More Reasons For Not Using Web

The Qt Company published a guest post “Qt QML v HTML5 – a practical comparison” and a whitepaper by the Austrian Qt consultancy Sequality. Sequality had one developer writing a simplified application for controlling a bottling plant first with Qt and then with Web (AngularJS). The developer had 160 hours for each implementation. The application had to run on a tablet, a PC and a Raspberry Pi 3 with different resolutions.

Here are my favourite findings of Sequality’s experiment.

  • The developer finished considerably more functionality with QML than with Web.
  • Higher efforts to use OpenGL acceleration for Web: “Enabling GPU rendering on Chromium […] doesn’t fix the HTML5 demo’s performance problem. In fact, the CPU is utilized even more, which leads to overheating.”
  • Higher efforts for testing Web: “The fact that HTML5 applications can be executed on a number of platforms – and a number of browser engines on each platform – multiplies the testing time correspondingly.”
  • Availability of a certain Web technology in 10 years: “Modern HTML5-based applications that use frameworks like AngularJS are relatively new and undergo changes from year to year – a valid question is whether AngularJS (or any other currently trendy Javascript-library) will still be a relevant HTML5-technology in 10 years.”

Qt vs. Web (Part 1): Three Cautionary Stories About Web

Let XXX be a manufacturer of printers, TVs, set-top boxes (STBs) or home appliances. XXX must decide whether to use Qt or Web for the HMI of their devices. I’ll start my series “Qt vs. Web” with three cautionary stories about using Web technologies. Facebook moved from Web to native. Netflix built its own rendering engine and JavaScript HMI library to continue with Web technologies. Although LG’s smart TVs run on WebOS, the built-in and brand-critical TV UI uses QML and Qt. Third-party apps use standard Web technologies.
Continue reading