> From: Atlant Schmidt <aschm...@dekaresearch.com> > To: 'Bob Hood' <bho...@comcast.net>; "interest@qt-project.org" > <interest@qt-project.org> > Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2012 9:00 AM > Subject: Re: [Interest] Digia to acquire Qt from Nokia >> Wait a sec... wasn't that because Nokia bought a highly valuable >> toolkit, got a lot of testing and probably even bug fixes "for >> free" from the community, had a gazillion of Qt developers just >> waiting to unleash their creativity on Nokia phones... and then >> decided NOT to use it by going Windows mobile exclusively? Wasn't >> THAT the reason they failed with Qt? > > That's not exactly how it played out. By the time of Symbian^3, > Qt was a standard feature of Nokia's Symbian phones. Anna and > Belle also contained it as standard. > > And if I'm not mistaken, by that time, hadn't Nokia switched > over to using a Qt-based Web browser on Symbian? How many of > the software's other standard apps had been switched to Qt- > based designs? (The plan certainly was to switch all of them, > but I left Nokia before the changeover was accomplished.) > > Nokia didn't exactly throw away Qt without ever deploying it. >
He didn't say they didn't deploy (though I could see how that was implied); just that they committed to it as a strategy that was 100% compatible with what they were doing before, only to then go quickly in a very different direction that was 100% compatible with any previous direction. Qt didn't fail at Nokia. Nokia failed to utilize Qt and stick with a strategy long enough to see it through to sucess. Nokia's failure in that regard is their own, and purely a business one that has no link to how Qt is licensed (other than possible political ones for Elop, but that's neither here nor there). Ben _______________________________________________ Interest mailing list Interest@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest
