How about accessibility, and other input methods? Is it hard to do with HTML5? Do any web frameworks make it easier?
Qt or HTML5? A Million Dollar Question
31–40 of 88 posts
Re: Qt or HTML5? A Million Dollar Question
#32Real link: http://content.cdntwrk.com/files/aT05NDQwMzEmdj0xJmlzc3VlTmF... While this does read a bit like an ad I find the points to be valid. I also think interface quality can be achieved to be better with Qt Quick than with HTML. Unfortunately there is a somewhat higher entry barrier, but that shouldn't be a problem for a company this large. I am glad one company didn't follow the hype of putting web technology e…
What I'm missing are some points regarding:
- Maintainability: Who will maintain a Qt application once it's deployed? How fast can a Qt application become modified?
- Cost for/of developers/development: How easy is it to find good Qt frontend developers/maintainers?
- System upgrades: How will HAM upgrade its appliances?
I assume he's talking about HAM as BSH (Bosch and Siemens Home Appliances). They're currently heavily researching IoT for their appliances. Looking at certain planned features, I guess their appliances will soon be equipped with more powerful embedded systems anyway...
Re: Qt or HTML5? A Million Dollar Question
#33The link reads like an advert.
that is, i read it few months ago in spam from qt
Re: Qt or HTML5? A Million Dollar Question
#34If QT could produce a "themable" web app where you can give the theme.css of whatever it generates to a designer would be nice.
Re: Qt or HTML5? A Million Dollar Question
#35Good luck getting any serious technical support with Qt. At least with HTML5 there's a huge amount of users and technical resources. I was never able to get answers to any technical questions that weren't trivial.
Re: Qt or HTML5? A Million Dollar Question
#36What about Flutter? It will also have similar advantages over HTML as QT.
Re: Qt or HTML5? A Million Dollar Question
#37Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you want an optimized application for minimal hardware then surely HTML isn't an alternative anyway? Not sure I agree that QT is harder to develop and maintain, it depends on what you are used to.
"If you want an optimized application for minimal hardware then surely HTML isn't an alternative anyway?" That was the question on linked article. These days HTML becomes viable even on low-end hardware, it's even standard on some appliances (i.e. home routers) and this question is very common. "Not sure I agree that QT is harder to develop and maintain, it depends on what you are used to." General census is that wri…
Anecdotally.
When I play youtube videos in my browser I'm getting about 1/3 of the view time before the battery is out compared to using mpv with youtube-dl on my laptop.
It's not just about being able to run it at all but run it efficiently. These days anything on the web feels really sluggish and I miss the days when optimisation was a priority.
Also for me, I vastly prefer writing C++ code over html and the few times recently where I had to write webpages I used libwt[1] in C++. It's almost like using QT but for html.
Re: Qt or HTML5? A Million Dollar Question
#38I've done both and the real answer is "it depends". If performance is all that matters, the yes, it's Qt hands down. But Qt is also significantly harder to develop and maintain, especially if you want optimized application for minimal hardware.
Maybe this was the case with Qt4, but Qt5 (that is, QML) is a dream.
Re: Qt or HTML5? A Million Dollar Question
#39I've done both and the real answer is "it depends". If performance is all that matters, the yes, it's Qt hands down. But Qt is also significantly harder to develop and maintain, especially if you want optimized application for minimal hardware.
>> But Qt is also significantly harder to develop and maintain, especially if you want optimized application for minimal hardware.
If by that you mean it's easier to hack together some awful JS+HTML compared to hacking together a Qt application, I agree. If you want to build a maintainable, reliable and efficient solution, I don't think there is that much difference between the two. Qt has bindings to many languages, and even if you are forced to use C++ because of hardware constraints, the fact that the Qt front end API is a million times better (easier, better documented) than whatever JS frontend, offsets the language overhead.
I'm not really sure anyone could say React or Bootstrap or whatever is 'easy to use' if you are not familiar with it. Easy to get a button on the screen, maybe, but that hardly makes a user interface.
Re: Qt or HTML5? A Million Dollar Question
#40Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you want an optimized application for minimal hardware then surely HTML isn't an alternative anyway? Not sure I agree that QT is harder to develop and maintain, it depends on what you are used to.
"If you want an optimized application for minimal hardware then surely HTML isn't an alternative anyway?" That was the question on linked article. These days HTML becomes viable even on low-end hardware, it's even standard on some appliances (i.e. home routers) and this question is very common. "Not sure I agree that QT is harder to develop and maintain, it depends on what you are used to." General census is that wri…
> writing clean C++ is a bit harder than creating HTML page
False analogy. The counterpart of HTML in the Qt world is QML, not C++. C++ is the counterpart of JS (or whatever backend language the web application uses).