Re: [Development] Qt and IoT infographic

On Wednesday, 30 August 2017 07:32:42 PDT Jason H wrote: > > For one-offs or maybe tens of copies, sure, there's a lot of Arduinos. And > > a lot of Raspberry Pis too. > > > > For production runs, that number goes very quickly to zero. > > I guess this comes down to whom you are marketing. I can

Re: [Development] Qt and IoT infographic

> Sent: Tuesday, August 29, 2017 at 5:07 PM > From: "Thiago Macieira" <thiago.macie...@intel.com> > To: development@qt-project.org > Subject: Re: [Development] Qt and IoT infographic ... > > Besides, this comes a bit as disdainful. I work in music research

Re: [Development] Qt and IoT infographic

> On 29 Aug 2017, at 18:00, Thiago Macieira wrote: > > On Tuesday, 29 August 2017 02:43:44 PDT Shawn Rutledge wrote: >> And yet it has a web server for serving up either a human-readable page or >> JSON on demand, and it also pushes data to a central server

Re: [Development] Qt and IoT infographic

Thiago Macieira (earlier): >>> Research shows NO ONE deploys Arduino for real products. It's a >>> maker toy, stuff hobbyists use to make one-off things and some >>> professional makers use for initial prototyping. When they get >>> serious, Arduino goes out the window and they get real boards.

Re: [Development] Qt and IoT infographic

On Tuesday, 29 August 2017 12:41:25 PDT Jean-Michaël Celerier wrote: > > Research shows NO ONE deploys Arduino for real products. It's a maker toy, > > stuff hobbyists use to make one-off things and some professional makers > > use > > for initial prototyping. When they get serious, Arduino goes

Re: [Development] Qt and IoT infographic

> Research shows NO ONE deploys Arduino for real products. It's a maker toy, stuff hobbyists use to make one-off things and some professional makers use for initial prototyping. When they get serious, Arduino goes out the window and they get real boards. Sure, but if you can't start prototyping

Re: [Development] Qt and IoT infographic

On Tuesday, 29 August 2017 10:35:05 PDT Jason H wrote: > I think the ideal tech solution here is not to do one or the other, rather > both, in a layered approach. Use the HTTP/REST and provide a translation > layer to CoAP. They make a statement about it being really close, so it > shouldn't be

Re: [Development] Qt and IoT infographic

29.08.2017, 19:00, "Thiago Macieira" : > On Tuesday, 29 August 2017 02:43:44 PDT Shawn Rutledge wrote: >>  And yet it has a web server for serving up either a human-readable page or >>  JSON on demand, and it also pushes data to a central server periodically. > > Is

Re: [Development] Qt and IoT infographic

> Sent: Tuesday, August 29, 2017 at 12:00 PM > From: "Thiago Macieira" <thiago.macie...@intel.com> > To: development@qt-project.org > Subject: Re: [Development] Qt and IoT infographic > > On Tuesday, 29 August 2017 02:43:44 PDT Shawn Rutledge wrote: > > An

Re: [Development] Qt and IoT infographic

  This. +1*100 Sent: Tuesday, August 29, 2017 at 4:20 AM From: "Jean-Michaël Celerier" <jeanmichael.celer...@gmail.com> To: "Thiago Macieira" <thiago.macie...@intel.com> Cc: development@qt-project.org Subject: Re: [Development] Qt and IoT infographic

Re: [Development] Qt and IoT infographic

On Tuesday, 29 August 2017 02:43:44 PDT Shawn Rutledge wrote: > And yet it has a web server for serving up either a human-readable page or > JSON on demand, and it also pushes data to a central server periodically. Is that a static JSON? Because if you need to compose the data on the fly, you

Re: [Development] Qt and IoT infographic

On Tuesday, 29 August 2017 01:44:34 PDT Edward Welbourne wrote: > Thiago: > >> If you're going to communicate with a tiny MCU connected over a mesh > >> network like 6LoWPAN/Thread, you won't be using TCP. Much less HTTP. > > and you'll want that MCU running something light-weight in C++, not a >

Re: [Development] Qt and IoT infographic

> On 29 Aug 2017, at 10:44, Edward Welbourne wrote: > > Thiago: >>> If you're going to communicate with a tiny MCU connected over a mesh >>> network like 6LoWPAN/Thread, you won't be using TCP. Much less HTTP. > > and you'll want that MCU running something light-weight

Re: [Development] Qt and IoT infographic

Thiago: >> If you're going to communicate with a tiny MCU connected over a mesh >> network like 6LoWPAN/Thread, you won't be using TCP. Much less HTTP. and you'll want that MCU running something light-weight in C++, not a web-bloat thing. So Qt is just the thing for the job. (... and I had to

Re: [Development] Qt and IoT infographic

> If you're going to communicate with a tiny MCU connected over a mesh network like 6LoWPAN/Thread, you won't be using TCP. Much less HTTP. What makes me a bit sad is that if Qt's not doing it, then we end up having to put up with bloated stuff like Node.JS on beagleboard or raspberries :

Re: [Development] Qt and IoT infographic

On Mon, 28 Aug 2017 21:41:15 +0200, Jean-Michaël Celerier wrote: > * apparently QQuickWindow has some ties to the QML engine but in my > experience you can just create new QQuickItem from c++ and add them as > child of the rootItem and it works. F.e. https://github.com/uwerat/qskinny does

Re: [Development] Qt and IoT infographic

On Monday, 28 August 2017 12:26:55 PDT Jason H wrote: > > > 2. ZeroConf should be a standard thing. Where's Qt's support? > > > > Right now, in KF5 (kdnssd). > > And who puts/[wants to put] KDE on IoT? a) it's just one library. KF5 was designed as multiple, smaller, independent libraries that

Re: [Development] Qt and IoT infographic

<jh...@gmx.com> wrote: > > Sent: Monday, August 28, 2017 at 11:38 AM > > From: "Thiago Macieira" <thiago.macie...@intel.com> > > To: development@qt-project.org > > Subject: Re: [Development] Qt and IoT infographic > > > > On Monday, 28 Aug

Re: [Development] Qt and IoT infographic

> Sent: Monday, August 28, 2017 at 11:38 AM > From: "Thiago Macieira" <thiago.macie...@intel.com> > To: development@qt-project.org > Subject: Re: [Development] Qt and IoT infographic > > On Monday, 28 August 2017 07:01:07 PDT Jason H wrote: > > Onto

Re: [Development] Qt and IoT infographic

On 28 August 2017 at 18:38, Thiago Macieira wrote: > Timur began working on an simple HTTP server. This is a controversial > decision, since we've long said that Qt should not be the tool for server-side > programs. That might be worth reconsidering as a guideline

Re: [Development] Qt and IoT infographic

On Monday, 28 August 2017 07:01:07 PDT Jason H wrote: > Onto my criticisms of Qt wrt IoT: > > 2. ZeroConf should be a standard thing. Where's Qt's support? Right now, in KF5 (kdnssd). > 3. IoT generally use web services, namely RESTful APIs. Where's Qt's > support for writing a RESTful server?

Re: [Development] Qt and IoT infographic

n, Aug 28, 2017 at 4:01 PM, Jason H <jh...@gmx.com> wrote: > > > > Sent: Thursday, August 24, 2017 at 5:00 PM > > From: "Thiago Macieira" <thiago.macie...@intel.com> > > To: development@qt-project.org > > Subject: [Development] Qt and

Re: [Development] Qt and IoT infographic

> Sent: Thursday, August 24, 2017 at 5:00 PM > From: "Thiago Macieira" <thiago.macie...@intel.com> > To: development@qt-project.org > Subject: [Development] Qt and IoT infographic > > Re the inforgraphic at > https://info.qt.io/whitepaper-building-the-

Re: [Development] Qt and IoT infographic

On Friday, 25 August 2017 00:17:02 PDT Jean-Michaël Celerier wrote: > > So where's the information about local network discovery and > > communication? > Where's the strategy on common protocols and data models? Publish and > subscribe of notifications? > > (adding a vote for support of Zeroconf

Re: [Development] Qt and IoT infographic

> So where's the information about local network discovery and communication? Where's the strategy on common protocols and data models? Publish and subscribe of notifications? (adding a vote for support of Zeroconf in Qt : https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTBUG-30823) I think that the Pub - Sub

Re: [Development] Qt and IoT infographic

If we have a Qt 6 dance will it be backported to Qt 5? ;) Andy Development på vegne av Thiago Macieira skrev følgende den 25.08.2017, 08.20: On Thursday, 24 August 2017 23:10:45 PDT Lorn Potter

Re: [Development] Qt and IoT infographic

On Thursday, 24 August 2017 23:10:45 PDT Lorn Potter wrote: > On 08/25/2017 02:08 PM, Thiago Macieira wrote: > > [ "First there was Linux / and then there was Mac / now with Windows / > > on the Open Source track"  anyone?] > > ahh yes. The all time dance mega hit: Qt 4 Dance! > >

Re: [Development] Qt and IoT infographic

On 08/25/2017 02:08 PM, Thiago Macieira wrote: > [ "First there was Linux / and then there was Mac / now with Windows / on > the > Open Source track"  anyone?] ahh yes. The all time dance mega hit: Qt 4 Dance! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NbTEVbQLC8s

Re: [Development] Qt and IoT infographic

On Thursday, 24 August 2017 21:23:42 PDT Jake Petroules wrote: > Yep: > > ... > - Embedded Windows > - Symbian > - Android > - S40 > - QNX > ... > > I imagine QWS was in the place where Embedded Linux is now as there's no > other gaps in the bit set and the last platforms in the list are too new

Re: [Development] Qt and IoT infographic

> On Aug 24, 2017, at 9:08 PM, Thiago Macieira > wrote: > > On Thursday, 24 August 2017 20:06:56 PDT Jake Petroules wrote: >> In our license management systems, there happen to be exactly 12 "platforms" >> codified, so it's possible someone in marketing looked at a

Re: [Development] Qt and IoT infographic

On Thursday, 24 August 2017 20:06:56 PDT Jake Petroules wrote: > In our license management systems, there happen to be exactly 12 "platforms" > codified, so it's possible someone in marketing looked at a copy of that > list in Salesforce or something. That list is: > > - X11 > - Embedded Linux >

Re: [Development] Qt and IoT infographic

> On 25 Aug 2017, at 7:00 am, Thiago Macieira wrote: > > My criticism is what I *don't* see in this: local communication. Cloud > communication *should* be secondary in IoT. In fact, few devices should > communicate with the Cloud, hopefully only those that have

Re: [Development] Qt and IoT infographic

I'll find out who wrote that and why. In our license management systems, there happen to be exactly 12 "platforms" codified, so it's possible someone in marketing looked at a copy of that list in Salesforce or something. That list is: - X11 - Embedded Linux - Windows (desktop Windows) - macOS

Re: [Development] Qt and IoT infographic

On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 2:00 PM, Thiago Macieira wrote: > Re the inforgraphic at > https://info.qt.io/whitepaper-building-the-internet-of-things > (not the paper because it's asking information I won't give before I get > it) > > "adaptable" is also misspelled as

Re: [Development] Qt and IoT infographic

Maybe they count "platforms" not as OSs but as platform plugins in Qt xD Beste Grüße / Best regards, Alexander Nassian > Am 24.08.2017 um 23:05 schrieb Thiago Macieira : > >> On Thursday, 24 August 2017 14:00:01 PDT Thiago Macieira wrote: >> PS: it also says

Re: [Development] Qt and IoT infographic

On Thursday, 24 August 2017 14:00:01 PDT Thiago Macieira wrote: > PS: it also says "Artificial Intelligence" in "The Backbone" part. How is > that relevant to Qt or where is it exposed in Qt? It also says "12+ supported platforms". Where does that number come from? I can count 7: - Linux -

[Development] Qt and IoT infographic

Re the inforgraphic at https://info.qt.io/whitepaper-building-the-internet-of-things (not the paper because it's asking information I won't give before I get it) First of all, I like that Qt Company is taking this seriously. You can improve those graphics with target numbers for 2020, which