Vote for Qt. Qt for Windows Phone under review.

| December 29, 2011 | 85 Replies


Something that looked so simple to us on the outside would be to bring Qt to Windows Phone, leveraging then both all the possible Qt developers and bringing them to this young new Windows Phone OS. But for what ever reason, it’s not there.

Well on the Windows Phone official site’s developer feedback page, Qt for Windows Phone is under review, and has amassed around seven hundred votes. But I’m sure you guys can push that further.

Windows Phone native developers have done well to push marketplace to 50,000 at a way quicker pace than Android, Symbian and BlackBerry. Only 2 months behind iPhone. Imagine if Qt developers suddenly just had the ability to port tens of thousands of apps to the platform? (I’m sure it’s not that simple otherwise, N9 would also have tens of thousands of N8’s Qt apps).

Laura Reed, Laura Reed (Admin, Windows Phone Developer) responded  ·  

This is an outctopping from the Native SDK suggestion ( Please use this suggestion to vote and comment on your want/need for Qt support on the Windows Phone platform.

Vote and Comment if you want Qt on Windows Phone

p.s. whilst you’re here in a voting mode, Nokia’s made it to round 3:


Comments for Qt:

ysedit commented  ·  

Would be really cool.


Qt is today supported on Harmattan, Symbian, BB10, has community ports on IOS and Androïd… the only mobile OS where Qt is not is WP, which is the main focus for Nokia, owner of Qt… Strange, no ?

Having Qt everywhere, including WP, would help having your application running everywhere without the need of re developping it… It’s already the case on the desktop side, just waiting the same on the mobile side.

Bojan Komljenović commented  ·  

I’m not going to sweet talk you into Qt/QML, but do think about this:
There is a vast number of multiplatform Qt developers with various background knowledge that enriches them in their Qt app making carriers.
You do want that variety in power and knowledge pulled to WP7 by any mean necessary.
To answer your question boldly, only a full Qt port to WP7 will satisfy a majority of developers.


Randall Arnold commented  ·  

Ah, that would be the holy grail for so many developers… especially those coming from Symbian.



Enrico Miglino commented  ·  

As a multiplatform developer, working mostly on Qt environments for symbian, Harmattan and Android but also developing pure C++ / linux for embedded platforms and java when Android needs specific in- depth os applications as any kind of platform for web side services I can say that why not, WP7 / 8 wil be a new native platform. If the code we developed in past should be changes, it should be done. Times changes and if past code was developed with high technology level and portability there are not great problems to convert, recycle or reuse on this new platform. I was in past years Ms developer for about 10 years, then I worked on cicso operating system for advanced technology routers, then I managed and ported many of the Windows for workgorup code developing Novell OS for The old Novell platforms.
And just for this reason, as open source developer, memebr of the Nokia developer community and of the KDE – Necessitas I think that the best solution to open to the great potential of the developers is the ability of this great platform to integrate the Qt development. Indeed should be maintained the grapic style and characterial impact of the device itself, just because I think that a differentiation is a great thing. But the presence of the Qt means not only to cover a wide portion of the mobile development world but means too moving the device in a potential market grow that can only be positive for the product distribution.

And many, many more.

Thanks Vikas Patidar for the tip!



Category: Nokia, Windows Phone

About the Author ()

Hey, thanks for reading my post. My name is Jay and I'm a medical student at the University of Manchester. When I can, I blog here at and tweet now and again @jaymontano. We also have a twitter and facebook accounts @mynokiablog and Check out the tips, guides and rules for commenting >>click<< Contact us at tips(@) or email me directly on jay[at]
  • et3rnal

    done 🙂

    thanks 4 sharing it, would really love to see Qt in wp

  • Vikas Patidar

    Thanks Jay, you have posted it here to get more support from MNB readers.

  • nn

    Wont happen. Ever. Really, MS would rather bankrupt themselves than put multiplatform open source GPLed library into WP.

    You have better chance to vote in plain C++. Yeah, WP7 doesn’t allow you to use C++ and compile into native binary code, you can use only managed C#. What a great platform!

    • et3rnal

      Even though, if they supported c++ then the Qt wp port will come faster 😀

      btw Nokia working on Metro style components 😉 u can find them here


      • nn

        No, it wont. MS bans GPL licensed software in their app store, so even when ported your best chance would be on jailbroken devices.

        That Qt is for next Windows 8, where for historical reasons MS doesn’t lock you down that much. Yet.

        • Shaun

          Qt is dual licensed. Commercial and GPL. It wouldn’t be impossible for Nokia and Microsoft to come up with licencing terms they were both happy with.

          • nn

            The thing is, even Qt Commercial license isn’t for making proprietary changes and then push the incompatible library into the world.

            However, Nokia owns copyrights, so they theoretically could just give Qt to MS and let them rape it to the point it sort of works in WP land and is incompatible enough from everyone else. But then the open source and multiplatform part is gone and you bet that it would be slower and more clumsy than the official MS way. Who would want to develop WP apps with it, then?

          • Just for the record: Qt is dual licenced. Commercial and LGPL. They changed to LGPL a while back, after Nokia bought Trolltech. But I’m sure LGPL is not what msoft would like either.

    • Cocco Bill

      Qt on WP7 will never happen. Even if that suggestion gets 6 000 000 000 votes.

      • Mike

        Well then I will not develop for the Windows Phone, and I think most of the Qt developers wont. It is as simple as that. I’ll continue to support Symbian, MeeGo, Android and Blackberry (if they get BB 10 released)

    • Punching Bag

      Qt already exists on Windows, this is not a giant leap

      • nn

        It exists on desktop Windows only because MS can’t forbid you from installing it.

        • Shaun

          It exists on WinCE also. Its only on WP where Microsoft only allow managed code that it isn’t.

    • 352×416

      I would imagine that being able to code in C++ and compile to native binary would give better performance and lower battery use.

    • migo

      You don’t have a clue what you’re talking about. They’re sticking to XNA and Silverlight at the moment as they’re cross platform, and that allows them to move to the MinWin kernel for Apollo without sacrificing backwards compatibility with existing WP7(.5) apps. The few apps they’ve allowed to be written in native code will have to be re-written for WP8. Supporting any other platform of managed code will introduce more problems.

      Also, most Qt apps on Symbian are written for 640×360, which is a different aspect ratio from 800×480, not to mention the apps will have a very jarring effect on the overall UI. Something that’s also not desirable this early into the platform’s life cycle.

      • nn

        Ergo MS wont allow Qt on WP because it’s totally against their ecosystem strategy. Thanks for confirmation.

      • Punching Bag

        That makes it even more obvious of why it would work.

        Let devs who want to make the lower resolution cross platform version do it in qt.

        Let the devs who want to make the higher res glossy version write in native win.

        It’s a win win

      • incognito

        Qt is not any ‘other platform of managed code’ – you have libs in Qt to do memory management, but you’re not obliged to use them. Qt is as native as it can be for a cross-platform solution.

        Second, every app written using the Qt toolkit, if it was written properly that is, separates the UI from the business logic, which allows you to just change the layouting for another resolution and have your app fully working. You can even add dynamic scaling (if you didn’t use LQ bitmaps for visual elements) and have the app scale itself to whatever resolution without the need to change the UI files at all.

      • mark

        “most Qt apps on Symbian are written for 640×360, which is a different aspect ratio from 800×480”

        Like any half-decent UI toolkit that isn’t a century old, it handles scaling the software to whatever resolution you have, and developers do not write for a resolution. In my opinion, Qt is one of the better toolkits out there at handling this (even for graphics, like games, the QGraphicsScene makes rescaling automatic). Not all Symbian phones do 640×360, there’s at least one 640×480; plus Qt is used for Maemo/Meego devices which do 800×480. The Qt Simulator can be used to test different resolutions, and even on a single phone, you have to cope with changing orientation. If this myth about Symbian resolutions was really true, how on earth did Apple ever manage to increase the resolution after so many years of the IPhone’s low fixed resolution?

        Whilst some poorly written software might have hardcoded pixel coordinates or resolutions, that’s nothing that can’t be fixed in the porting. Sure, it won’t be a simple recompile, but porting would still be far easier than rewriting every line to convert from C++ to C#! You seem to think that developers would simply go ahead and release applications that work at the wrong size? If they were that stupid, then they could still do that now when porting from C++ to C#…

      • Mike

        Since when XNA and Silverlight have been cross platform? Or do you mean “cross Windows platform”? If you do then you don’t really understand what cross platform means.

      • Mike

        > Also, most Qt apps on Symbian are written for 640×360, which is a
        > different aspect ratio from 800×480,

        That is not true at all. Neither Symbian is tied to specific screen resolution nor is Qt. Most of the Qt apps written for the Symbian do have scalable UI. Qt and QML do have dynamic UI layout management which makes it possible to create scalable UI which adapts to screen resolution on run time.

        When you are developing Qt apps for the Symbian, or for any other platform you DO NOT define UI statically, which means that you DO NOT define static UI component sizes or coordinates on screen. That would create non-scalable UI tied to some screen resolution. So you DO NOT do that. What you do us that you define dunamic relations between UI components. If you write Qt apps using C++ then you use Qt’s layouts. If you are writing Qt apps using QML, then you use QML’s positioners and anchoring. In both cases the result is scalable UI which IS NOT tied to any specific screen resolution.The UI defined that way WILL scale when screen resolution changes.

        I have been developing Qt apps for the Symbian since Nokia bought Trolltech and ported Qt to Symbian, and I have NEVER creayed any app tied to 640×360 resolution or to any other resolution. All of my apps do have nice looking scalable UI, which works on different screen resolutions.

  • jr

    then again I ask.. how many apps has Qt. added to Meego.. ?

    • Pretty much every app you can find for the platform.

      If there aren’t many apps in your view for MeeGo, then please consider whether its Nokia’s strategy or Qt it self to “blame” for this.

      • jr

        I ask this because people like you portray Qt as a the platform which makes it easy for developers to port apps easily.. so far this hasn’t been the case in Meego.. Developers aren’t porting their Symbian apps too meego so why do you think it will be different on wp7?

        • Punching Bag

          Yeah exactly, which is why I think this can happen and micros~1 doesn’t need to fear it

        • Shaun

          Qt may allow easy ports of Symbian Qt apps but that doesn’t mean developers are going to support another platform with very limited reach and an uncertain future.

          Also, a lot of the development happens in countries where Nokia have chosen not to ship the N9. Those developers aren’t going to be inclined to port their local apps. Lastly, Nokia haven’t exactly been generous with N9s for developers unlike Lumias.

          • Jay Montano

            devs got n950

            • Noki

              hahahha, you know how many??? It was a joke.

              • Punching Bag

                How many?

                • TrollKnightRises

                  not more than 300

          • jr

            n9 isn’t the first Meego/maemo device and what does a developer loose by porting an already made app ? maybe Qt isn’t as easy as some of you are making it seems like hence the lack of interest of developers to port their apps over

            • Bloob

              Actually, it is. But it’s not like you still can’t write code so bad that there’s quite a bit of reworking needed when switching platforms.

            • Noki

              People that have zero idea of what they are talking about should abstain from doing so….

              The N9 has more and more apps every day, for a completely dead platform it is quite good.

              The motivation to port an app to it is rather limited on the fact that its a dead on arrival, the Microsoft V.P. in charge made perfectly audible. Developers started to move to other places that have a brighter future… NOT WP btw 🙂

              • Viipottaja

                Is that why the WP Marketplace is growing so fast recently? 😉

                • troll

                  shut up paid ms troll. =P

              • jr

                Windows Mobile is dead but people still make apps for it and I bet there has been more apps and development for WM in the past one year than meego/Maemo.. but that wasnt my point.. My point was why aren’t develops not interested in posting their Qt apps to Meego if it was an easy cake?.. apparently its not so people should just stop wasting our ears about Qt’s versatility.

                • ftw

                  one has to wonder what is driving so many developers into making apps for wp… 😀 in no time youi will have more apps than users.

                  there is a about 40 users per app that is a pretty interesting number.

        • Mike

          That’s not true. There is lots of Qt apps which are available to both Symbian and MeeGo. Lots of developers do port their apps to both platforms. And the porting is really really easy, especially if the app is made usin QML. And almost every new Qt app for Symbian and MeeGo is made using QML. Porting Qt app to new platform IS wery easy.

      • Punching Bag

        Pretty much “every app”, are you taking crazy pills?

        Where’s my N9 Shazam? Where’s my Fruit Ninja? Where’s my video chat? These all exist on Symbian.

        There’s a LOT missing from my N9!

        • reptile

          He meant that any app you can find for the N9 was programmed using Qt.

          Any app that wasn’t ported from Symbian to Meego was because the developers saw no point in doing extra work when it was announced that the N9 would have no future.

  • I’d love for my fav apps on Qt to make it to WP7. I’ve no idea of the technical implications of this move, but those listed comments make some good points for getting Qt on WP7.

    I think the best argument is to hold on to Nokia’s Symbian devs by including Qt in the platform!

  • Sun Down

    Yeah, saw the ‘GotY’ device for 2011 on Giz (which I tend to avoid). I hope Lumia reaches number 1. Will vote for Qt too.

  • DAEX

    I like Qt 😀

  • Doug

    Lumia 800 won’t beat the Galaxy Nexus in that Gizmodo voting thingy. N9 has a better chance.

  • Bloob

    Yeah, sure I’d like it, but never going to happen. MS wants a uniform programming environment across all it’s platforms, Qt would ruin that. They get money from the many versions of Visual Studio (and support) too you know. Unless Qt creator will be removed and Qt get deeply integrated with some VS version.

    • yasu

      There is a Qt Visual Studio add-in, IIRC. Not that it means that MS will adopt Qt on WP.

    • incognito

      Qt add-in for VS works remarkably well for something that was always considered an afterthought. I think that’s the least of Microsoft’s qualms with Qt, there are many other things that they won’t like with it, independence from the VS wouldn’t even make the top 100 list.

      • Punching Bag

        What do you think are the top 3?

        Maybe I’m naive (actually, yes, I’m naive) but I’m not sure they will be all too bothered, so long as there remains an incentive/feature for devs who want to go with their in-house platform over qt…

        My other question is, why haven’t they called it the “xphone” (like xbox) yet?!

        • incognito

          Top 3? Easily the first is that by introducing a cross-platform solution, especially as potent as Qt is, they lose control over the developers (and if you remember that ‘developers, developers, developers’ speech you know how they are valued). If one could write an app that can with little to no modifications run on concurrent platforms there is no incentive for either developers or users to stay with their platform. Come by your time to replace your phone, and you go out and check various phones, and then you value them only by their hardware, UI, whatever – not by the amount and type of apps they have, nor if your absolutely must-have app is present there. Google and Apple don’t want that either, and for the same reason.

          Second would be that, by extension of the first, it essentially commoditizes the OS. And Microsoft is first and foremost an OS provider, and it is their main source of income. If the underlying OS becomes irrelevant (and it definitely does if you can do the same things on other OSes), Microsoft is reduced to a service provider, and in that arena not only that the competition is fierce, but for the most part is miles ahead of Microsoft.

          Third would be if they allow Qt without allowing native development (which they are not planning to do) – i.e. Qt becomes a first class citizen along with the XNA/.NET, but no ability to utilize pure C/C++ or whatever apart from the Qt toolkit itself – Qt apps would perform much better than managed apps that are considered ‘native’ on the WP. And will give much more power to the developers. Only a crazy, or a lazy person would in that case use .NET for anything that doesn’t fall in under ‘simple tasks’.

          Sure, Microsoft can lock-in some APIs and so on, but then Qt is not given the first class citizen status, so WP would not actually support Qt.

          Oh, yeah, forgot another thing – using Qt you can easily break from the shackles of pre-defined UI style – your apps would not even have to follow the Metro guidelines. True, Microsoft can be a gate keeper on their Marketplace and request all the apps to follow the visual style they prescribe, but still…

          Trust me, in the whole setup, VS and its future is not really a concern for Microsoft. Qt exists for desktops for more than a decade and it didn’t kill their VS line.

          • Punching Bag

            I think I agree with everything you say, but foresee a different outcome

            For 1 and 2, that’s how it starts…and then later, after devs have bought in, they introduce the proprietary stuff that only works in QtMS# or what have you. “Pure” Qt still works in this example, but to get the bells and whistles you need the proprietary MS stack…

            For 3 and ease of use…I don’t necessarily see that as bad. Like VB and VBA…let the lazy people use .NET, and let the stronger devs use the low level tools. That will be the common Qt tool, until of course they introduce their proprietary additions

            I hear ‘ya on the Metro thing, but don’t they just need to enforce guidelines for publishing to their app store? That might turn off the same devs that want Qt to begin with, but that’s a diff problem…

            • Punching Bag

              Mind you, this example is not entirely different from what Nokia is doing themselves with their own win phones!

            • incognito

              As I’ve said bellow, there is a certain advantage of bringing Qt to WP – you get more developers instantly either the ones from the Qt arena that won’t have to bother to learn .NET/XNA, or the ones that are cautious because WP doesn’t have a significant user base so they don’t want to invest in creating an app for a platform that might just as well flop tomorrow. But with that benefit come the aforementioned dangers which Microsoft really cannot afford this early in the game.

              Think about it – if they introduce Qt as a first-class citizen in their WP ecosystem, shortly all the powerful apps will be written in Qt and available for other platforms as well – .NET would by that account become a tool for newbies and seasoned .NET, Microsoft-only developers thus reducing their wanted ecosystem for the WP to a nil, and even if they try their well known shenanigans with APIs to force their solutions – developers would revolt and just continue supporting the other platforms. Microsoft would have to love Qt as their own child and outperform their competitors in order to survive with the Qt introduction. That ain’t gonna happen…

              Sure, if they’ve had 50%+ market share they could go that route and still maintain their exclusivity through partnerships, special APIs and so on, but this early in the game it would turn out as Microsoft is investing in the Qt ecosystem instead of their own WP.

              Of course, I’m presenting the worst case scenario for Microsoft if they’d go down that route – it wouldn’t be that bad given that the Qt is still far away from being a first class citizen on iOS and Android, so the advantage of easily migrating users between platforms and thus the danger of the OS commoditization is not that great, but given the weak WP presence even as such it could damage their intended ecosystem.

              As for Nokia – nobody claimed that what they are doing with the WP is actually smart. The results, so far, are not working in their favor either. I’m quite sure that Microsoft would never allow themselves to go the way of Nokia…

              • Punching Bag

                Ok…so….rather than speculating on whether or not you think they’ll do it…

                Are you for it or against it?

                • incognito

                  Of course I’m for it – I even voted even tho I do find it futile – I am a developer, and the more freedom to us developers the happier we are 🙂

                  On many occasions I have stated that while I do prefer completely open systems, I am prepared to use closed ones for as long as they don’t try to artificially lock me in and as long as they allow me to develop for them the way I prefer – that’s why I don’t have big qualms with desktop Windows, and I’m even using it almost proportionally to my Linux usage. The development ratio is more in favor of Linux, but I still don’t mind developing for Windows either as I can often reuse my code thanks to Qt, GTK and similar cross-platform libraries/toolkits. If desktop Windows would require me to use only and only .NET (even tho I’ve developed quite a number of apps in it), I would downright refuse to develop for it because I don’t want to be locked in.

                  I’m just explaining why I don’t think that will ever happen.

                  • Punching Bag

                    Agree and agree

                    While unlikely, I don’t think it’s impossible…

                    If Qt is the gateway to get little Microsoft App Stores into pants pockets quickly, I think they’ll go for it..

  • Weirdfisher

    Balmer won’t give a chance to Meego

  • mrtman

    Wait… didn’t nokia say qt in wp7 would inevitably cause fragmentation? We all agreed to that.

    If the Supreme Minds now consider qt, does it mean that microsoft is so desperate about wp7 that they will accept fragmentation, or does it mean the whole fragmentation claim was another political bullsh*t arrogantly fed to the masses(us)?

    • migo

      It means they’re considering community input.

  • Noki

    NEVER EVER Would that be allowed by Microsoft. Remember the “war of the ecosystems” the programing language is the corner stone of those wars.
    If Microsoft would allow Qt I and I’m sure many others would reconsider our opinion on Microsoft strategy, I’m sure we wont have to since Microsoft strategy and interests are the ONLY interests for nokia.

    Nokia in less that one year will have to sell off some of its assets, My bet would be a large chunk of its pattens on smart phones to Microsoft. I would much more prefer it would be the Qt division to Google or Samsung… But I doubt the boss (the real one) would allow that, I think they will just try to kill it, under a myth of the next billion…

    One as to wonder if google would not allow Qt… oo wait, it already does allow Qt, as does RIM (in fact Qt is the defacto programing framework for the next blackberries).

    • Only idiots or greedy trolls use APIs and languages for the war of ecosystems. Normal people use them for development and benefit of society.

      • ftw

        Yeap, NOKIA used to be like that,

  • first of all, they have to add native c++ support, then opengl support and after that it will be possible to port Qt on WP
    But I dont think ms will do this

  • Troll

    This would shut sooooooo many people up
    . I like to.see all the pessimism here cause if its true, then thats one major arguement point gone.

    • Noki

      I would love to be shut up, don’t think I will.

      • troll

        true. it needs to be seen how many previous non native developmental sdk made it.

  • Heron

    If this happens, it will be good news for Nokia and for the success of WP7. Microsoft will do what it does best if they allow what happened with Windows itself, which allowed for some open love but it allowed itself to compete in developer space as a big player.

    I doubt it will happen, but consider this: Windows NT used OpenGL as a standard when Microsoft knew it couldn’t get its own API out in time and when OpenGL was the de facto standard in workstation space. Granted, Qt isn’t that standard, but bring enough developers and critical mass will be won. This is a battle MS knows it must win to stay relevant, and it might bring out all the stops this time. Including working with a lesser evil to fight the big evil.

  • Viipottaja

    Bunch of other developer requests that are under review:

    We’ll see how much comes out of it of course.

  • Deep Space Bar

    so basically kill everything nokia started and give it to every other company for basically free

    • Punching Bag

      I thought trolltech made qt

      • Deep Space Bar

        Nokia owns trolltech

        • Punching Bag

          NOW they do! They didn’t start it. Is this a duh convention?

  • > But for what ever reason, it’s not there.

    Those are simple and historical. MS hates cross platform development. They want Windows only APIs. History showed this many times. No wonder they are banning any non MS development framework on Windows Phone, which they control by not releasing native SDK for it (C/C++).

    These kind of tactics are called “vendor lock-in”, and Microsoft never hid their intentions with using APIs to achieve it (see ). So I highly doubt that MS will let Qt in, while they still use these prehistoric proprietary tactics. May be they’ll get some sanity with time, but I wouldn’t bet on it.

    • ftw

      +++++++ Hell will freeze over or worse they will fire the Steve/phen’s before we see any of that.

  • Mario

    Qt in WP7?

    “A game-changer. On the level of the conical bullet in nineteenth century, or faster-than-light travel in the twenty-third.”

    It would the way to free users from being locked to a particular platform if they want a particular app…

    • That’s exactly why Microsoft wouldn’t let it happen. MS doesn’t like free users and free developers.

  • Deep Space Bar

    now do you kno why Microsoft is scared of open source/linux/Qt/symbian and Android

  • tp

    as far as i know, the microsoft i’v known wouldn-t approve somethin like qt.


    Balmer would secretly say to elop:

    ”dude, if the gurus start porting, all hell z gonna break loose!”

    • Punching Bag

      No, that’s not how it works

      1) They embrace it and let it grow

      2) They add proprietary features after it has caught on. C’mon guys.

      Cynicism aside, I think it’s a decent possibility they could take it on.

  • incognito

    Microsoft will rather give up WP7 than allow that. If they cannot lock-in developers to their own ‘ecosystem’ (.NET, XNA…), and especially if they cannot lock them to the unique APIs provided by the platform (even if they allow native development they will do that – Apple does it as well) what’s to stop both developers and users to migrate to other platforms on a whim?

    They even do it on their desktop Windows, to a smaller extent as it is still open-ish (but the Metro part of the W8 won’t be, surprise, surprise) – how many times have you heard people saying that they’d give up Windows in a heartbeat if there were their favorite apps available for MacOS X/Linux/whatever? They can afford that semi-openness in the desktop arena because they are holding de-facto monopoly over it, but they’ve been utilizing a lot of lock-in tactics in their server space, they’ve been pushing plenty of their proprietary .NET stuff, they’ve been releasing early locked-in APIs to their software partners… All for the goal of locking in developers to the Windows platform and making it financially nonviable for them to port their apps to other platforms. Ergo – you have to stay with Windows whether you like it or not.

    Now, if they are trying (and often succeeding) with these shenanigans, who in his right state of mind would think they are going to allow that for the platform where they can’t break even the 2% barrier? Yes, it would for a moment add an advantage to WP (you, as a developer, have an escape plan if it flops by releasing your app for another platform) but would in the long run crush the WP ‘exclusiveness’ – if they cannot keep up with Android, iOS or whatever, users and developers could easily switch (provided that Qt becomes an official, first class citizen of those ecosystems, and even Apple and Google wouldn’t want that either, for the same reasons) leaving WP in the dust. So, as I’ve said, Microsoft will rather kill the whole WP line than to allow that – why even bother when you are at danger of flopping just by making a single mistake that would disgruntle either the users or the developers, or both?

    However, for Nokia – as the owner of Trolltech and with two/three platforms already utilizing the Qt (and a plan for extending that to s40/Meltemi/whatever) – that would be smashing. But why would Microsoft care about Nokia, especially at their own expense?

    • +1. To quote one of the Microsoft’s head managers:

      The Windows API is so broad, so deep, and so functional that most Independent Software Vendors would be crazy not to use it. And it is so deeply embedded in the source code of many Windows apps that there is a huge switching cost to using a different operating system instead… It is this switching cost that has given the customers the patience to stick with Windows through all our mistakes, our buggy drivers, our high TCO (total cost of ownership), our lack of a sexy vision at times, and many other difficulties […] Customers constantly evaluate other desktop platforms, [but] it would be so much work to move over that they hope we just improve Windows rather than force them to move. In short, without this exclusive franchise called the Windows API, we would have been dead a long time ago.

      • Noki

        would be funny if it wasn’t so sad…..

  • tp

    punching bag, i get ur good intentions. But thats just u.
    I’m sure u and ‘sir’ balmer r nt on the same frequency here!

    • Punching Bag

      Maybe I’m just old and still remember the micros~1 that invented BASIC, DOS, and DirectX

      I also feel like if Bill G were a younger man he would personally like qt for what it is! Let’s not forget that the man’s a true geek!

      • incognito

        Is that the same Bill Gates who said that GPL is a communist movement, and the BSD license cannot bring any improvement to the software as nobody wants to work for free? Or the one who openly claimed that the OSS movement are bunch of thieves and parasites? Or the one who approved, after all that, for Microsoft to steal the whole TCP/IP stack from BSD because ‘the license allowed it’ as it was OSS w/ BSD license? All that happened during his reign.

        Mr. Gates despises GPL/LGPL/BSD and other OSS approaches as much as Ballmer, and given the impact Qt could have on their own business especially regarding the WP, I don’t think that he’d look favorably on all that. While he might be more on the geeky side, he is a businessman first and foremost, and no way in hell he’d allow that.

        I greatly admire him for his altruism and even for his general achievement (even tho they used shady tactics way too often to be on the ‘good guy’ list, but that’s business for you), but he was the single most fierce enemy of the (F)OSS movement, and if he was running Microsoft still, he’d be even for more lock-in than that monkey Ballmer. Don’t take Mr. Gates’ kindness for a weakness…

  • GordonH

    Qt is an enemy to Ms.
    It will be killed unless Ms gets cornered with low developer interest. Nokia are now fully working for Ms. The ” next billion” phase is excuse to see Wp7 results first then decide on Qt strategy.
    The Finn company is Finnnised. Nokia shareholders are Americans. Nokia is in a big big mess.