.NET vs Trolltech's QT

Why should my company choose .NET over Trolltech's QT plattform?

[65 byte] By [Rogowski] at [2007-12-23]

«« JDK1.4 to J#
»» Convert LRESULT to LPCWSTR in c++

# 1

Please feel free to comment!! =)

Rogowski at 2007-8-30 >

top of Msdn Tech,.NET Development,Common Language Runtime...

# 2

Hi, i don′t think that we can compare .NET with QT.

More you can compare .NET to J2EE..

KristijanM. at 2007-8-30 >

# 3

What about in terms of gui-development. Is there any advantages of using .net over Qt? Why wouldn't one choose Qt for gui development? Or .net?

Abis at 2007-8-30 >

# 4

IMHO

1. There are a lot of .net developers out there. so hiring becomes easier

2. There are answers or forums where you can get answers on .NET easily, not so on QT I suspect.

3. .NET has the potential to be more productive if you get your base libraries right.

PAULL at 2007-8-30 >

# 5

It depends on your specific needs.
Qt builds on top of C++, which is by nature not as fully object-oriented as .NET is (I don't what Qt adds to here).
.NET implements built-in support for reflection and serialization. However Qt is much more platform independent than .NET currently is. .NET uses a CIL (common intermediate language) assembly in compiled-form that is virtually platform independent when JITed, however Microsoft does only have official support for this on the Windows and XBox 360 platform (an unofficial Rotor project which is a subset of the .NET CLR for Unix/macos exists) and most likely won't implement .NET for any other platform (an open source project called Mono implements the open specification of .NET for Linux and Macos). However Qt does.

-- Edit:
.NET is free of charge for open and commercial use (the compilers, runtime and jitters), however Qt is not. A commercial .NET application would also need to be obfuscated to protect from reverse engineering).

Kea at 2007-8-30 >

# 6

Qt can be seen as a third-party contributor w/ C++ libraries. There is no problem adding Qt's libraries to be used in a .NET environment.

I like Qt because it is very powerful and well documented libraries, similar to STL libraries but much more extensive.

Qt is free if you develop Open Source,. and for a fee if you develop for Commercial use. I recommend you to test it yourself under the Open Source license and if you like it your company can buy it.

I think it is NOT an alternative .NET more like a complement since .NET is a development environment in itself while Qt is not

kjehed at 2007-8-30 >

# 7

Viewing .NET and Qt (and Java as many also would do) as complements rather than options is a better choice of view, like kjehed does, each development platform for different needs.

Kea at 2007-8-30 >

.NET Development

Common Language Runtime

.NET Development Hot Topic

.NET Development New Topic

.NET Development

Java / MSDN / Linux Tech / PHP Tech / MSDN DotNet / MSDN TECH / Health Library / Programmers Tech / visual basic Tech / Developer Tech / Ipod faqs / Msdn China Tech