Support Board
Date/Time: Sat, 23 Nov 2024 18:38:28 +0000
Future planned OS platforms for SC
View Count: 25325
| [2016-04-04 21:07:30] |
| User35525 - Posts: 181 |
|
Awesome post bjohnson777. I also started with Linux around year 2000 and prefer it. Before then it was AIX and IRIX. The reasons you listed (bugginess, security, privacy) are THE reasons I also don't use Windows, and won't use Apple OS X. I'm a system administrator, and cannot tell you how much time our users have wasted on problems due to M$; likewise, whenever I've been forced to manage M$ servers, time has been wasted there too. Linux is a great all-around OS, with adequate performance on the desktop, and a niche on servers; I sure don't see many Windows and OS X servers. People use Linux period (server and desktop) because it offers more freedom and choice, and can be customized easily when necessary. It might not look pretty by default (like SC), but it "just-works". Windows and OS X are black boxes, and as traders, we should appreciate that black boxes take choices away from end-users and obfuscate issues. There are plenty of Win/Mac/Linux software available, and I'd love to see that option for Sierra Chart. Not Java-based, but native apps. If the time comes that SC ever stops working in Wine, that will be the end of the line for SC and me. Date Time Of Last Edit: 2016-04-04 21:09:04
|
| [2016-04-04 22:08:09] |
| ganz - Posts: 1048 |
|
bjohnson777 Ganz is not the end all authority on linux
:)sure. i'm not. to wait until a graphical programming package and related OS is 100% stable and bug free
the new solution MUST be better. isn't it?For the power traders, good luck on building a high performance custom workstation..
Charts and power traders. Is it a joke? :)Will it bring in heavy power traders looking for performance (and privacy) that cannot be offered by win and mac? That's currently Ubuntu. Canonical has commercial support packages.
Ubuntu? so why just not windoze? :)NO OTHER charting package currently offers?
Investor RT has Mac version and it is good and advanced statistical app.But the clue here is not the app but a trading engine API. SC isn't a video game
Desktop users should feel comfortable and it is the key to be known as stable and fast....
so you've said a lot but you've said nothing>> /dev/null |
| [2016-04-04 22:27:15] |
| Yoda - Posts: 106 |
|
so you've said a lot but you've said nothing
>> /dev/null qanz, I'm not sure who from SC appointed you hall monitor, but last I checked these forms were open to all users to express their opinion. A healthy debate with lots of ideas is always good, but as I have told you previously, there is no need for you to be derogatory to other posters just because you don't agree with them or don't think they added value. If we all did that, this forum would become useless. I for one (and I'm not alone) agree 100% with bjohnson777 and believe that his post is valid and on topic. Date Time Of Last Edit: 2016-04-04 22:46:42
|
| [2016-04-04 22:59:56] |
| ganz - Posts: 1048 |
|
Yoda since this thread is opened for the discussion i will post it here when i feel need it just ignore my posts in case you feel ill to read it but it wold be very nice to see a solution from you or someone else in other case my posts are just the same as all of that pointless ones Date Time Of Last Edit: 2016-04-04 23:00:28
|
| [2016-04-05 01:02:37] |
| bjohnson777 (Brett Johnson) - Posts: 284 |
|
Ganz is trolling a bit. I don't see anything I need to directly respond to. A couple things I should have included: 1) I mentioned picking a development package that supports win, mac, linux, and bsd. A few of those will also support smart phones and tablets. The SC devs are on the right course cleaning up and modularizing code. This would potentially allow the same core code to be run on all devices. This would be a powerful offering. 2) While QT and WX may have their failings, they are also used by some major players listed on their web sites. Other smaller programming environments may stay around for now, but they may also crater in the future. That cratering would represent a massive loss of time. Thankfully the devs are openly against java and m$.net. When I was trading with Schwab, their program was m$.net based and had some serious problems. I still fail to comprehend how I could get a 400meg XML config file off 8 tabs and a couple dozen chart windows... that would choke their "cloud service" xeons. |
| [2016-04-05 08:08:47] |
| Cavalry3162 - Posts: 523 |
|
i am badly waiting for the linux version of sierra. using wine and the win version isnt gonna cut it, you get these fat window borders while you can disable them in windows.. thats just horrible. everything else i'd need to do i can do in Linux better that on Windows. Saying that Linux isnt ready for production is absurd. So please dont just listen to that one guy who is saying that. however, i am a bit concerned about this "directional flipping" of SC. It almost seems as they change their mind every week. is there no way to set up a plan and stick to it? thanks, Andreas |
| [2016-04-05 09:50:23] |
| ganz - Posts: 1048 |
|
dont just listen to that one guy who is saying that.
https://www.netmarketshare.com/os-market-share.aspx?qprid=9 https://www.netmarketshare.com/operating-system-market-share.aspx?qprid=10&qpcustomd=0 http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Feb-2016-Steam-Stats http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTc3NDk |
| [2016-04-05 15:26:10] |
| User35525 - Posts: 181 |
|
Good chart ganz: https://www.netmarketshare.com/os-market-share.aspx?qprid=9 Windows's total market share has apparently dropped 73% to 63% in just 12 months -- about 14% -- indicative of a decrease in desktop market across the board in favor of mobile platforms. Maybe a time will come when SC would need to work on a mobile device. The desktop trend for the same period (May 2015 to March 2016) shows that Windows generally has 90% of the desktop OS market share, with OS X and Linux sharing the remaining 10%: https://www.netmarketshare.com/operating-system-market-share.aspx?qprid=9&qpcustomb=0&qpct=4 It's been said that 90% of traders are losing money. Could it be that 90% of users have an unproductive OS? We chose SC because it's the best desktop trader software available; it's engineered the best and "just works", consuming few computing resources. It's no shocker that our astute trading community would similarly be choosy about our OS. Support said they'd take a poll here, which will show more than the general market share trends. I wonder what SC's market share is among traders, but frankly it doesn't even matter to me, because I know it's better than other platforms, and profitable traders (both professional and retail) esteem it highly. And a democratic poll isn't the best way in my opinion, because even SC agrees that Windows is pretty poorly engineered; if they want to continue to improve, they should offer higher-quality software (which means making it available to Linux and OS X). SC has a niche in "quality", which is diametrically opposed to "Windows". Frankly it's amazing that SC can be such a quality product, considering the sub-par OS and broker data feeds pushed to the masses. That's a testament to quality engineering. I'm frankly surprised that Linux has nearly 20% of the "alternative" market share! To be more specific, as of March 2016, Linux and OS X enjoy 9.55% of total market share; of that entire "alternative" portion (the 10% who aren't the clueless masses), Linux enjoys 18.64% of market share!! So, roughly 4x as many people choose OS X as Linux. Wow, kudos Linux! With all of Apple's marketing, you have 8/10 smart people choosing Apple, and the rest chose Linux! And what's even more cool, is that represents a 5.9% increase from May 2015. Maybe "smart" isn't the best word. As Windows has the broadest market share, there are bound to be many smart, profitable traders using it. Their life would be infinitely better if they ditched Windows, but hey, different strokes for different folks. Smart people do the right thing "eventually", and that's why SC ditched M$.net, ditched Java, ditched Windows registry, implemented DTC, put all their software in a single directory, engineered a quality graphics API, made things simple enough to work in Wine, listen to their customers, are considering OS X and Linux, and have considered QT and WX. I hope SC support "re-considers" wxWidgets. It's a good option for the future. Date Time Of Last Edit: 2016-04-05 15:39:10
|
| [2016-04-05 15:45:13] |
| ganz - Posts: 1048 |
|
User35525 Yes. Looks good. I prefer Linux since 1993 on everyday basis. Check this forum and that old SC Support forum for wine/linux - I shared some info in order to use SC on Linux. I'd like to use SC Linux version but there is the reality: Xwindows system is outdated and is not fully controlled by devs, QT5 has a lot of bugs (the info from QT5 devs). QT5 on Xwindows is/will be never as good as Windows at this moment of time. So we a trying to find the solution or we'd waiting for a new API on Wayland/Mir. I'm asking for suggestions to solve the problem but not precious opinions how linux cool is again and again - (i know it). so I see no trolling here on my side as i see no solution on yours. And it will be fine to vote and see % of SC users on Linux. :) Date Time Of Last Edit: 2016-04-05 15:50:24
|
| [2016-04-05 17:07:45] |
| User35525 - Posts: 181 |
|
ganz so I see no trolling here on my side as i see no solution on yours.
Ganz, I've enjoyed your previous posts, and have been trying to suggest solutions. :-) I started this thread and have suggested Linux, QT, wxWidgets, SFML, CEGUI, ImGui, MyGui, and nim in various posts. The new Nim language (has been around for 8 years) can compile to C, C++, Objective C, and JavaScript, so could help SC target mobile, web, and cloud in the future. There are in-progress nim wrappers for wxWidgets and Vulkan: https://github.com/Araq/wxnim https://github.com/nimious/vulkan I'd love to see SC rewritten in nim, and ACSIL use it. Nim is cross-platform, high-level, and efficient, and is a good replacement for C++. Until then, I'm learning enough to write my own private platform that uses nim, wxWidgets, and CSFML/SDL. Time will tell what happens. I'm enjoying SC for now, but am curious about the future. As my platform progresses, I'll just need a quality data feed. For now, I'm getting data+execution from SC. Date Time Of Last Edit: 2016-04-05 17:08:45
|
| [2016-04-05 17:17:42] |
| ganz - Posts: 1048 |
|
User35525 I've enjoyed your previous posts
I meant there was the discussion a years ago or so.and have suggested Linux, QT, wxWidgets, SFML, CEGUI, ImGui, MyGui, and nim in various posts.
so let's begin from the starting point ...what is the definite reason to suggest it? have you got any side by side tests in terms of 2d and fonts rendering performance (Win vs $SUBJ)? thnx. |
| [2016-04-05 18:15:06] |
| User35525 - Posts: 181 |
|
I started this thread because I was concerned about SC consuming future development by forking their Windows codebase to create an OS X version built with a completely different API. They're already busy enough to basically worry about two products. If they adopt other OS platforms, as they've said they're planning to, I hope they pick a cross-platform API. I don't care how they do that (wxWidgets, roll their own wrappers, etc) but I hope they get it done, so they don't make unnecessary work for themselves. If they can target Linux, then I'll be even happier, as I can ditch Wine. Date Time Of Last Edit: 2016-04-05 18:15:46
|
| [2016-04-05 19:13:04] |
| bjohnson777 (Brett Johnson) - Posts: 284 |
|
User35525 nicely covers the OS market share charts. I'll point out a few extra things. Winxp still being so high in the list tends to point to a corporate usage that is unwilling to go to new win versions... probably for reasons already mentioned. That is not a positive for M$, especially after winxp was EOL'd and not getting any security updates. There seems to be a high resistance to win8 and win10 in the corporate world. In big corporations, the average user/employee has no say about what computer and OS is being used. M$ still has a monopoly in that market and will skew the statistics. Ganz using video game and PornHub articles in an argument is a kinda desperate. Andreas reinforces the common argument of M$ quality concerns. Making a linux (or other OS) version of SC shouldn't really be looked at as porting and maintaining a separate branch. It should be looked at as a global upgrade that adds multiple platforms as part of the upgrade. Getting an SC version on one of the open unix platforms would be a major boost to reliability and perception. Many of the high dollar traders won't put up with M$ defecation and rot because it isn't cost effective for so much time to be wasted. Those traders may have the admin skills required to set up an open unix on their own. If not, they have the money to pay someone and take it as a business expense. One reason I keep mentioning the BSD's is that they are used by pretty hard core unix admins. The BSD's ship much lighter weight than the consumer linux variants. They tend to be more secure than linux. Since Mac is a BSD variant, getting SC on BSD shouldn't be much extra work. Eventually I envision hosted headless versions of SC trading robots similar to what MetaQuotes does with their ExpertAdvisors. Having a BSD version of that clearly states: "We don't mess around. If you want a serious and professional option, it's right here." Since QT gets bashed the most, let's use it in an example analysis. Yes, there are some reported bugs. The main questions should be: * Are these bugs in the main core or peripherals? * Are these bugs being actively fixed? * What is the expected fix time? * Are the peripheral bugs relevant to a charting package? * Are there simple workarounds for the bugs related to a charting package? * Since QT is open sourced, is it worth the SC dev's time to fix some of the bugs and submit patchs? * Given all this, are the very wide cross platform gains enough to offset the time working around the bugs? These questions then get asked of WX and the others User35525 listed. These questions can also be asked against the various win versions (excluding the last two). Ganz: "Xwindows system is outdated and is not fully controlled by devs"
Your pro M$ argument about this statement hardly holds water. This is just you whining again about not being able to play every video game under the sun on X11. The X11 system in general was designed for networking and multi-user environments on mainframes. While it has some quirks, it is hardly outdated. The general accelerated driver interfaces are more than enough for a charting package. The real bottleneck in a charting package isn't drawing lines on the screen, it's doing the calculations for all those lines in an efficient manner. Some indicators have very heavy calculations per bar. It's something I run up against constantly in my own tool kit DLL and my own scratch pad linux program.Ganz: "Xwindows system is outdated and is not fully controlled by devs"
News flash: THE SC DEV'S DO NOT CONTROL M$ OR APPLE! If there is a problem, they go to the back of the line like everyone else. Linux and BSD X11 is open sourced. If the SC dev's really wanted to, they could fork their own version and control it to their heart's delight. I don't see the need for this, though.A quick add to something I said previously: Releasing your own commercial versions of win and osx without absurd licenses can get you thrown in jail. Nobody cares about releasing your own version/flavor/tweaks of the open unix's. A custom stripped down linux live CD that could also be used as an installer disc could have basic security settings and performance tweaks already in place. This alleviates the need for the end user to be admin level saavy. |
| [2016-04-06 17:42:53] |
| User754985 - Posts: 109 |
|
From a business perspective,there a two distinct SC user groups - each with its own needs. For Algo traders - a "taken-for-granted" approach is a server in a DC,close to the broker,only running SC. A WinServer in a minimal install running such an efficient software like SC is very stable. What "rot",driver issues,etc?? With correct combination of hosting provider/NIC/OS settings,CPU, latency can be improved, but probably running under linux can reduce it further (1-2ms?? i am not a big expert in linux). OS overhead difference would be negligible compared to other issues related to network congestion,provider,broker systems, etc.. Going with linux will also save appr.$25/month in WinServer rent costs (if renting a dedicated server). Advanced algo traders would gladly max SC on Linux. But is there a real problem/need or would improvement be significant? I do not think so. For the "charting package" users - I could hardly imagine that many people would have/add a dedicated linux "trading" computer at home side-by-side with their regular Windows/OSx' one (and plain switching en mass is ruled out). Trading manually from charts from home is latency-independent by default(otherwise one would rent a server near broker) and any irregularities in operation can be immediately addressed. SC Core users,those who see and appreciate the difference in reliability and efficiency(which comes from experience with other software) are usually knowledgeable enough and understand the priority and discipline to maintain their trading Windows computers lean and stable. That's the small "cost of doing business", like in any other profession. So, stable SC under Win on Parallels/VMFusion/VirtualBox should be good enough for "discretionary trading Mac users". If they are trading by now, they most probably already have this set-up - since no other popular trading platform is on Mac. I really doubt SC would gain userbase being 'Mac-Native". It would be odd if having a Mac would drive choice of a trading platform for "semi-professional'. It might make more business sense to just improve compatibility/stability under those boxes (if there are any issues). |
| [2016-04-07 01:56:04] |
| bjohnson777 (Brett Johnson) - Posts: 284 |
|
User754985: It's not really about getting that extra 1ms performance. This is a long thread, so I'll throw out a quick summary. The linux/unix argument is about dumping bloat, long term stability, privacy, security, and getting away from poor M$ engineering that continually plagues a monopolistic company that has $10's of billions in cash laying around in the bank that refuses to address real world problems about its products. It's about switching to an OS platform that "just works" as advertised. Privacy: Scroll up and see the altervista/win10 arguments. It also seems like just about any win program I install nowadays wants to hijack my browser settings and install spyware. It's not just about win10. Smart phones and tablets also have privacy issues, but SC isn't even close to being on those yet. Security: Last night I rolled back my win7 install to a clean backup made 10 months ago. First thing I do is regular upgrades in preparation for a new clean backup. Win7 updates took 3 damn hours for 50 critical security updates (M$ quit naming these in the update window because they're just about all "take over your system" fixes) and 20 optional updates totaling about 88megs (hidden slowness jab intended). People who claim there's nothing wrong with M$ don't have enough experience to back up that statement. Yes, all OS's find periodic "take over your system" type bugs, but not at the M$ frequency. Yes, all OS's have some kind of viruses, but unix viruses are much rarer because of the designed in multi-user security model that dates back to the early 1970's (and is continually updated). The M$ security model hasn't changed much from the days of DOS. Drivers: Since I rarely use my dual boot back into win7, I keep forgetting about the win7 graphics chip driver problems. It doesn't always clean up the screen when it is supposed to. Moving another window over the trash will repaint the affected areas. I do not have that problem with the generic built in linux driver. This is a Radeon, so it's not like it's an unknown chip from an unknown company. Repaint problems are usually sloppy driver implementations. Win is well known for sloppiness. Stability: I can run my linux systems well over a year, up, running, without reboot, and without major problems with no stop in sight. I've done it several times with my home systems and rack servers. My best uptime was 807 days before being taken down for over due upgrades... The only real reason I'd reboot is for a kernel upgrade (I do a few custom compiles a year) and critical security updates that I want to make sure the old library got dumped. I've yet to see any M$ install (including server) that can compete with that. Leave a regularly used win server up and running for that long and it will start cratering from run time “rot”. I detail my various OS stances back in post 49: Future planned OS platforms for SC | Post: 86478 If you're taking cues from ganz, don't. Nearly everything he has said about linux is misguided and wrong. I say that from real world professional experience gained the hard way from being down in the admin trenches... as do some others here. There is a HUGE difference between the M$ world and unix world. |
| [2016-04-07 03:56:49] |
| User754985 - Posts: 109 |
|
bjohnson777: you are arguing about benefits of linux vs. windows, from the perspective of a puristic sys admin (and you are probably right). My POV was about making a business decision for SC. |
| [2016-04-07 05:35:08] |
| Cavalry3162 - Posts: 523 |
|
User754985, please let SC do their own business decision and just bring up your user POV.
Date Time Of Last Edit: 2016-04-07 05:35:31
|
| [2016-04-07 13:02:56] |
| ganz - Posts: 1048 |
|
User754985 +1 |
| [2016-04-07 20:00:59] |
| bjohnson777 (Brett Johnson) - Posts: 284 |
|
User754985: You tell me that I'm probably right but then I'm wrong? Your POV seems to be from hosted scalping bots. That's not what SC is. Most of the retail trading robots don't do this and that is a small trading market. Scalping bots are not what this conversation is about. Let's simplify this with a car comparison. M$: medium engine power, poor fuel economy, high pollution, bad design that's supposed to fit all, breaks down a lot, medium initial investment (often repeated) with high maintenance costs. unix: high engine power, excellent fuel economy, low pollution, multiple designs for multiple needs, works out of the box, low initial investment (open source variants) with low maintenance costs. Which would you rather pay for out of your own wallet? There's nothing puristic about it. |
| [2016-10-27 05:33:23] |
| WYFB - Posts: 9 |
|
Just to add some spice to the conversation! Linux distro's are all moving to wayland from X11. Fedora and ubuntu already package it for their platforms. Also, Flatpak - the future of application distribution flatpak.org/ The days of chasing multiple Linux distributions are over. Standalone apps for Linux are here! Flatpak brings standalone apps to Linux - Fedora Magazine https://fedoramagazine.org/introducing-flatpak/ Jun 21, 2016 - Flatpak brings standalone apps to Linux .. 'Flatpak' Is The Universal Linux Packaging Format That Puts 'Security ... www.tomshardware.com/.../flatpack-universal-linux-packaging-form... Tom's Hardware Jun 22, 2016 - The recently released "flatpak" Linux packaging format promises to make security its main priority, while also making Linux apps as universal ... In considering Linux in the near future, it would be wise to look at the near/medium term future of where these distro's are also heading. |
| [2016-11-15 21:53:13] |
| ganz - Posts: 1048 |
|
WYFB Linux distro's are all moving to wayland from X11.
... in 5 years or so :)"flatpak" Linux packaging format promises to make security its main priority
will it work on Win10 as fast as an WinAPI/Net app? :)The days of chasing multiple Linux distributions are over.
nope.Flatpak - the future of application distribution
nope.In considering Linux in the near future
so .... nope. :)
|
| [2017-03-01 15:52:15] |
| ganz - Posts: 1048 |
|
bjohnson777 (Brett Johnson) If you're taking cues from ganz, don't. Nearly everything he has said about linux is misguided and wrong. I say that from real world professional experience gained the hard way from being down in the admin trenches... as do some others here. There is a HUGE difference between the M$ world and unix world.
bla ... bla ...bla http://phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=CVE-2017-2624-Xorg lol :) |
| [2017-12-03 22:52:56] |
| BeardPower - Posts: 51 |
|
Hi, I'm new to SC, so pardon me for reviving this thread. First and foremost, regardless of the framework, you will use in the end, there will be dragons. If you want to avoid them nearly wholly, you have to roll your own UI engine, as many developers did for their (audio) software. Are there some (useful) UI frameworks out there? Sure. Are they perfect? No, and maybe there will never be one. There are three possibilities: - use the native frameworks on each platform - use a software renderer and roll your own UI engine - use a (hardware accelerated) UI engine, which is not perfect I hope this little overview helps you in your decision making. Let's start with the central questions: - Do you want/need a C++ framework or is even a framework written in C (or a different language) okay? - Do you want/need native widgets, near-native widgets or don't you care about that? - Do you want/need to use an immediate mode or retained mode UI? - Do you want/need theming support? - Do you want/need to use vector graphics? - Do you want/need to use scripting? - Do you want/need to use different rendering backends and the latest and greatest hardware acceleration? As I read through the forum, I have the impression, that the SC team does not care about a native widget feature. If they did, they would not be that resistant to incorporate the newest, fancy flat designs the major OSs are heading. :) But, let's assume for now, that they do care. The major frameworks used, as already mentioned in previous posts, are Qt and wxWidgets. Both are not only UI frameworks, but cross-platform development frameworks, which means, that they come with a lot of features, bells and whistles (aka bloat), which SC does not need or does not even want to use, as they already implemented their own custom containers, data structures and so on. So SC only needs a pure UI engine. There are also multimedia frameworks like JUCE, SDL, SFML and Kore. Those handle graphics context creation, input handling, drawing primitives, asset rendering and much more. The difference is the number of platforms they support, features and the programming language. SDL is C, JUCE, SFML and Kore is C++, with Kore supporting the most backends (from Windows to Android to Game consoles; DX12, OpenGL (ES), Vulkan, Metal, you name it). Last, but not least, there are pure UI libraries like FLTK and NanoSVG. Qt: - C++ - near-native widgets (they do try to emulate the native widgets as best as they can, but they will never look 1:1) - retained mode - theming support - vector graphics support - scripting support - hardware acceleration based on various APIs * does not use GTK+ on Linux * licensed under different licenses (commercial and LGPL) wxWidgets: - C++ - native widgets, so they will look 1:1 - retained mode - theming support - no vector graphics support - scripting support - hardware acceleration based on OpenGL * uses GTK+ on Linux * licensed under the wxWindows Library Licence A major issue with both is that they are very bloated and eat up a lot of resources, inflate the executable in size to a vast extent and, especially Qt adds some licensing headaches. When using Open Source software, you always have to deal with licenses, which are maybe incompatible with your proprietary software, like the GPL. E.g., Qt comes with two licenses: commercial and Open Source (LGPL). When using the latter, you need to statically link the Qt libs, which maybe is something you do not want, so you need to go with the former, which adds significant costs for the developer. SDL/SFML/Kore (there is also Kha, which is implemented in Haxe and using Kore for the native backends): - C/C++ - all are just multimedia libraries, which use hardware acceleration where they can - immediate mode - not message/event based; only rendering the complete scene with x frames per second (think of a video game) - hardware acceleration based on OpenGL and other APIs (Kore supports any graphics lib; DX11/DX12, OpenGL (ES), Metal, Vulkan, etc.) - support any major platform and beyond * no dependencies (fast, small and light) * you have to use a third party UI engine/library or you draw the widgets yourself * all are licensed under the zlib/png license https://www.libsdl.org https://www.sfml-dev.org http://kha.tech / https://github.com/Kode/Kore JUCE: - C++ - non-native widgets, so they will never look 1:1 - retained mode - theming support - vector graphics support - scripting support - hardware acceleration based on OpenGL * licensed under different licenses (commercial and GPL) * it was originally developed for implementing music applications, so it also offers a great UI module https://juce.com / https://juce.com/features FLTK: - C++ - non-native widgets, so they will never look 1:1 - retained mode - no theming support - no vector graphic support - no scripting support - hardware acceleration based on OpenGL * no dependencies (fast, small and light; it only adds a few hundred kb to your executable) * licensed under the LPGL with static linking clause http://www.fltk.org NanoVG: - C - non-native widgets, so they will never look 1:1 - immediate mode - no theming support - vector graphics support (as the lib is a vector graphics rendering library base on OpenGL) - no scripting support - hardware acceleration based on OpenGL (there are also ports to other graphics APIs) * no dependencies (fast, small and light) * you have to use a third party UI engine/library or you draw the widgets yourself * licensed under the zlib license https://github.com/memononen/nanovg Alternatives, which are Open Source, have a permissive license and are tailored to be fast, have a small footprint and are doing just one thing: UI Nevertheless, the Open Source licenses maybe are incompatible with your proprietary software! There are also other UI libraries, which just call the native widget functions of the OS to draw them, but either they are missing out on some OS (Linux or macOS), are in flux, unstable or immature. Some libs, which could also be interesting for you: - libGUI (just calling the native functions of the OS) https://github.com/andlabs/libui - EFL (used by Samsung for their TizenOS) https://www.enlightenment.org/about-efl Godspeed to you for bringing a native SC to other platforms! Date Time Of Last Edit: 2017-12-03 22:56:00
|
| [2017-12-04 02:31:07] |
| |
|
Currently Sierra Chart uses MFC and the Windows API. We do not plan to use QT or wxWidgets. These were decided against about two years ago. They simply have too much of a performance impact, and user interface change to be acceptable. Plus we would have to deal with all of the problems and bugs with them which is absolutely out of the question. Neither us or the users would have any tolerance for that. We are in the process of developing our own classes that wrap the Windows SDK and remove MFC. Graphics will still use the Windows GDI wrapped in a single class. All of this will be completed in 2018. Therefore, porting to another operating system will be relatively easy because it will just be a small set of functions and classes that have to be updated for the other OS. Sierra Chart Support - Engineering Level Your definitive source for support. Other responses are from users. Try to keep your questions brief and to the point. Be aware of support policy: https://www.sierrachart.com/index.php?l=PostingInformation.php#GeneralInformation For the most reliable, advanced, and zero cost futures order routing, *change* to the Teton service: Sierra Chart Teton Futures Order Routing |
| [2017-12-19 20:00:59] |
| ganz - Posts: 1048 |
|
fyi: https://blogs.gnome.org/uraeus/2017/12/19/why-hasnt-the-year-of-the-linux-desktop-happened-yet/
|
| [2017-12-20 21:43:14] |
| ganz - Posts: 1048 |
|
fyi: https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/2402 http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2017/12/ubuntu-corrupting-lenovo-laptop-bios so NEVER use unstable flower distros and non-LTS kernels the only stable solution is RHEL/CentOS and/or Debian Stable/oldSTable ones. |
To post a message in this thread, you need to log in with your Sierra Chart account: