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

Make Apps for Linux

makealinux.app

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 422 posts

Re: Make Apps for Linux

#351

Post by anonyme-honteux »

sph wrote: post #321
pjmlp wrote: post #319

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep. Just browse their documentation, that is the kind of development experience GNOME and KDE were expected to provide, 20 years ago, yet fail short due to Linux distributions fragmentation, the devs using other environments, or still stuck with plain window managers and xterms workflows.

If only GNOME and KDE were backed by one of the largest companies in the world, with tens of billions of dollars at its disposal.

NeXT under Steve Jobs had a maximum of 500 people working with him in .

There has been much more efforts than that in desktop linux.

Yet NeXT delivered a mostly coherent programming platform, back in the 1990s.

One thing NeXT didn't do is to introduce shitloads of useless complexity with fragmentation for the sake of it and half assed solutions on top of that.

Re: Make Apps for Linux

#352

Post by fullspectrumdev »

danans wrote: post #170
fullspectrumdev wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then you are stuck using basically a browser wrapper for your UI, which frankly sucks for performance and native integration most of the time. The move to making everything a webapp is great for development velocity right until you smash into one of the many, many corner cases where it sucks.

> Then you are stuck using basically a browser wrapper for your UI, AFAIK, Flutter compiles to native code, no browser needed.

I may have to give Flutter another look, I’ve gotten rather pessimistic about modern UI stuff lately :)

Re: Make Apps for Linux

#353

Post by jwells89 »

emptysongglass wrote: post #346
jwells89 wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While the Qt Telegram app runs fine on macOS, most Apple users opt the Swift/Cocoa client for macOS and iOS[0]. [0]: https://github.com/overtake/TelegramSwift

Can you qualify "most Apple users"? I've never met anyone running the Telegram Swift client and this is the first I've heard of it.

Same as you, most of the people using iPhones and Macs that I know.

Additionally, the official Telegram site points to the Swift client for its Mac download (the Qt client is marked as “Telegram for PC/Linux”) and the Swift client is the first result on the Mac App Store, which would make it seem likely that’s the client most Mac users are going to have installed.

Re: Make Apps for Linux

#354

Post by pjmlp »

arp242 wrote: post #342
pjmlp wrote: post #336

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is also the biggest different between proper desktop operating systems since forever, and the fragmented Linux distributions. Available API means the whole stack, everything needed to write applications end to end, regardless of their purppose, not CLI and daemons.

And I am saying you don't need to rely on any of that. You can just ship it yourself (statically link, or use LD_LIBRARY_PATH). That's what Windows applications that rely on GTK or Qt do as well, and it works fine, which works well, and it works fine for Linux too. The basics (libc, libX, etc.) are stable, and the Linux kernel is stable. And this is what Windows does too really, with MSVC and dotnet and whatnot redis…

Not really got the point, no wonder Linux Desktop development is as it is, and Google needed to step in.

Re: Make Apps for Linux

#355

Post by WillAdams »

jwells89 wrote: post #121
zer0zzz wrote: post #34

I think the premise is wrong when there still doesn’t exist a core set of frameworks that are abi stable on Linux. On competing platforms there are way more frameworks out of the box (CoreImage, CoreAudio, CodeML, SceneKit, AppKit, etc) and they don’t break as often. I know in Linux they have fun things like snap and flatpak but it is really solving the problem using a bit of infrastructure and package management ins…

If I could have that spread of frameworks that macOS offers on Linux, I’d be targeting Linux with my side projects yesterday. Having such a wide selection of tools to readily reach for with zero consideration about how long it’ll be supported, which fork is best, how well it meshes with a pile of other third party libraries, etc is amazing. It reduces friction massively and you just build stuff. The KDE Qt ecosystem…

Have you looked into GNUstep?

https://gnustep.github.io/

Re: Make Apps for Linux

#356

Post by jwells89 »

WillAdams wrote: post #355
jwells89 wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I could have that spread of frameworks that macOS offers on Linux, I’d be targeting Linux with my side projects yesterday. Having such a wide selection of tools to readily reach for with zero consideration about how long it’ll be supported, which fork is best, how well it meshes with a pile of other third party libraries, etc is amazing. It reduces friction massively and you just build stuff. The KDE Qt ecosystem…

Have you looked into GNUstep? https://gnustep.github.io/

Yep, have been aware of it for a long time. It’s great in concept but as far as I’m aware a good deal behind current macOS — last I knew it was compatible with OS X 10.6 (released 2009) with no support for Swift or for any of the advancements in Objective-C made since then.

I’m also not sure how well GNUStep apps would fit into a modern GTK or Qt-based desktop, e.g. if they’d theme controls to match.

Re: Make Apps for Linux

#357

Post by lupusreal »

mixmastamyk wrote: post #317
yaomtc wrote: post #314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nonsense. Fixing a typo or amending a command somewhere in the middle are obvious use cases.

That’s only the last line, not quite what they stated. Still a lot slower than emacs or CUA keys, so no it doesn’t fall flat. The kind of person that would use it doesn’t use a terminal.

> That’s only the last line, not quite what they stated

Then I wasn't clear, I am talking about using the mouse to position the cursor in the current line being edited. If I am writing a long command and realize I made a typo 50 characters earlier in the second argument, I should be able to click in the second argument to reposition my cursor. And yes, I do use vi-mode and know how to do this the vi-way with just the keyboard, but Vim also supports using the mouse for this and there's no reason shells shouldn't as well.

> The kind of person that would use it doesn’t use a terminal.

Absolute nonsense.

Re: Make Apps for Linux

#358

Post by amadeuspagel »

abhinavk wrote: post #100
zer0zzz wrote: post #34

I think the premise is wrong when there still doesn’t exist a core set of frameworks that are abi stable on Linux. On competing platforms there are way more frameworks out of the box (CoreImage, CoreAudio, CodeML, SceneKit, AppKit, etc) and they don’t break as often. I know in Linux they have fun things like snap and flatpak but it is really solving the problem using a bit of infrastructure and package management ins…

I had read somewhere that Win32 (via Wine or Proton) is the most stable target for Linux right now.

Actually, web standards are.

Re: Make Apps for Linux

#360

Post by [deleted] »

pjmlp wrote: post #354
arp242 wrote: post #342

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And I am saying you don't need to rely on any of that. You can just ship it yourself (statically link, or use LD_LIBRARY_PATH). That's what Windows applications that rely on GTK or Qt do as well, and it works fine, which works well, and it works fine for Linux too. The basics (libc, libX, etc.) are stable, and the Linux kernel is stable. And this is what Windows does too really, with MSVC and dotnet and whatnot redis…

Not really got the point, no wonder Linux Desktop development is as it is, and Google needed to step in.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN