Desktop Environment for Proprietary Applications?

nushoin writes "Gnome and KDE are the two major desktop environments used on Linux today. However, Gnome is growing more and more affiliated with Microsoft's proprietary technologies (Mono, OOXML). Targeting the Gnome desktop environment could prove dangerous in the long run, assuming that one would like its applications to run on distributions other than SuSE. On the other hand, TrollTech is being bought by Nokia, whose commitment to the desktop world remains to be proven. Assuming that one would like to develop a desktop application (either free or closed source), which desktop environment would you target, and what widget tool kit would you use?"

FUD

[QuantumG]

Jesus, GNOME != Suse.. GNOME != Miguel.

Why not just use Ubuntu?

[MMC Monster]

That's what nushoin uses, after all. Yeah, it's flamebait. The whole freaking summary is flamebait as well. Just because someone that writes code likes some stuff that MSFT makes doesn't mean that we should abandon ship. If proprietary code is found in the codebase, it should be easy to remove. So far it hasn't shown up, which is pretty amazing since it's all opensource.

Epic FUD

[splortnik2003]

And not because it's inconsequential that QT was bought by Nokia or that Miguel *hearts* MS. It's just not news, not shocking and at the moment not a problem.

Re:FUD

[kripkenstein]

Jesus, GNOME != Suse.. GNOME != Miguel.

Agreed, this is a ridiculous claim.

Yes, Novell is working on Mono and partnering with Microsoft, while at the same time investing in GNOME. But that doesn't 'taint' GNOME in any way. The core GNOME technologies - GLib, GTK, and so forth - are not written in C# and have nothing to do with Mono. The licensing of those core GNOME technologies is the LGPL, in fact, precisely to ensure that there is no risk in developing for that platform. No one 'owns' it, and no one can 'taint' it. You will be able to run GTK and GNOME anywhere you compile it to run, be it SUSE, other Linux distros, Solaris, or whatever; again, as LGPL, you can do whatever you want with it, if you abide by that license. In particular, you can run any app you want on such a platform, which is the question here. The claim that "Targeting the Gnome desktop environment could prove dangerous in the long run" simply shows a lack of understanding of what GNOME is and how FOSS licensing works.

Regarding Qt, Qt is dual licensed as GPL and proprietary. If you want to run FOSS apps on KDE, you have no problem (at least if your FOSS license agrees with what Nokia will accept, and that includes most of those existing today). But if you want to run proprietary applications on a desktop, Qt is a poor choice. For starters it costs money. Furthermore, Nokia can charge whatever they want for proprietary licenses, and this might change at any point; there are no guarantees. However, if you are willing to take that risk, then Qt/KDE is a nice platform (although the portability, one of its main advantages, seems lost in this particular context, since it appears a single desktop is going to be chosen).

So, if you want to develop a FOSS application, both GNOME and KDE are fine (just make sure with KDE that you agree to the licensing). If, on the other hand, you want to develop a proprietary application for a particular desktop, I would say GNOME is the way to go.

Use Qt4 for GUI toolkit

[Anonymous Coward]

Nokia poses absolutely no threat to Qt and it's the best GUI toolkit available for Linux by far. It also works wonderfully on Windows, OS X, *BSD and Solaris.

Re:Epic FUD

[Anonymous Coward]

That doesn't make it any less FUDulous. Asking stupidly, overzealous loaded questions is just ASKING for a flamewar to break out, and the fact that it was accepted and posted here should just make everyone here sick.. the editors have devolved to Digg's stupidity.

First of all, Qt is GPL (even v3 now); Nokia can't undo that. Future developments might change things, but people can always fork it and continue as if Trolltech never existed.

Secondly, GNOME is *NOT* adopting Microsoft technologies. Miguel != SuSE != GNOME. OOXML, Mono are not essential technologies, and can be removed quite simply (with very little deficit to usability; the only significant Mono applications in the GNOME stack are a photo manager (GThumb already exists), Tomboy (retardedly complex code for sticky notes; already several replacement projects AND E-D-S can already do everything Tomboy does, AND Conduit can sync E-D-S across machines) and Beagle, and Tracker's not only faster, but it uses less memory and has been accepted as default across most of the prominent GNOME-based desktops). Futhermore, effort is underway to give C# users a better way to integrate into GNOME: Vala is modeled after C# and compiles directly to plain-ol' generic GObject C. On top of that, the most new code going into GNOME is Python, by a rather wide margin.

Re:FUD

[kripkenstein]

But if you want to run proprietary applications on a desktop, Qt is a poor choice. For starters it costs money. Furthermore, Nokia can charge whatever they want for proprietary licenses, and this might change at any point; there are no guarantees.

This is quite trollish. Qt is no different in those respects from the other innumerable commercial libraries that are routinely used in proprietary software development. Singling out Qt as a "risk" suggests an axe to grind, and recommending GNOME for proprietary applications confirms it.

Yes, you are right, Qt is no different from other toolkits that cost money for proprietary apps: I would make the same argument against Microsoft tools. If you get hooked on Visual Studio/.Net/etc., then you run the risk of Microsoft raising prices in the future. Exactly the same as proprietary apps on Qt, that is the risk of developing for a platform owned by a corporation.

This risk does not exist if you develop for a platform that is LGPL, you can write apps for it (FOSS or proprietary) without such concerns.

Re:The answer is simple, very simple

[SanityInAnarchy]

Or you could follow the examples of Opera and Skype and go Qt.

Same rules apply, though. Don't be afraid to pull in libraries, but no matter how closely you tie it to a particular desktop environment, unless you do something incredibly stupid, it will work on others -- it will just be that much more bloated on them.

Re:FUD

[dpilot]

Come back in 10 years and let's see how "open" Mono/C#/OOXML really are/were.

Most of us are betting that the landscape will be littered with corpses, and the MS Lawyers will be wiping their swords.

Beyond that, where have you been with OOXML? It's not complete! Since when does a *standard* read crap like "Do this the way Word95 does"? If you want a real standard, and if that real standard must accept Word95 has what has been de-Facto, then you need to adequately describe exactly what it is Word95 does. Then instead of "the way Word95 does" insert the real description. (And even with that shorthand, it's over 6000 pages?)

At least one, apparently.

[Anonymous Coward]

And it seems to be you.

What the hell is with these types of posts? "Do my research." "Where is your proof?" When GTK an open source library is the proof. WTF? You can download and look at the source code, then you yourself can say if the other poster's comments are true or not. If you knew anything about the subject, I doubt you would make such a vague statement.

In real life, those making claims and expect to be taken seriously bear the burden to validate those claims. The absence of this is what leads to things like "sensationalism" and also outright lies. In the case of false or less-than-wholly-true claims, this is because average consumption of information is taken at face value, and regardless of whether any intelligent few actually ever follow up with their own research to disprove statements of falsehood, the pool has been tainted.

The onus is on you.

Welcome to the adult world.

Microsoft wasn't allways cheap

[krischik]

However, today Microsoft tools cost almost nothing. You can get Visual Studio Express for free and professional version for something like $150. I don't think that this price is going to change in foreseeable future. And you don't need to upgrade it often - I still use VisualStudio 2003 for my C++ development, and a lot of people still use ten years old VS6!

Prices for MS$ tools have gone up and down depending on how strong the competition was at the time. When Borland was strong in hobby arena (When MS-C/C++ came without "Visual") prices where low. When Borland more or less abandoned Hobbyist/Student use Viusual-C/C++ went up in price until GCC became more mainstream when Express was introduced.

Besides I consider Express is cripple-ware. Quite a bit of interesting stuff is not included (at least last I checked). And it's of course the same for Borland tools.

Martin