I think Qt needs to rethink their licensing model.
Currently you either pay them a LOT of money for everything they offer, or you don't pay them anything and just use the LGPL version (when that's possible).
It seems their current strategy is to milk the users that can't use the LGPL users as much as possible,
Additionally they try to convince as many people as possible that the LGPL version won't work for them, by having very confusing licensing terms on their website.
My company currently uses the LGPL version of Qt, and would gladly pay for the commercial one. In the Trolltech and Nokia days they actually did pay for it, but the prices are no longer affordable us.
So we are stuck with the LGPL version for now.
We don't need a trillion supported platforms and tons of features. We have a Desktop App that runs on Windows (and in the future maybe Linux), and we use the old Widget stuff (currently no QML).
We would gladly pay for the features we need, but not the ridicolous amound they are charging now.
It seems their current strategy is to milk the users that can't use the LGPL users as much as possible, Additionally they try to convince as many people as possible that the LGPL version won't work for them, by having very confusing licensing terms on their website.
My company currently uses the LGPL version of Qt, and would gladly pay for the commercial one. In the Trolltech and Nokia days they actually did pay for it, but the prices are no longer affordable us. So we are stuck with the LGPL version for now.
We don't need a trillion supported platforms and tons of features. We have a Desktop App that runs on Windows (and in the future maybe Linux), and we use the old Widget stuff (currently no QML). We would gladly pay for the features we need, but not the ridicolous amound they are charging now.