Should I use QT Creator? It's a new ide by QT for developing QT apps. Does it make it easier? I don't really like big IDEs. Do you any of you use it?

Blaze349 wrote:

Should I use QT Creator? It's a new ide by QT for developing QT apps. Does it make it easier? I don't really like big IDEs. Do you any of you use it?

Doesn't it cost a lot of money?

The only gui stuff I've done in C++ has been with wxWidgets, so I couldn't really say. However, learning to use a widgets library using nothing but C++ can be useful and can give you more control.

Wettining wrote:

Doesn't it cost a lot of money?

Nope, it's for free.

TheMonsterOfTheDeep wrote:

The only gui stuff I've done in C++ has been with wxWidgets, so I couldn't really say. However, learning to use a widgets library using nothing but C++ can be useful and can give you more control.

So wxWidgets over Qt? I can use both without Qt creator though

Jonathan50 wrote:

Wettining wrote:

Doesn't it cost a lot of money?

Nope, it's for free.

The open sourced is free but you have to include Qt in your product and you can't sell it/get revenue from ads

Blaze349 wrote:

TheMonsterOfTheDeep wrote:

The only gui stuff I've done in C++ has been with wxWidgets, so I couldn't really say. However, learning to use a widgets library using nothing but C++ can be useful and can give you more control.

So wxWidgets over Qt? I can use both without Qt creator though

No, I wouldn't say that. I kind of chose wxWidgets arbitrarily. My comment was more generic about any particular widget library - gui builders can help, but they aren't really necessary and they make it harder to build more complex, dynamic uis (due to autogenerated code, etc..)

Well, only if you want your app to work on Windows 95. Click here/url] and scroll down to the bottom. Then scroll up a bit until you get to the Qt/WxWidgets section.

Wettining wrote:

The open sourced is free but you have to include Qt in your product and you can't sell it/get revenue from ads

That's not true, Qt is available under the GPL and LGPL (both of which allow you to sell your product) and the Qt commercial license Look here: https://www.qt.io/licensing-comparison/

CatIsFluffy wrote:

Well, only if you want your app to work on Windows 95. Click here/url] and scroll down to the bottom. Then scroll up a bit until you get to the Qt/WxWidgets section.

That's cool IMO.

Jonathan50 wrote:

Wettining wrote:

Doesn't it cost a lot of money?

Nope, it's for free.

Yup very free http://prntscr.com/fyqqp2

herohamp wrote:

Yup very free http://prntscr.com/fyqqp2

Yep, it's under the GPL http://code.qt.io/cgit/qt-creator/qt-creator.git/tree/ and in Debian repositories

Edit: https://www.qt.io/ide/ https://info.qt.io/download-qt-for-application-development

Jonathan50 wrote:

herohamp wrote:

Yup very free http://prntscr.com/fyqqp2

Yep, it's under the GPL http://code.qt.io/cgit/qt-creator/qt-creator.git/tree/ and in Debian repositories

Edit: https://www.qt.io/ide/ https://info.qt.io/download-qt-for-application-development

oh thanks

Jonathan50 wrote:

Wettining wrote:

The open sourced is free but you have to include Qt in your product and you can't sell it/get revenue from ads

That's not true, Qt is available under the GPL and LGPL (both of which allow you to sell your product) and the Qt commercial license Look here: https://www.qt.io/licensing-comparison/

CatIsFluffy wrote:

Well, only if you want your app to work on Windows 95. Click here/url] and scroll down to the bottom. Then scroll up a bit until you get to the Qt/WxWidgets section.

That's cool IMO.

But if I make a commercial app doesn't that mean I have to let everyone see the source code (not saying that is a bad thing)?

Blaze349 wrote:

But if I make a commercial app doesn't that mean I have to let everyone see the source code (not saying that is a bad thing)?

If you share it under the GPL, then yes, and you also have to allow anybody to redistribute your app or modified versions (This is, as it were, the main reason I sort of think the GPL is not necessarily suitable for commercial applications, but that's just my personal opinion).

However, Qt is licensed under the LGPL, which does not require your app to also be licensed under the LGPL.

TheMonsterOfTheDeep wrote:

Blaze349 wrote:

But if I make a commercial app doesn't that mean I have to let everyone see the source code (not saying that is a bad thing)?

If you share it under the GPL, then yes, and you also have to allow anybody to redistribute your app or modified versions (This is, as it were, the main reason I sort of think the GPL is not necessarily suitable for commercial applications, but that's just my personal opinion).

However, Qt is licensed under the LGPL, which does not require your app to also be licensed under the LGPL.

Is there a good alternative to Qt that looks good?

Blaze349 wrote:

TheMonsterOfTheDeep wrote:

Blaze349 wrote:

But if I make a commercial app doesn't that mean I have to let everyone see the source code (not saying that is a bad thing)?

If you share it under the GPL, then yes, and you also have to allow anybody to redistribute your app or modified versions (This is, as it were, the main reason I sort of think the GPL is not necessarily suitable for commercial applications, but that's just my personal opinion).

However, Qt is licensed under the LGPL, which does not require your app to also be licensed under the LGPL.

Is there a good alternative to Qt that looks good?

I'm pretty sure most widget libraries are under the LGPL or something similar. As I said, the LGPL is not exactly copyleft - if I understand correctly, it allows you to license your code however you want, as long as the LGPL'd library is statically linked.

Blaze349 wrote:

TheMonsterOfTheDeep wrote:

Blaze349 wrote:

But if I make a commercial app doesn't that mean I have to let everyone see the source code (not saying that is a bad thing)?

If you share it under the GPL, then yes, and you also have to allow anybody to redistribute your app or modified versions (This is, as it were, the main reason I sort of think the GPL is not necessarily suitable for commercial applications, but that's just my personal opinion).

However, Qt is licensed under the LGPL, which does not require your app to also be licensed under the LGPL.

Is there a good alternative to Qt that looks good?

Visual Studio Community, it's free

TheMonsterOfTheDeep wrote:

Blaze349 wrote:

TheMonsterOfTheDeep wrote:

Blaze349 wrote:

But if I make a commercial app doesn't that mean I have to let everyone see the source code (not saying that is a bad thing)?

If you share it under the GPL, then yes, and you also have to allow anybody to redistribute your app or modified versions (This is, as it were, the main reason I sort of think the GPL is not necessarily suitable for commercial applications, but that's just my personal opinion).

However, Qt is licensed under the LGPL, which does not require your app to also be licensed under the LGPL.

Is there a good alternative to Qt that looks good?

I'm pretty sure most widget libraries are under the LGPL or something similar. As I said, the LGPL is not exactly copyleft - if I understand correctly, it allows you to license your code however you want, as long as the LGPL'd library is statically linked.

Like ARkit? So if I want to sell an app then I link it with LGPL. Cool. So should I use Qt Creator? What benefits does it actually have.

Wettining wrote:

Blaze349 wrote:

TheMonsterOfTheDeep wrote:

Blaze349 wrote:

But if I make a commercial app doesn't that mean I have to let everyone see the source code (not saying that is a bad thing)?

If you share it under the GPL, then yes, and you also have to allow anybody to redistribute your app or modified versions (This is, as it were, the main reason I sort of think the GPL is not necessarily suitable for commercial applications, but that's just my personal opinion).

However, Qt is licensed under the LGPL, which does not require your app to also be licensed under the LGPL.

Is there a good alternative to Qt that looks good?

Visual Studio Community, it's free

I don't like Microsoft or Visual Studio. Windows compatibility is never an important issue for me.

Blaze349 wrote:

Like ARkit? So if I want to sell an app then I link it with LGPL. Cool. So should I use Qt Creator? What benefits does it actually have.

I can't really say anything about its benefits. Lots of people have written about benefits of various libraries; you should probably just google around.

If there isn't enough information online, what you might what to do is just try writing a small app with a few widget libraries that you think look good, and then going with the one that works the best for you for any real projects you might want to do.