On 06/11/2012 01:13, a.gra...@gmail.com wrote: > Hi, > > On 5 November 2012 17:18, supernova <supernova...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Hi to all, I found this video on the web: >> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EEXk-ClMO-8 >> and following it i was able to build a desktop KDE really similar to Ubuntu >> Unity. >> I was wandering about future development of gnomeshell, which is quite >> alchemic and esoteric. >> So I think that considering a switch to QTs could be a concrete and >> advantageous chance. Programming in QTs environment is becoming easy and >> easier, they are light, complete and highly customizable. Moreover dolphin > > +1 from me, but when Canonical decided to drop Unity-2D they clearly > closed doors to Qt, except for some applications (like the Ubuntu One > client). > In my hopinion this was a bad choice, but.... time will say.
If we are to switch the default desktop to a Qt based one, we're going to be shifting Unity's roots from GNOME to KDE, and the Ubuntu default desktop environment itself from GNOME to KDE. With that we're going to have to change over all the default apps in order to maintain the user experience. Or we're going to require vast improvements in the integration of Gtk+ apps in KDE. Either way, the change is not going to happen easily. I don't think the little advantage, if any, that we can possibly derive from shifting Unity to Qt is worth the amount of effort required to make it happen. In fact, I think Unity-2D happening in Qt was a bad idea in the first place. I recall there being quite a space crunch on the desktop CD image as a result of shipping both toolkits together on disk. -- Kind regards, Loong Jin
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~unity-design Post to : unity-design@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~unity-design More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
