Comment Very wrong (Score 1) 103
>Unfortunately, this will not be sufficient to >ensure the success of KDE. The prohibitive
>cost of licensing Qt for commercial development >ensures that most shareware and
>small proprietary software developers will write >for the Gnome desktop
This is pure (if unintentional) FUD. You do not need Qt to write KDE-compliant applications. One possible reason why FUD like this is continually spread (note that I am not saying that the author of the above post is to blame) is that there are commercial interests that want to have a QT-quality and relatively easy-to-use toolkit without having to pay for it. So they claim that Harmony is needed in order to write KDE-compliant applications.
>Hackers who prefer KDE to Gnome should strongly support the continuation of Harmony
In other words, work hard to give commercial interests a free ride. I really hope noone buys this. The interests of the free software movement are much better served by a GPL'd Harmony.
>cost of licensing Qt for commercial development >ensures that most shareware and
>small proprietary software developers will write >for the Gnome desktop
This is pure (if unintentional) FUD. You do not need Qt to write KDE-compliant applications. One possible reason why FUD like this is continually spread (note that I am not saying that the author of the above post is to blame) is that there are commercial interests that want to have a QT-quality and relatively easy-to-use toolkit without having to pay for it. So they claim that Harmony is needed in order to write KDE-compliant applications.
>Hackers who prefer KDE to Gnome should strongly support the continuation of Harmony
In other words, work hard to give commercial interests a free ride. I really hope noone buys this. The interests of the free software movement are much better served by a GPL'd Harmony.
