Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Flutter: a Portable UI Framework for Mobile, Web, Embedded, and Desktop

developers.googleblog.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

381–390 of 467 posts

Re: Flutter: a Portable UI Framework for Mobile, Web, Embedded, and Desktop

#381

Post by detaro »

Nokinside wrote: post #369
kristoffer wrote: post #364

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't agree that you need to provide a way for your customers to replace the Qt libraries? (because that is a fact of LGPL3, read the anti tivoization clause). Do you see any possible security problems with the above? Because in reality it means that you give your customers the possibility to run their own code on your hardware. That is a problem for many companies and products.

>You are forced to help customers replace the Qt libraries in your product. Depends on what you mean by 'help'. You are forced to give the opportunity for them to do the work if they need it. If you have statically linked files, it can't be done by accident. > Do you see any possible security problems with the above? No I don't. When I provide completely closed binaries for my customers, they can hack with the binari…

> If you don't want your customers create security problems, you don't allow them to modify the software in your hardware.

How do you do that, while said software depends on LGPL3 licensed Qt?

Re: Flutter: a Portable UI Framework for Mobile, Web, Embedded, and Desktop

#382

Post by MrGilbert »

Apocryphon wrote: post #299
076ae80a-3c97-4 wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which is going to be hard. Xamarin these days is really nice to work with.

Perhaps, but for whatever reason React Native seems to still dwarf it. Maybe the companies that tend to churn out popular mobile apps just don’t invest in .NET?

Well, it might be burned soil. Even in tech companies it's hard to convince the "decision-makers" to have another look at a technology that failed some years ago.

Also, you need some experienced people to look at new technology.

Re: Flutter: a Portable UI Framework for Mobile, Web, Embedded, and Desktop

#383

Post by Nokinside »

kristoffer wrote: post #379
Nokinside wrote: post #369

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>You are forced to help customers replace the Qt libraries in your product. Depends on what you mean by 'help'. You are forced to give the opportunity for them to do the work if they need it. If you have statically linked files, it can't be done by accident. > Do you see any possible security problems with the above? No I don't. When I provide completely closed binaries for my customers, they can hack with the binari…

I think I'm clearly stating my assumptions. GPL3 and LGPL3 requires you to enable the user to replace the GPL/LGPL3 code on your device with the users own version of said code. It does not matter if you link statically. Now, it would be possible let the user do this and not let it be a problem for your product (in terms of security, reverse engineering, ip theft, etc) but it is more and harder work. I have used both…

Notice the exception:

> But this requirement does not apply if neither you nor any third party retains the ability to install modified object code on the User Product (for example, the work has been installed in ROM).

- If you ship embedded product where the code is not supposed to be easily upgraded, you don't have to provide means to do that. Anti-Tivoization applies to cases like TiVo where they added DRM to prevent users from upgrading but allowing you to upgrade.

- Also, anti-Tivziation clauses don't apply software distributed to business. Medical devices or safety critical software etc. Any devices sold to business.

Re: Flutter: a Portable UI Framework for Mobile, Web, Embedded, and Desktop

#384

Post by Nokinside »

detaro wrote: post #381
Nokinside wrote: post #369

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>You are forced to help customers replace the Qt libraries in your product. Depends on what you mean by 'help'. You are forced to give the opportunity for them to do the work if they need it. If you have statically linked files, it can't be done by accident. > Do you see any possible security problems with the above? No I don't. When I provide completely closed binaries for my customers, they can hack with the binari…

> If you don't want your customers create security problems, you don't allow them to modify the software in your hardware. How do you do that, while said software depends on LGPL3 licensed Qt?

from GPL v3

> But this requirement does not apply if neither you nor any third party retains the ability to install modified object code on the User Product (for example, the work has been installed in ROM).

Also, anti-tivoizaton clauses does not apply to devices sold to business.

Re: Flutter: a Portable UI Framework for Mobile, Web, Embedded, and Desktop

#385

Post by Apocryphon »

davedx wrote: post #309
Apocryphon wrote: post #294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m sure those are all great cross-platform solutions, and Qt in particular has been around forever and predates smartphones, but you never hear about high-profile app examples that use them. Unlike React Native, which has lost more high-profile companies that previously tried them than I’ve ever heard of any firm using Xamarin. I wonder why is that. Doubtlessly you can make great apps with say NativeScript, or in Pa…

Can you explain what you mean about React Native? If I understand, you're saying more companies have tried and then abandoned React Native than Xamarin? Can you provide evidence of this please?

Sure. The major apps that were previously using React Native are AirBnB and Udacity, who are fairly prominent as far as startups go. As far as companies currently using the framework, they are respectably impressive:

https://facebook.github.io/react-native/showcase.html

I haven’t heard of anyone similar using Xamarin, not even Microsoft-related ventures. Maybe because they’re mostly not in the U.S.?

https://www.altexsoft.com/blog/mobile/13-apps-made-with-xama...

Re: Flutter: a Portable UI Framework for Mobile, Web, Embedded, and Desktop

#386

Post by auggierose »

Hixie wrote: post #239
on_and_off wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

edit : I am not a Googler, but that's what I gathered from talking with them Here is what is happening : A couple of years ago, when the dart team failed at getting their runtime embedded into the browsers, they started searching for a problem to solve. They thought they had hit jackpot with multiplatform development. So they started working on Flutter. This is all entirely independent from the Android team at Google…

(I'm the Flutter TL.) As far as the bit about Flutter goes: Flutter was started by engineers from the Chrome team, and myself (who worked in the open source team as editor of the HTML standard). We had no relationship with the Dart team at all until some times into the project, when we were looking around for a language to replace JavaScript in our project (codenamed Sky at the time). We considered a large number of…

What is a TL?

Re: Flutter: a Portable UI Framework for Mobile, Web, Embedded, and Desktop

#388

Post by Apocryphon »

pjmlp wrote: post #327
Apocryphon wrote: post #294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m sure those are all great cross-platform solutions, and Qt in particular has been around forever and predates smartphones, but you never hear about high-profile app examples that use them. Unlike React Native, which has lost more high-profile companies that previously tried them than I’ve ever heard of any firm using Xamarin. I wonder why is that. Doubtlessly you can make great apps with say NativeScript, or in Pa…

There are plenty of high-profile Qt apps running on four wheels, and I bet with more users than all Flutter apps combined.

Sure, but are they running on smartphones?

Re: Flutter: a Portable UI Framework for Mobile, Web, Embedded, and Desktop

#389

Post by douglaswlance »

sandGorgon wrote: post #182

Can someone from the Google team comment on what's going on - https://techcrunch.com/2019/05/07/kotlin-is-now-googles-pref... > Android development will become increasingly Kotlin-first,” Google writes in today’s announcement https://techcrunch.com/2019/05/07/google-launches-jetpack-co... > Google today announced the first preview of Jetpack Compose, a new open-source UI toolkit for Kotlin developers who want to use…

Flutter != Android

Android will be Kotlin

Flutter will be Dart.

Re: Flutter: a Portable UI Framework for Mobile, Web, Embedded, and Desktop

#390

Post by fauigerzigerk »

zimpenfish wrote: post #374
fauigerzigerk wrote: post #356

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm getting 32 mbps from BT for £52.49. My O2 mobile internet hardly works at all. London really has terrible internet infrastructure. I wouldn't be surprised at all if some people got no more than 10 mbps as you say.

> London really has terrible internet infrastructure. I think it probably has average infrastructure shared over too many connections. If I do 4G speed tests up north, it's always way faster but there's also way fewer people trying to use it concurrently...

>I think it probably has average infrastructure shared over too many connections.

Which makes it indistinguishable from terrible infrastructure :)

More people sharing the infrastructure also means more people paying for it. So in terms of value for money London's internet infrastructure is terrible even by your very lenient definition.

Post reply on HN