[vtkusers] VTK and QT on Windows2000

[Charl P. Botha]

On Wed, Apr 17, 2002 at 11:00:11AM -0400, Andy Cedilnik wrote:
> On Wed, 2002-04-17 at 10:37, Goodwin Lawlor wrote:
> > While there's a thread going on QT - just a quick question: What are the
> > pros and cons of QT v's FLTK for building VTK apps?
> > 
> > I notice ITK uses FLTK but there seems to be more noise on this list about
> > QT...
> 
> Licensing is an major difference. FLTK is LGPL while QT is GPL or QPL.
> So, for FLTK you application can be any license you want (correct me if
> I am wrong), while for QT your application either needs to be GPL or
> you need to buy developers license.
> 
> FLTK is much lower weight than QT, which is good for space constrained
> applications. QT however has much better widgets and much more
> functionality. 
> 
> QT needs preprocessing, while FLTK (if you do not use fluid) you don't.
> 
> QT looks better (IMHO).

I agree with Andy on every point.  I would like to make it clear that if one
develops an application with QT free, one is forced to release the
application under the GPL.  Please see the licensing FAQ on trolltech's
page.  For this reason I use FLTK for my VTK/C++ creations.  Alternatively,
I could pay a few hundred $s for a developer's license.  I have nothing
against QT, but when on a tight budget, one tends to take these things into
account.

In addition, the simplicity of FLTK makes understanding it a cinch.  Digging
into the code to clear up some point hardly ever takes more than a few
minutes.  The programmer's documentation is also quite sufficient.

-- 
charl p. botha http://cpbotha.net/ http://visualisation.tudelft.nl/