Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- misc:gui_frameworks_for_linux [2017/05/13 00:53] – mithat
+++ misc:gui_frameworks_for_linux [2017/05/29 19:28] (current) – [wxPython (including Phoenix)] mithat
@@ Line 4: / Line 4: @@
 ==== Tkinter ====
-TL;DR
-  * Perhaps ok for small, one-file utility apps.
+**TL;DR**: Perhaps OK for small, one-file utility apps
 Pros
@@ Line 63: / Line 63: @@
 ==== PyGObject ====
-TL;DR
-  * Perhaps best option for Linux-centric apps---unless/until some GNOME heaviness/goofiness happens.
+**TL;DR**: Perhaps best option for Linux-centric apps---unless/until some GNOME goofiness happens.
 Replacing PyGTK.
@@ Line 87: / Line 87: @@
 ==== wxPython (including Phoenix)===
-TL;DR
+**TL;DR**: Perhaps best option for multi-platform proprietary apps that have zero budget.
-  * Perhaps best option for multi-platform proprietary apps that have zero budget.
 Pros
@@ Line 112: / Line 111: @@
 ==== PyQt ====
-TL;DR
-  * Perhaps best option for multi-platform FOSS apps and for proprietary apps that have a $500 tools budget.
+**TL;DR**: Perhaps best option for multi-platform FOSS apps and for proprietary apps that have a $500 tools budget.
 Pros
@@ Line 128: / Line 127: @@
 ==== PySide ====
-TL;DR: Abandonware? If not now, later?
+**TL;DR**: Abandonware? If not now, later?
 Classic PySide was released in 2015 and works with Qt 4.8 framework. PySide2, which supports Qt5, is being developed, but it's not production ready, seems to be moving slowly, and doesn't seem to have much mindshare.
 ==== Kivy ====
-TL;DR
+**TL;DR**: Not really a desktop application framework. Well-suited to touch interfaces.
-  * Interesting, but not really a desktop application framework. Good for touch interfaces.
 Pros