

Today's Browsers follow standard

https://caniuse.com/

Thierry Nivelet
http://foxincloud.com/
Give your VFP app a second life in the cloud

> Le 31 mai 2017 à 21:30, Gene Wirchenko  a écrit :
> 
> At 07:55 2017-05-30, Alan Bourke  wrote:
> 
>> On Tue, 30 May 2017, at 12:05 PM, Stephen Russell wrote:
>> > On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 3:07 AM, Alan Bourke 
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > > > In 2017, how many users are looking for desktop apps?
>> > >
>> > > Still plenty.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > Seriously?
>> >
>> >
>> 
>> Seriously. Anything that needs any sort of meaningful interaction with a
>> local file system or devices, or a rich UI for example.
> 
>  1) Snappiness, too.
> 
>  2) The UI limitations of browsers are a bother.  Oh, yes, there are some 
> solutions, but unfortunately, there is no standard.  And many of the richer 
> features require security compromises.
> 
>  3) When something fails, is it due to a bug?  A wrong browser version?  
> Security blocking?  It is much simpler when only one thing can fail.
> 
> Sincerely,
> 
> Gene Wirchenko
> 
> 
[excessive quoting removed by server]

___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/104fb2f4-aba3-4d49-8358-80a605b7b...@foxincloud.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: [NF] PyQT for desktop applications

2017-05-31 Thread Stephen Russell

On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 2:35 PM, Gene Wirchenko  wrote:

> At 12:27 2017-05-30, Stephen Russell  wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> Each environment has it's own line issues, but no users who are well versed
>> in "the internet vs the network" would ever ask for limited functionality,
>> instead, they would demand the web as it provides access to everything.
>>
>
>  Do those well-versed users you mention know about security issues?
>
>  Considering all of the on-line break-ins, it is worth thinking about
> *who* is being provided access to everything.
> 
>

Those users have titles like IT Operations manager, CIO, IS Director.  Yes,
I believe they know about security.

Access is all about a log-in process.  Is your connection to data passed
through a decryption algorithm first or do connect because it is easier
that way?

-- 
Stephen Russell
Sr. Analyst
Ring Container Technology
Oakland TN

901.246-0159 cell

--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/alternative
  text/plain (text body -- kept)
  text/html
---

___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/CAJidMYK4OjQ3H1p8Sf_1vopzkH19EsKLYU=_+gc6f7fbotc...@mail.gmail.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: [NF] PyQT for desktop applications

2017-05-31 Thread Gene Wirchenko


At 12:27 2017-05-30, Stephen Russell  wrote:

[snip]


Each environment has it's own line issues, but no users who are well versed
in "the internet vs the network" would ever ask for limited functionality,
instead, they would demand the web as it provides access to everything.


 Do those well-versed users you mention know about security issues?

 Considering all of the on-line break-ins, it is worth thinking 
about *who* is being provided access to everything.


Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko


___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/69374837d07fb59af189f7634106fff7@mtlp87
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: [NF] PyQT for desktop applications

2017-05-31 Thread Gene Wirchenko

At 07:55 2017-05-30, Alan Bourke  wrote:

On Tue, 30 May 2017, at 12:05 PM, Stephen Russell wrote:
> On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 3:07 AM, Alan Bourke 
> wrote:
>
> > > In 2017, how many users are looking for desktop apps?
> >
> > Still plenty.
> >
> >
> Seriously?
>
>

Seriously. Anything that needs any sort of meaningful interaction with a
local file system or devices, or a rich UI for example.

  1) Snappiness, too.

  2) The UI limitations of browsers are a bother.  Oh, yes, there 
are some solutions, but unfortunately, there is no standard.  And 
many of the richer features require security compromises.

  3) When something fails, is it due to a bug?  A wrong browser 
version?  Security blocking?  It is much simpler when only one thing can fail.

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko

___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/354e024d0ca51127f9ea6d7e7b82a5c6@mtlp86
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: [NF] PyQT for desktop applications

2017-05-31 Thread Jean Laeremans

We too and you're welcome to it. 1st thing I did was install libre office.

On May 31, 2017 11:02 AM, "Alan Bourke"  wrote:

> On Wed, 31 May 2017, at 09:32 AM, Jean Laeremans wrote:
> > Ever tried office365 ? What a nice piece of rubbish that is. ;)
> >
>
> We have that at a corporate level, and it's pretty good in terms of the
> browser versions of Word and Excel. But a million miles away from the
> desktop versions, still.
>
> --
>   Alan Bourke
>   alanpbourke (at) fastmail (dot) fm
>
[excessive quoting removed by server]

___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/CAPqLOBz7ng4YoMv4zS854H2Qpa7r+Gg84h_63c=8gpqjh+u...@mail.gmail.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: [NF] PyQT for desktop applications

2017-05-31 Thread Alan Bourke

On Wed, 31 May 2017, at 09:32 AM, Jean Laeremans wrote:
> Ever tried office365 ? What a nice piece of rubbish that is. ;)
> 

We have that at a corporate level, and it's pretty good in terms of the
browser versions of Word and Excel. But a million miles away from the
desktop versions, still.

-- 
  Alan Bourke
  alanpbourke (at) fastmail (dot) fm

___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/1496221331.3078639.993883736.77dc9...@webmail.messagingengine.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: [NF] PyQT for desktop applications

2017-05-31 Thread Jean Laeremans

Ever tried office365 ? What a nice piece of rubbish that is. ;)

On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 9:11 AM, Alan Bourke 
wrote:

> The PC is dead and it will be all mobile devices...
> It'll all be cloud and nothing local...
> No more native apps, they'll all be in the browser...
>
> Like all predictions the truth is in between somewhere.
>
> If for example Microsoft still don't have a browser version of Word that
> is anything near the native version then we're a ways off everything in
> the browser yet.
>
>
> --
>   Alan Bourke
>   alanpbourke (at) fastmail (dot) fm
>
> On Tue, 30 May 2017, at 08:27 PM, Stephen Russell wrote:
> > On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 1:45 PM, Alan Bourke 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > The thing is that yes you can get a fluid, responsive, beautiful UI
> > > using one of the three billion client side  frameworks, coupled to a
> > > back end developed with this week's server-side framework but to make
> it
> > > secure and to test it on all the browsers on all the platforms is
> > > literally ten times the work.
> > >
> > >
> > Seems like it can be done.  Now tell me about OCX files that need to be
> > installed.
> >
> > Each environment has it's own line issues, but no users who are well
> > versed
> > in "the internet vs the network" would ever ask for limited
> > functionality,
> > instead, they would demand the web as it provides access to everything.
> >
> >
> > --
> > Stephen Russell
> > Sr. Analyst
> > Ring Container Technology
> > Oakland TN
> >
> > 901.246-0159 cell
> >
> >
> > --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
> > multipart/alternative
> >   text/plain (text body -- kept)
> >   text/html
> > ---
> >
[excessive quoting removed by server]

___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/CAPqLOBwU++pD+CFV_v3Gpfgy0qnhMea__To2wAeP35PWj=t...@mail.gmail.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: [NF] PyQT for desktop applications

2017-05-31 Thread Alan Bourke

The PC is dead and it will be all mobile devices...
It'll all be cloud and nothing local...
No more native apps, they'll all be in the browser... 

Like all predictions the truth is in between somewhere. 

If for example Microsoft still don't have a browser version of Word that
is anything near the native version then we're a ways off everything in
the browser yet. 

-- 
  Alan Bourke
  alanpbourke (at) fastmail (dot) fm

On Tue, 30 May 2017, at 08:27 PM, Stephen Russell wrote:
> On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 1:45 PM, Alan Bourke 
> wrote:
> 
> > The thing is that yes you can get a fluid, responsive, beautiful UI
> > using one of the three billion client side  frameworks, coupled to a
> > back end developed with this week's server-side framework but to make it
> > secure and to test it on all the browsers on all the platforms is
> > literally ten times the work.
> >
> >
> Seems like it can be done.  Now tell me about OCX files that need to be
> installed.
> 
> Each environment has it's own line issues, but no users who are well
> versed
> in "the internet vs the network" would ever ask for limited
> functionality,
> instead, they would demand the web as it provides access to everything.
> 
> 
> -- 
> Stephen Russell
> Sr. Analyst
> Ring Container Technology
> Oakland TN
> 
> 901.246-0159 cell
> 
> 
> --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
> multipart/alternative
>   text/plain (text body -- kept)
>   text/html
> ---
> 
[excessive quoting removed by server]

___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/1496214695.3055854.993791352.5655e...@webmail.messagingengine.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: [NF] PyQT for desktop applications

2017-05-30 Thread Ed Leafe

On May 30, 2017, at 4:27 PM, mbsoftwaresoluti...@mbsoftwaresolutions.com wrote:

> What are your favorite JavaScript tools/frameworks, Ed?

To be honest, I haven't done any client-side interfaces for some time now, so I 
don't have a favorite. I work pretty much exclusively on the back end of the 
cloud, specifically the Nova compute project in OpenStack. Sometimes, though, I 
come across a site that I really like, and look at the page source to get an 
idea as to what JS libs it's loading so that I can keep it in mind if I ever 
get another UI project to work on. The last site I saw that made me look at the 
source used EmberJS (https://emberjs.com/). I don't claim they're the best or 
anything; it's just that whoever developed the site I was on sure knew how to 
make it look good.

-- Ed Leafe







--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/signed
  text/plain (text body -- kept)
  application/pgp-signature
---

___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/d3543c25-7bc6-4e7e-b71c-09d59d4f9...@leafe.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: [NF] PyQT for desktop applications

2017-05-30 Thread mbsoftwaresolutions


On 2017-05-30 15:27, Stephen Russell wrote:

Seems like it can be done.  Now tell me about OCX files that need to be
installed.

Each environment has it's own line issues, but no users who are well 
versed
in "the internet vs the network" would ever ask for limited 
functionality,

instead, they would demand the web as it provides access to everything.




Does anybody use OCX controls anymore???

___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/aa7da47b33c79b8cc2790bdbedebe...@mbsoftwaresolutions.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: [NF] PyQT for desktop applications

2017-05-30 Thread mbsoftwaresolutions


On 2017-05-30 14:33, Ed Leafe wrote:

Ten years ago I would have wholeheartedly agreed with you. Five years
ago I wouldn't have been too sure about that. Now think that the
Javascript tools and frameworks have advanced so that they can do as
much or more than desktop widgets, and they totally kick ass when used
on mobile platforms.



What are your favorite JavaScript tools/frameworks, Ed?

___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/9d55f327651b5d3568a2a52d52db5...@mbsoftwaresolutions.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: [NF] PyQT for desktop applications

2017-05-30 Thread Stephen Russell

On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 1:45 PM, Alan Bourke 
wrote:

> The thing is that yes you can get a fluid, responsive, beautiful UI
> using one of the three billion client side  frameworks, coupled to a
> back end developed with this week's server-side framework but to make it
> secure and to test it on all the browsers on all the platforms is
> literally ten times the work.
>
>
Seems like it can be done.  Now tell me about OCX files that need to be
installed.

Each environment has it's own line issues, but no users who are well versed
in "the internet vs the network" would ever ask for limited functionality,
instead, they would demand the web as it provides access to everything.

-- 
Stephen Russell
Sr. Analyst
Ring Container Technology
Oakland TN

901.246-0159 cell

--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/alternative
  text/plain (text body -- kept)
  text/html
---

___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/CAJidMYJ5LuLvaLN_e88Z-VkufcO=qzruxanetgshygcdpl3...@mail.gmail.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: [NF] PyQT for desktop applications

2017-05-30 Thread Thierry Nivelet

1/10 th of the time using FoxinCloud with integrated Bootstrap support. Just 
adapt your VFP app, and/or write an extension for the web using your extent 
classes, and you're done. 

Thierry Nivelet
http://foxincloud.com/
Give your VFP app a second life in the cloud

> Le 30 mai 2017 à 20:45, Alan Bourke  a écrit :
> 
> The thing is that yes you can get a fluid, responsive, beautiful UI
> using one of the three billion client side  frameworks, coupled to a
> back end developed with this week's server-side framework but to make it
> secure and to test it on all the browsers on all the platforms is
> literally ten times the work. 
> -- 
>  Alan Bourke
>  alanpbourke (at) fastmail (dot) fm
> 
>> On Tue, 30 May 2017, at 07:33 PM, Ed Leafe wrote:
>> On May 30, 2017, at 11:26 AM, mbsoftwaresoluti...@mbsoftwaresolutions.com
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> Just responded to Ed's post saying that a desktop UI still kicks ass over a 
>>> web page UI.
>> 
>> Ten years ago I would have wholeheartedly agreed with you. Five years ago
>> I wouldn't have been too sure about that. Now think that the Javascript
>> tools and frameworks have advanced so that they can do as much or more
>> than desktop widgets, and they totally kick ass when used on mobile
>> platforms.
>> 
>> 
>> -- Ed Leafe
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
>> multipart/signed
>>  text/plain (text body -- kept)
>>  application/pgp-signature
>> ---
>> 
[excessive quoting removed by server]

___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/d8f4a848-f990-4f36-9474-86901141b...@foxincloud.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: [NF] PyQT for desktop applications

2017-05-30 Thread Alan Bourke

The thing is that yes you can get a fluid, responsive, beautiful UI
using one of the three billion client side  frameworks, coupled to a
back end developed with this week's server-side framework but to make it
secure and to test it on all the browsers on all the platforms is
literally ten times the work. 
-- 
  Alan Bourke
  alanpbourke (at) fastmail (dot) fm

On Tue, 30 May 2017, at 07:33 PM, Ed Leafe wrote:
> On May 30, 2017, at 11:26 AM, mbsoftwaresoluti...@mbsoftwaresolutions.com
> wrote:
> 
> > Just responded to Ed's post saying that a desktop UI still kicks ass over a 
> > web page UI.
> 
> Ten years ago I would have wholeheartedly agreed with you. Five years ago
> I wouldn't have been too sure about that. Now think that the Javascript
> tools and frameworks have advanced so that they can do as much or more
> than desktop widgets, and they totally kick ass when used on mobile
> platforms.
> 
> 
> -- Ed Leafe
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
> multipart/signed
>   text/plain (text body -- kept)
>   application/pgp-signature
> ---
> 
[excessive quoting removed by server]

___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/1496169913.2893178.993216240.2d82c...@webmail.messagingengine.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: [NF] PyQT for desktop applications

2017-05-30 Thread Ed Leafe

On May 30, 2017, at 11:26 AM, mbsoftwaresoluti...@mbsoftwaresolutions.com wrote:

> Just responded to Ed's post saying that a desktop UI still kicks ass over a 
> web page UI.

Ten years ago I would have wholeheartedly agreed with you. Five years ago I 
wouldn't have been too sure about that. Now think that the Javascript tools and 
frameworks have advanced so that they can do as much or more than desktop 
widgets, and they totally kick ass when used on mobile platforms.

-- Ed Leafe

--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/signed
  text/plain (text body -- kept)
  application/pgp-signature
---

___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/826d6b94-5c34-40e1-9068-94b2c5d8f...@leafe.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

RE: [NF] PyQT for desktop applications

2017-05-30 Thread Jean Laeremans

+1

On May 30, 2017 6:28 PM, "Paul H. Tarver"  wrote:

> Seriously.
>
> Not all programming is for web-based applications and not all clients want
> web-based applications.
>
> If this were true, this group would not exist.
>
> Neither would any of the thousands of desktop (VFP!) applications that are
> still being supported every day.
>
> Neither would my business.
>
> Paul H. Tarver
> Tarver Program Consultants, Inc.
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Stephen Russell [mailto:srussell...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2017 6:06 AM
> To: profoxt...@leafe.com
> Subject: Re: [NF] PyQT for desktop applications
>
> On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 3:07 AM, Alan Bourke 
> wrote:
>
> > > In 2017, how many users are looking for desktop apps?
> >
> > Still plenty.
> >
> >
> Seriously?
>
>
>
>
> --
> Stephen Russell
> Sr. Analyst
> Ring Container Technology
> Oakland TN
>
> 901.246-0159 cell
>
>
> --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative
>   text/plain (text body -- kept)
>   text/html
> ---
>
[excessive quoting removed by server]

___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/capqlobw9ymc1wktoq506y6mzpghfteosszsb4df1scr0g7l...@mail.gmail.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

RE: [NF] PyQT for desktop applications

2017-05-30 Thread Paul H. Tarver

Seriously.

Not all programming is for web-based applications and not all clients want
web-based applications. 

If this were true, this group would not exist. 

Neither would any of the thousands of desktop (VFP!) applications that are
still being supported every day. 

Neither would my business. 

Paul H. Tarver
Tarver Program Consultants, Inc.

-Original Message-
From: Stephen Russell [mailto:srussell...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2017 6:06 AM
To: profoxt...@leafe.com
Subject: Re: [NF] PyQT for desktop applications

On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 3:07 AM, Alan Bourke 
wrote:

> > In 2017, how many users are looking for desktop apps?
>
> Still plenty.
>
>
Seriously?

--
Stephen Russell
Sr. Analyst
Ring Container Technology
Oakland TN

901.246-0159 cell

--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative
  text/plain (text body -- kept)
  text/html
---

[excessive quoting removed by server]

___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/080501d2d961$a645e7e0$f2d1b7a0$@tpcqpc.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: [NF] PyQT for desktop applications

2017-05-30 Thread mbsoftwaresolutions


On 2017-05-30 04:07, Alan Bourke wrote:

In 2017, how many users are looking for desktop apps?


Still plenty.



Just responded to Ed's post saying that a desktop UI still kicks ass 
over a web page UI.


___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/d005cc86250dff9e14a20bf78cc81...@mbsoftwaresolutions.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: [NF] PyQT for desktop applications

2017-05-30 Thread mbsoftwaresolutions


On 2017-05-30 08:51, Edward Leafe wrote:


And yeah, it is 2017 now, and most of the demand I see is not only for
web-based apps, but also mobile-aware web apps. I’m sure that there
are people who still want desktop apps, but then again, there are
still people running Windows XP.



Yes, it seems like everybody wants web apps...and honestly, it seems 
like sometimes for intracompany items, a web app isn't needed but still, 
that's what they want.  That said, in 2017, I think you could still 
argue that a more productive UI could be built for a desktop app, "but 
that's not cool."


___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/95ec982d23a43c67ad5bf0065256c...@mbsoftwaresolutions.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: [NF] PyQT for desktop applications

2017-05-30 Thread Fred Taylor

Desktop or web app, whichever, when your only tool is a hammer, everything
looks like a nail,

Fred

On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 8:44 AM, Stephen Russell 
wrote:

> On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 9:55 AM, Alan Bourke 
> wrote:
>
> >
> > On Tue, 30 May 2017, at 12:05 PM, Stephen Russell wrote:
> > > On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 3:07 AM, Alan Bourke 
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > > In 2017, how many users are looking for desktop apps?
> > > >
> > > > Still plenty.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > Seriously?
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Seriously. Anything that needs any sort of meaningful interaction with a
> > local file system or devices, or a rich UI for example.
> >
> >
> I think that you are dreaming or have not exposed your network properly to
> fulfill your needs of what to do with a "system."
>
> have worked with Document Management systems that acted on and then moved
> files because they were in a specific folder.  That location also enacted a
> special set of rules for those documents.
>
> Printers?  We have 300-400 printers on our network that all receive correct
> documents because the direction is not a part of the report but of the
> application that made the output.
>
> UI?  Using css, jquery, as well as a host of other javascript frameworks UI
> is a look and feel that you pick and it is applied,   is your friend
> when you reference the class or Id.
>
> --
> Stephen Russell
> Sr. Analyst
> Ring Container Technology
> Oakland TN
>
> 901.246-0159 cell
>
>
> --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
> multipart/alternative
>   text/plain (text body -- kept)
>   text/html
> ---
>
[excessive quoting removed by server]

___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/CAJCBksoT7DM7fFku-MaUUZAdRwDOAP_57Q0m3=ahz3jwvcj...@mail.gmail.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: [NF] PyQT for desktop applications

2017-05-30 Thread Stephen Russell

On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 9:55 AM, Alan Bourke 
wrote:

>
> On Tue, 30 May 2017, at 12:05 PM, Stephen Russell wrote:
> > On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 3:07 AM, Alan Bourke 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > > In 2017, how many users are looking for desktop apps?
> > >
> > > Still plenty.
> > >
> > >
> > Seriously?
> >
> >
>
> Seriously. Anything that needs any sort of meaningful interaction with a
> local file system or devices, or a rich UI for example.
>
>
I think that you are dreaming or have not exposed your network properly to
fulfill your needs of what to do with a "system."

have worked with Document Management systems that acted on and then moved
files because they were in a specific folder.  That location also enacted a
special set of rules for those documents.

Printers?  We have 300-400 printers on our network that all receive correct
documents because the direction is not a part of the report but of the
application that made the output.

UI?  Using css, jquery, as well as a host of other javascript frameworks UI
is a look and feel that you pick and it is applied,   is your friend
when you reference the class or Id.

-- 
Stephen Russell
Sr. Analyst
Ring Container Technology
Oakland TN

901.246-0159 cell

--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/alternative
  text/plain (text body -- kept)
  text/html
---

___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/cajidmyk7txuujf1dncym68ubdxv8uryvorm9_v7sh7es8v5...@mail.gmail.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: [NF] PyQT for desktop applications

2017-05-30 Thread Alan Bourke

On Tue, 30 May 2017, at 12:05 PM, Stephen Russell wrote:
> On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 3:07 AM, Alan Bourke 
> wrote:
> 
> > > In 2017, how many users are looking for desktop apps?
> >
> > Still plenty.
> >
> >
> Seriously?
> 
> 

Seriously. Anything that needs any sort of meaningful interaction with a
local file system or devices, or a rich UI for example. 

___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/1496156138.2840509.992939968.2865d...@webmail.messagingengine.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: [NF] PyQT for desktop applications

2017-05-30 Thread Edward Leafe

On May 29, 2017, at 7:50 AM, mbsoftwaresoluti...@mbsoftwaresolutions.com wrote:
> 
> I'm getting ready to do some Python learning on PluralSight.com 
>  and the dude mentioned PyQT for desktop 
> applications.
> 
> Ed & Paul (and others) -- your thoughts on that?  Was interested in your take 
> since you did Dabo for desktop applications with Python.

When we created Dabo way way back in 2004 (!) Qt was only available under a 
commercial license, so while it looked nice, we passed on it in favor of 
wxPython. Since then they have released a “free” version that while you don’t 
pay to use it in some circumstances, it doesn’t come with an open license. I 
haven’t played around with it very much, so I don’t have an opinion on how 
working with it would be.

And yeah, it is 2017 now, and most of the demand I see is not only for 
web-based apps, but also mobile-aware web apps. I’m sure that there are people 
who still want desktop apps, but then again, there are still people running 
Windows XP.

-- Ed Leafe

--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/alternative
  text/plain (text body -- kept)
  text/html
---

___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/d0308365-7d4a-4691-8965-30b3b395d...@leafe.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: [NF] PyQT for desktop applications

2017-05-30 Thread Stephen Russell

On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 3:07 AM, Alan Bourke 
wrote:

> > In 2017, how many users are looking for desktop apps?
>
> Still plenty.
>
>
Seriously?

-- 
Stephen Russell
Sr. Analyst
Ring Container Technology
Oakland TN

901.246-0159 cell

--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/alternative
  text/plain (text body -- kept)
  text/html
---

___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/cajidmyjigbuepakmu76iscff69tucmswxvn3_lwughkhknb...@mail.gmail.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: [NF] PyQT for desktop applications

2017-05-30 Thread Alan Bourke

> In 2017, how many users are looking for desktop apps?

Still plenty.

-- 
  Alan Bourke
  alanpbourke (at) fastmail (dot) fm

___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/1496131673.2754208.992545944.4c787...@webmail.messagingengine.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Re: [NF] PyQT for desktop applications

2017-05-29 Thread Malcolm Greene

PyQT has 2 different licensing models which may complicate your decision
to go this route. PyQT has a fat distribution as well.

Other options for Python desktop apps are wxPython (Dabo's choice) and
Tkinter/ttk. While Tkinter/ttk often gets a bum rap, I've seen some cool
apps built with this GUI framework. While the Tkinter/ttk is definitely
a contrarian route, its advantages are that its a lightweight
distribution that ships out of the box with most Python distributions,
its cross platform (Windows, Mac, Linux), it supports both Python 2 and
3 ... and contrary to the press it receives, the ttk side has
surprisingly modern widgets. Check out this great tutorial to see more:
http://www.tkdocs.com/tutorial/index.html. Bryan Oakley on Stackoverflow
has some great tips as well. BTW: Python's default IDE (Idle) is built
entirely on tkinter and while its not pretty, the full source code to
this app ships with the Python distribution as well.

In 2017, how many users are looking for desktop apps? If you're going
the Python route, why not check out some of the great Python web
frameworks like Django, Flask, or Bottle?

Welcome to the dark side!

Malcolm

___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message:
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/1496079312.755837.991968504.271be...@webmail.messagingengine.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

52 matches

Mail list logo