On 02.07.2015 18:07, Bob Hood wrote:
On 7/2/2015 8:44 AM, Igor Mironchik wrote:
On 02.07.2015 17:21, Daniel França wrote:
>> This news sounds like a good week for Xamarin
Indeed
Stop guys...
No, they have a valid point. I had not even heard about Xamarin until
they posted this, and after looking, it looks like Xamarin is a
legitimate competitor to what the Qt Company intended with its Indie
license.
Ok, Xamarin is cheaper than Qt. But with Xamarin and C# you can write
crosspaltform only business logic. All UI is platform dependend and you
should write UI for iOS, UI for Android, and so on. With Qt you can
write once and deploy everywhere...
Dropping the $25/month ($300/year) indie program for a $350/month
($4200/year) full license program seems completely counter intuitive
to me. Could somebody explain the rationale for that one? As was
pointed out previously, Qt is not really a visible player in the
mobile market, and dropping that program--even though you didn't have
what you would consider sufficient interest--will not get you there
when you are now charging an order of magnitude more, twice what your
nearest competitor (Xamarin) is charging for their most expensive plan.
On the surface, this looks like it was a horrid marketing decision.
If you are serious about market penetration, instead of withdrawing,
you actually should have gotten more aggressive.
_______________________________________________
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest
_______________________________________________
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest
