You can write it in Python is you're scared of C++. QML let's you inline JavaScript, or call it from a file.
Qt comes with 5, 000 classes for every situation to back you up, before you need to go to the community.
I think that a lot of developers are simply scared of it, without just cause. They believe rumours, without ever actually trying to use the thing. They don't evaluate first.
C++ is harder to use, so developers are more expensive to hire.
QT is either GPL which is viral i.e. you have to open source your software under the same license, or quite expensive. Even if you’re working on open source GPL software, free QT edition has less features, esp. on embedded.
Technically, LGPL option allows using in proprietary software. Practically, static linking is often better e.g. makes executable much smaller. And even with dynamic linking, see this note from https://blog.qt.io/blog/2009/11/30/qt-making-the-right-licen...
> If you are shipping an executable, you must include any data and utility programs needed for reproducing the executable (i.e. must provide components needed to recompile with a new version of the library) unless such data and utility programs are normally distributed with the major components of the operating system on which the executable runs
For developers of proprietary software, flutter’s BSD 3 clause license is way easier to comply.
Because qt UI is in all ways worse than what browsers can already do. All qt does for displaying web pages is it embeds chromium, same as electron does. Trying to tie c++ to that is shooting yourself in the foot if you can just use node, which electron does.
> All qt does for displaying web pages is it embeds chromium, same as electron does.
It doesn't:
> WebView is a component for displaying web content which is implemented using native APIs on the platforms where this is available, thus it does not necessarily require including a full web browser stack as part of the application. [0]
Webview is unreliable and not used by electron apps for a reason, you cannot control anything about it. You're stuck with whatever native browser the system has. That's alright for basic things, but hardely what you'd sanely deploy tech that relies upon modern js.
And even if that was the reason, your response didn't make anyone any smarter. How is it bad? Which you can't answer, because your only line of reasoning is that it has to be bad, because it's not as popular.