I’m the new QML webview for mobile (Android and iOS), and they are very
immature but works.
They do not integrate into scene graph, so you cannot apply any transformation,
rotation, opacity, scale, animation, etc.
The webview is always on top of everything ! :-( You have to invent tricks to
inte
Last time I tried it did not work in usable fashion, neither on android,
nor iOS.
That was around December, January.
On 11/07/2015 20:12, jh...@gmx.com wrote:
> I don't know. Never tried. I know Qt has that capability with its web kit.
> I don't know about the OEM ones. I would guess yes,
I don't know. Never tried. I know Qt has that capability with its web kit. I
don't know about the OEM ones. I would guess yes, but that is just a guess.
-Original message-
Sent: Saturday, 11 July 2015 at 18:22:52
From: "John C. Turnbull"
To: "Jason H"
Subject: Re: [Interest] Qt m
Thanks very much Jason for this helpful info.
When I asked this question, I was referring to the times you want to embed a
web browser in your app. I believe in both iOS and Android you are forced to
use the native browser so how can you integrate that effectively into your
scene graph if you w
> Amongst all the debate around the Indie license, some mention was made of Qt
> Mobile not quite "being ready yet".
>
> So, for someone considering Qt for lots of things including mobile, could
> someone please answer these questions for me:
>
> 1. Which Qt features do not currently work on iO
On 7/11/2015 2:17 PM, Bob Hood wrote:
> On 7/11/2015 5:00 AM, Nicola De Filippo wrote:
>>> Mobile never was a core area for Qt in the post-Nokia period, and while
>>> there are good intentions, I'm sure there is a line after which the
>>> return on investment is really low from a commercial license
On 7/11/2015 5:00 AM, Nicola De Filippo wrote:
> Hi,
>> Mobile never was a core area for Qt in the post-Nokia period, and while
>> there are good intentions, I'm sure there is a line after which the
>> return on investment is really low from a commercial license business
>> perspective. Simply put,
Hi,
>
>
> Mobile never was a core area for Qt in the post-Nokia period, and while
> there are good intentions, I'm sure there is a line after which the
> return on investment is really low from a commercial license business
> perspective. Simply put, the core philosophies of Qt are not exactl
Thanks, but I would still appreciate someone answering all my questions if
possible…
From: Dmitry Volosnykh [mailto:dmitry.volosn...@gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, July 11, 2015 3:11 PM
To: John C. Turnbull
Cc: interest@qt-project.org
Subject: Re: [Interest] Qt mobile apps v native
John, i
And how about the "professional license"?
On Sat 11 Jul 2015 at 11:04 Attila Csipa wrote:
> Disclaimer: I don't work or speak for the Qt company. I work(ed) for
> companies using the commercial license.
>
> The problem, as I understood it, was that this majority of Qt developers
> you mention nev
Disclaimer: I don't work or speak for the Qt company. I work(ed) for
companies using the commercial license.
The problem, as I understood it, was that this majority of Qt developers
you mention never materialized or went for the indie license. The sales
suggestion we got indicated that people e
Following opinion is mostly based on our Android/Ios app that latest version is
released couple of months ago, so some information may be outdated and we have
not yet tested it with Qt 5.5 .
Nay important features like Bluetooth LE, IOS bluetooth LE, IOS gps etc has
been added after these day.
12 matches
Mail list logo
