Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • Users
  • Groups
  • Search
  • Get Qt Extensions
  • Unsolved
Collapse
Brand Logo
  1. Home
  2. General talk
  3. The Lounge
  4. I feel cheated.
Forum Updated to NodeBB v4.3 + New Features

I feel cheated.

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Unsolved The Lounge
qt price
31 Posts 15 Posters 10.2k Views 7 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • C Offline
    C Offline
    chrtsi
    wrote on last edited by
    #17

    Apparently nobody is interested in the book. Thanks for your comments.

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • 6thC6 Offline
      6thC6 Offline
      6thC
      wrote on last edited by
      #18

      Would you consider using Qt Creator for Qt development? (This isn't at all being said nasty-like, just in case)

      I'd encourage you to at least get into Creator to see the example projects.

      I feel your sentiment as I came from Microsoft land but I too never actually got MSVC / Qt project going - I got close but honestly... by the time I got my head around signals and slots and how it all worked - I'd begun to not only live with but like Qt Creator.

      Something worth trying for before just giving up
      (clearly we think so - we are still here).

      1 Reply Last reply
      1
      • C chrtsi

        I downloaded and installed 5.11 of Qt (about a 5 hour process). Now I'm trying example 1 of the book, which starts with #include <QApplication>. VS can't find that. Anybody know what I'm supposed to put in my "include"project settings? I found the \Qt\5.11.1\winrt_armv7_msvc2017\include\qtwidgets folder, but that blows up on the next included .h file with: 1>c:\qt\5.11.1\winrt_armv7_msvc2017\include\qtwidgets\qapplication.h(43): fatal error C1083: Cannot open include file: 'QtWidgets/qtwidgetsglobal.h': No such file or directory, like it's looking for another qtwidgets folder.
        Any quidance would be appreciated.

        Z Offline
        Z Offline
        ziller
        wrote on last edited by
        #19

        @chrtsi said in I feel cheated.:

        Now I'm trying example 1 of the book, which starts with #include <QApplication>. VS can't find that. Anybody know what I'm supposed to put in my "include"project settings?

        Sorry, but this is one of the things that you cannot just transfer from a Qt4 book to Qt5. Modules have been introduced, so QtWidgets are not the default and your project must explicitly specify that it wants to use it. Using a Qt5 book for learning to program with Qt5 is definitely preferable.

        1 Reply Last reply
        1
        • Kent-DorfmanK Offline
          Kent-DorfmanK Offline
          Kent-Dorfman
          wrote on last edited by
          #20

          I know it's troll bait, but I do have to agree with the OP about licensing fees. Monthly use fees are criminal. Really, for as much as I hate windoze, the .net dev model is really the most fair one in the industry: buy once, and use that version forever without restrictions on redistributables.

          JKSHJ J.HilkJ veryqtpersonV sierdzioS 4 Replies Last reply
          1
          • Kent-DorfmanK Kent-Dorfman

            I know it's troll bait, but I do have to agree with the OP about licensing fees. Monthly use fees are criminal. Really, for as much as I hate windoze, the .net dev model is really the most fair one in the industry: buy once, and use that version forever without restrictions on redistributables.

            JKSHJ Offline
            JKSHJ Offline
            JKSH
            Moderators
            wrote on last edited by
            #21

            @Kent-Dorfman said in I feel cheated.:

            the .net dev model is really the most fair one in the industry: buy once, and use that version forever without restrictions on redistributables.

            What about the LGPL perpetually free license for Qt?

            Qt Doc Search for browsers: forum.qt.io/topic/35616/web-browser-extension-for-improved-doc-searches

            Kent-DorfmanK 1 Reply Last reply
            3
            • Kent-DorfmanK Kent-Dorfman

              I know it's troll bait, but I do have to agree with the OP about licensing fees. Monthly use fees are criminal. Really, for as much as I hate windoze, the .net dev model is really the most fair one in the industry: buy once, and use that version forever without restrictions on redistributables.

              J.HilkJ Offline
              J.HilkJ Offline
              J.Hilk
              Moderators
              wrote on last edited by
              #22

              @Kent-Dorfman Like almost everything in life, the listed licensing fees are basis for negotiation.

              Contact the sales team, make it clear you want a license and aren't just trolling and stuff may or may not happen to your favor.

              I don't agree with this approach, but its common practice throughout the world.
              I personal always ask for the price I actually want, that might be why I'm so terrible and selling and rather (financially) poor x)


              Be aware of the Qt Code of Conduct, when posting : https://forum.qt.io/topic/113070/qt-code-of-conduct


              Q: What's that?
              A: It's blue light.
              Q: What does it do?
              A: It turns blue.

              1 Reply Last reply
              2
              • JKSHJ JKSH

                @Kent-Dorfman said in I feel cheated.:

                the .net dev model is really the most fair one in the industry: buy once, and use that version forever without restrictions on redistributables.

                What about the LGPL perpetually free license for Qt?

                Kent-DorfmanK Offline
                Kent-DorfmanK Offline
                Kent-Dorfman
                wrote on last edited by
                #23

                @JKSH said in I feel cheated.:

                @Kent-Dorfman said in I feel cheated.:

                the .net dev model is really the most fair one in the industry: buy once, and use that version forever without restrictions on redistributables.

                What about the LGPL perpetually free license for Qt?

                The OP was about commercial licensing fees. the LGPL is still a fuzzy area that any company concerned about litigation would do well to stay away from. You too easily get into the "derivative works" issue. ...and really, commercial use should incur some sort of fee; just not the WindRiver model of paying, paying,and paying some more, ad infinitum.

                kshegunovK JKSHJ 2 Replies Last reply
                0
                • Kent-DorfmanK Kent-Dorfman

                  @JKSH said in I feel cheated.:

                  @Kent-Dorfman said in I feel cheated.:

                  the .net dev model is really the most fair one in the industry: buy once, and use that version forever without restrictions on redistributables.

                  What about the LGPL perpetually free license for Qt?

                  The OP was about commercial licensing fees. the LGPL is still a fuzzy area that any company concerned about litigation would do well to stay away from. You too easily get into the "derivative works" issue. ...and really, commercial use should incur some sort of fee; just not the WindRiver model of paying, paying,and paying some more, ad infinitum.

                  kshegunovK Offline
                  kshegunovK Offline
                  kshegunov
                  Moderators
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #24

                  @Kent-Dorfman said in I feel cheated.:

                  the LGPL is still a fuzzy area that any company concerned about litigation would do well to stay away from

                  I disagree, on both counts.

                  Read and abide by the Qt Code of Conduct

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  1
                  • Kent-DorfmanK Kent-Dorfman

                    I know it's troll bait, but I do have to agree with the OP about licensing fees. Monthly use fees are criminal. Really, for as much as I hate windoze, the .net dev model is really the most fair one in the industry: buy once, and use that version forever without restrictions on redistributables.

                    veryqtpersonV Offline
                    veryqtpersonV Offline
                    veryqtperson
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #25

                    Monthly use fees are criminal

                    This cruel business world, everybody just wants to make money out of simple folks. What a criminals, demanding to be paid for their commercial product on their conditions, that is just outrageous.

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    3
                    • Kent-DorfmanK Kent-Dorfman

                      @JKSH said in I feel cheated.:

                      @Kent-Dorfman said in I feel cheated.:

                      the .net dev model is really the most fair one in the industry: buy once, and use that version forever without restrictions on redistributables.

                      What about the LGPL perpetually free license for Qt?

                      The OP was about commercial licensing fees. the LGPL is still a fuzzy area that any company concerned about litigation would do well to stay away from. You too easily get into the "derivative works" issue. ...and really, commercial use should incur some sort of fee; just not the WindRiver model of paying, paying,and paying some more, ad infinitum.

                      JKSHJ Offline
                      JKSHJ Offline
                      JKSH
                      Moderators
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #26

                      @Kent-Dorfman said in I feel cheated.:

                      The OP was about commercial licensing fees. the LGPL is still a fuzzy area that any company concerned about litigation would do well to stay away from. You too easily get into the "derivative works" issue.

                      The LGPL was created for the very purpose of allowing a free library to be used in a proprietary project.

                      It also caters very well to those who want to use the library but cannot or don't want to pay the commercial licensing fee (and this solves the problem of a fee that's too high, no?)

                      ...and really, commercial use should incur some sort of fee

                      I agree that if someone gains commercially from a library, they should reciprocate somehow. This reciprocation has traditionally been in the form of monetary payment (e.g. licensing fees) to the library's developers.

                      However, the dual-licensing model provides another option: To pay what you want (and pay however much or little you want) by contributing time, expertise, or code to the library's community/ecosystem. It doesn't have to be cash.

                      Qt Doc Search for browsers: forum.qt.io/topic/35616/web-browser-extension-for-improved-doc-searches

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      3
                      • P Offline
                        P Offline
                        papa1000
                        Banned
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #27
                        This post is deleted!
                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • Leonart13L Offline
                          Leonart13L Offline
                          Leonart13
                          wrote on last edited by Leonart13
                          #28

                          If you choose the second option, and it is not cash, what is it? Knowledge, advertising or something else. just don't understand. Can it be used on Chromebox for example?

                          JKSHJ 1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • Leonart13L Leonart13

                            If you choose the second option, and it is not cash, what is it? Knowledge, advertising or something else. just don't understand. Can it be used on Chromebox for example?

                            JKSHJ Offline
                            JKSHJ Offline
                            JKSH
                            Moderators
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #29

                            @Leonart13 said in I feel cheated.:

                            If you choose the second option, and it is not cash, what is it? Knowledge, advertising or something else. just don't understand

                            Like I said in my post, you can "pay" by contributing time, expertise, or code to the library's community/ecosystem. You could make publish your app under a Free and Open Source license to benefit others. You could submit patches for new features of bug fixes to Qt itself. You could give your time to teach others how to use Qt effectively.

                            Qt Doc Search for browsers: forum.qt.io/topic/35616/web-browser-extension-for-improved-doc-searches

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            2
                            • T Offline
                              T Offline
                              topworker
                              Banned
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #30
                              This post is deleted!
                              1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • Kent-DorfmanK Kent-Dorfman

                                I know it's troll bait, but I do have to agree with the OP about licensing fees. Monthly use fees are criminal. Really, for as much as I hate windoze, the .net dev model is really the most fair one in the industry: buy once, and use that version forever without restrictions on redistributables.

                                sierdzioS Offline
                                sierdzioS Offline
                                sierdzio
                                Moderators
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #31

                                @Kent-Dorfman said in I feel cheated.:

                                I know it's troll bait, but I do have to agree with the OP about licensing fees. Monthly use fees are criminal. Really, for as much as I hate windoze, the .net dev model is really the most fair one in the industry: buy once, and use that version forever without restrictions on redistributables.

                                +1. And Qt license used to work the same way in the past, too. Maybe it still does, I'm not sure.

                                (Z(:^

                                1 Reply Last reply
                                0

                                • Login

                                • Login or register to search.
                                • First post
                                  Last post
                                0
                                • Categories
                                • Recent
                                • Tags
                                • Popular
                                • Users
                                • Groups
                                • Search
                                • Get Qt Extensions
                                • Unsolved