Making the Qt brand remarkable or provide more useful features?



  • I believe you already know Qt change their logo, if not, please go to the QBlog.

    I post my comments at here, because the QBlog do not show them at all(I don't know the reasons).

    There is nothing wrong about changing the logo, but other than changing logo and expect this could bring you more money, why not spend more resource to develop more useful features to the developers?

    Qt is amazing on desktops and embedded linux, but not so good on mobile. Qt5 still do not support
    

    1 : advertisement
    2 : notification
    3 : facebook
    4 : analytics(ex : google, flurry)
    5 : more build in widgets, this include QWidget and QQuick2
    6 : and so on

    Who are your customers?app consumers?Apparently no, they are developers.We developers do not care about your logo is 3D,2D or 100D, we want more useful features.Rather than rebranding your mark, please spend more resource to heard the voices of those developers, what are they want?Ask about your brilliant developers, what are the most essential features needed by Qt5?

    If you want to know what are the developers needed most, look at the plug-in of v-play. They keep their best to implement the many important features Qt5 still lacking(for moblie). Put yourself in the shoes of the developers, what makes you more excited?

    case A : The logo change, it become more beautiful
    case B : We offer you lot of useful features like v-play provided, now you do not need to scratch your head, struggle how to
    implement them on different platform anymore and you a lot of times.

    Think about another situation. What would you advertise Qt to the developers.

    “Qt can develop cross platform app, write once compile anywhere, but it do not support critical features of mobile like advertisement,
    analytics, facebook integration, notification and so on, but we do have a brand new 2D logo”.

    Or

    “Qt can develop cross platform app, write once compile anywhere, it is a very mature library on desktop and support
    every critical features of mobile
    , like advertisement, analytics, facebook integration, notification and so on”.

    Which one are more useful and give developers better image, greater interest on Qt tech? If you, Qt company believe we
    developers care about your logo more than useful features(and stable software), this is a serious problem,
    because you already missed your way.

    Hired more good developers, heard the voices of your porgrammers and the voices of the community, your customers.
    Don’t close your door and imagine a brand new logo could change things, developers care about the quality of the libraries but not your logo, which means stability, more features, ease to use API and performance.Only developers know what developers needed most, not PR or those mangament people without any or limited background of tech

    If a small company like v-play able to provide the developers so many useful features of mobile they want to
    have and keep asking on Qt company, how could a much bigger, richer company like Qt cannot make it? Again,
    please do not shut your door anymore, open your mind and heard the voices of the developers,
    what are we(developers) really need.

    If v-play can do it, I believe Qt company can make it even better.
    Before you change your logo, you need to change your development strategy.

    Anyone agree with me?Or my words making no sense?Please give me some input, since this is a forum for developers, I think it is a good place to gather their opinions.



  • I think You're missing most important part here... money. How much was spend on re-brand? I know that some companies do pay big bucks for simple stuff like new slogan / logo etc. and if that's the case here that I can say that QtCompany did overpay. In my opinion this could be easily achieved by one designer over night, but lets be more realistic and assume one month worth of work was put into this, plus changes to WWW / forums etc. so lets extend this to two months and i.e. 3 web developers plus one designer. This give two months worth of work for 3-4 workers.

    I honestly doubt that within that time solid API could be written for half of features that was pointed out. Also web API do change from time to time so maintenance is also a problem. Imagine situation when commercial customer purchased Qt license and all of sudden i.e. advertisement or analytic modules stops working due to change of API and Qt has no control over this what so ever - this is a risk.

    Don't get me wrong, I would love to see those features working, even with bugs.


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to Qt Forum was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.