Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
The Almighty Buck

Nokia Buys Trolltech 311

egil writes "Trolltech announced this morning (CET) that they have accepted a bid from Nokia to buy the entire company. The bid was for 16 NOK per share, which values the company at an equivalent of approximately 150 million USD. The stock currently trades at 15.70 on the Oslo stack exchange, up from around 10 on Friday. The offer has already been accepted by the Trolltech BOD."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Nokia Buys Trolltech

Comments Filter:
  • by Per Wigren ( 5315 ) on Monday January 28, 2008 @09:38AM (#22207228) Homepage
    I really hope that the KDE Qt Free Foundation [kde.org] agreements are valid because I have a gut feeling that they will be tested in court soon...
  • by morgan_greywolf ( 835522 ) on Monday January 28, 2008 @09:46AM (#22207282) Homepage Journal

    I really hope that the KDE Qt Free Foundation agreements are valid because I have a gut feeling that they will be tested in court soon...
    Interesting. TFA states that Nokia plans to continue to develop Qt, though, and will continue to offer it under both open source and commercial licenses, just as things are now.

    I assume that means as long as Nokia continues to develop Qt in the same manner (keeping Qt Free available for KDE), then the agreement doesn't apply.

  • Qtopia? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Jack Malmostoso ( 899729 ) on Monday January 28, 2008 @09:52AM (#22207338)
    What will happen to Qtopia?
    If Nokia switches to full-linux-ahead with it, it would really be sweet, although we'd see a nice internal fight between the existing GTK stack and the new qt one :)
  • by kripkenstein ( 913150 ) on Monday January 28, 2008 @09:56AM (#22207378) Homepage

    In case anyone can feel the panic setting in while thoughts of closed source qt libraries swirl around their heads it may be as well to remind people that Troll Tech and KDE have this all worked out nicely already.

    The KDE Foundation takes the code if qt is ever released closed. Not sure if it covers a buy out situation but I'm pretty sure it does.
    First, Qt is already released closed-source: it has several licenses, one of which is closed, others of which are GPL2, GPL3. But I presume you meant that they stop the FOSS releases. Then yes, you are essentially correct: if Qt stops being released in an (among others) FOSS license, it reverts to being BSD. However, this far from solves the issue. Qt may continue to be released as FOSS, but its development may stagnate, if e.g. Nokia's priorities are more towards mobile devices and less on desktop Linux (which makes sense, given what products Nokia specializes in). In that case, KDE will suffer, and little can be done.

    You might say, "but then the community can fork Qt." Yes, a fork is possible. The fork will then be GPL2/GPL3, which is somewhat problematic, in that in the future we will never be able to write KDE apps in GPL4, should such be released (and I presume that Microsoft's attacks on FOSS will necessitate a GPL4 eventually, just as Microsoft's deal with Novell necessitated certain clauses in the GPL3). That is, yes, we can fork Qt, but we cannot add licenses to it (only the copyright holders can, and Nokia is now that entity). Thankfully Trolltech helped out KDE this time by letting Qt be GPL3, but next time, we have no assurances whatsoever.
  • by Svartalf ( 2997 ) on Monday January 28, 2008 @10:02AM (#22207426) Homepage
    It only kicks in if the new owners choose to take Qt private or do something like dissolve the now new division of their
    company. It forces a fork of licensing, etc. making a BSD licensed version possible at the KDE Qt Free Foundation's
    discretion under those circumstances. At that point you'd have a version of Qt that was GPLed, BSD, and the completely
    closed license version that the new owners had.

    In this case, I doubt that Nokia would take it private- they know what Open Source is and seem to have few issues
    with it in general. I'm not quite sure why they're picking Trolltech and Qt up, to be honest, considering how
    well Maemo and Hildon works on things like their N770/N800/N810, but perhaps they're picking them up because they
    want another option choice on the UI and applications suite front.
  • by jone1941 ( 516270 ) <jone1941@nOsPAM.gmail.com> on Monday January 28, 2008 @10:03AM (#22207440)
    Until now Nokia has been using Gnome/GTK libraries for their open source products (namely the N Series PDA devices). I'm sure they have invested a fairly large amount of time and energy building out the GTK port of webkit and writing the entire UI of these devices running on GTK. Can anyone shed some light on exactly what implications this has for the internal Gnome development efforts? There is at least one Nokia developer on the Gnome Board of Directors and Nokia is a corporate sponsor to the Gnome Project. Overall this seems like a very strange move for them.

    The only obvious reason I can see for this decision is that Nokia's Mobile OS technology has been gradually falling behind for a number of years. Buying Trolltech gives them all the tech that went into the Zaurus devices and Trolltech's mobile environment (as seen on the green phone).

    I assume that over the next day or two an official announcement will be made about Nokia's intentions for the Qt licensing. In the mean time we all have to sit on our hands and anticipate a fork. On one hand this is a bit of a slap in the face to the Gnome/GTK teams that seems to imply Qt was the superior technology. On the other hand it also justifies Gnome's existence as a project to begin with, there have always been concerns that Trolltech would take it's ball and go home. KDE is extremely dependent on paid developers at Trolltech for much of the code that is written, it will also be interesting to see if Nokia ends up becoming a major sponsor to both projects. Only time will tell.
  • Re:Lovely (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Slashidiot ( 1179447 ) on Monday January 28, 2008 @10:04AM (#22207452) Journal
    The annoying tune was actually stolen from a relatively famous late 19th century spanish composer and guitar player, Francisco Tarrega [wikipedia.org]. It's part of the Gran Vals. Afterwards Nokia claimed it as a sound trademark...
    It was a shock to find out, while being in an auditorium, listening to a beautiful classic guitar concert, and suddenly a phone rang from the guitar... or so it seemed.
  • Re:Smart move! (Score:3, Interesting)

    by BestNicksRTaken ( 582194 ) on Monday January 28, 2008 @10:11AM (#22207514)
    not wanting to sound trollish (pun kinda intended) buit i thought python for series 60 was dead in the water - i.e. nokia themselves don't even support in anymore?

    maybe i heard wrong, as its something i'd really like to look at - especially if pyqt will soon work on the s60 due to this move, gotta be better than that java rubbish.
  • by pembo13 ( 770295 ) on Monday January 28, 2008 @10:12AM (#22207520) Homepage
    According to this page, http://www.opensource.nokia.com/contributions.html [nokia.com], Nokia is already fairly involved in OSS, more so than I would have guessed. If they do smart things, I have no problem patronizing their product lines more.
  • by kripkenstein ( 913150 ) on Monday January 28, 2008 @10:27AM (#22207664) Homepage

    Interesting. TFA states that Nokia plans to continue to develop Qt, though, and will continue to offer it under both open source and commercial licenses, just as things are now.

    I assume that means as long as Nokia continues to develop Qt in the same manner (keeping Qt Free available for KDE), then the agreement doesn't apply.

    Yes, all Nokia needs to do is keep Qt development on a low burner to avoid BSD-ization of their code. Not hard to do.

    I don't see Nokia as interested in the Linux desktop, so I presume that part of Trolltech's work will not continue exactly as before; why pay the salaries of several KDE developers, for example - not sure Nokia will see the point in that. I don't predict immediate firings, though, but if I was one of them I wouldn't count on long-term job security. What I do see Nokia as wanting from Trolltech is everything related to mobile devices, Qtopia, all that stuff. So overall Qt may continue to be developed, but I'm not sure its focus won't move to one that is less useful for KDE.

    Of course, this risk with KDE basing itself on Qt was obvious all the time due to the licensing model there. It is probably part of the reason why all major distros have moved to GNOME.
  • Greephone (Score:3, Interesting)

    by jfenwick ( 961674 ) on Monday January 28, 2008 @10:35AM (#22207742)
    I can't help but wonder if this has something to do with the death of the greenphone.
  • by G3ckoG33k ( 647276 ) on Monday January 28, 2008 @10:44AM (#22207820)
    "I don't see Nokia as interested in the Linux desktop"

    While I understand your arguments it would now be a relatively easy way for Nokia to sneakin to that business. Before this buyout it would have been "impossible".

    Don't forget that the margins of the mobile phone industry may be diminishing and that the distinction between a mobile phone and a laptop is blurred more and more. Nokia is spreading its risks. Who knows what a laptop's wireless connection will look like in five years. I don't, but I guess Nokia now is better prepared to not only know, but also to adapt and dictate.

    -
  • by nguy ( 1207026 ) on Monday January 28, 2008 @10:56AM (#22207930)
    I wonder what this means for commercial users of Qt. Despite what they say, Nokia doesn't strike me as a company that will do a good job at providing cross-platform desktop toolkits. So... either they re-release Qt under a BSD-like license, or commercial users will be out of luck.

    I'm also not sure this acquisition makes sense from a mobile perspective. Nokia needs a better UI strategy than they have right now, but Qt isn't really the top choice in that space either. This purchase really strikes me as one company with an aging platform buying another company with an aging platform.

    Well, I guess we'll know how things turn out when the dust settles.
  • by nguy ( 1207026 ) on Monday January 28, 2008 @11:06AM (#22208052)
    Having said all of the above, I can't help but remain a bit concerned about this turn of events. I was under the impression that Nokia have a rather tarnished reputation in the eyes of the Free Software world,

    That's not the main issue. Qt already is under the GPL, so whatever Nokia does or doesn't do won't affect KDE.

    The big question is what Nokia will do for commercial developers.

    I think Nokia's best bet is to re-release the desktop edition of Qt under a BSD-style license right away. Nokia isn't going to make much money from licensing anyway, and a BSD release could make Qt much more popular as a toolkit for everybody.
  • by ashridah ( 72567 ) on Monday January 28, 2008 @11:12AM (#22208120)
    As others have pointed out, Nokia do indeed make OS's, Symbian and their own home-grown variety. Let's also not forget that Qt maintains an embedded edition of their UI toolkit, which may well be very valuable to Nokia.

      They're also in the IDE business [slashdot.org], since they joined the Eclipse foundation, and have been pumping code into the C/C++ components, so people can use them to work on extensions for their own phones.

  • by vhogemann ( 797994 ) <`victor' `at' `hogemann.com'> on Monday January 28, 2008 @11:14AM (#22208160) Homepage
    Hummm,

    It's nice to have GTK and all, but look at QT4, it has much more advanced features. KDE3.5 already has a smaller memory footprint than Gnome, thanks to QT4 KDE4 will have an even smaller footprint.

    There were the GreenPhone. Also, there's already a Windows Mobile port of QT4, proving that it's well suited for embedded devices. And QT4 has Java bindings, witch is widely used on cellphone development as it is sandboxed.

    Pehaps Nokia is looking into replacing Symbian with a Linux stack? Pehaps they found out GTK lacking? Pehaps they fell the need to be able to control more directly the development of their toolkit of choice?

    Time will tell.
  • by pembo13 ( 770295 ) on Monday January 28, 2008 @11:20AM (#22208220) Homepage

    On the other hand it also justifies Gnome's existence as a project to begin with

    I find that hard to believe considering the rate at which Gnome is including Microsoft's tech.

  • by ZorinLynx ( 31751 ) on Monday January 28, 2008 @11:23AM (#22208240) Homepage
    I don't trust Nokia. They bought PDAapps (the company that made Verichat) just to promptly kill the product. No explanation, no way for current users to keep using it. Just... dead.

    Any company that does this is one to be feared.
  • the KKKPc (Score:2, Interesting)

    by toufeeq ( 956984 ) on Monday January 28, 2008 @11:59AM (#22208772)
    Sure, with the purchase of Trolltech, Nokia now can think of building an answer for Android. Sure they can now look at having a better widget toolkit than the one that ships with Symbian but here's my hunch..

    The laptop segment is starting to see a wide range of ultr-portable low-cost PC's like the eeePC and the Everex Cloudbook. These run Linux with a lightweight GUI. Maybe Nokia is viewing this as the future of the ultramobile laptop segment and thinks it needs to have a foothold in that. Paying $150 million for that actually looks cheap IMHO.

    Think about it, they have Maemo which is targetted at web-tablets and is stabilising quite well. They have Symbian , OpenC and Python for their high-end NSeries and ESeries phones. The one area of the "mobile" segement wherein they are currently lacking is the UMPC/el-cheapo laptop and by acquiring Trolltech and with it Qtopia/Qt they can make serious inroads into this upcoming area.
  • by Kjella ( 173770 ) on Monday January 28, 2008 @12:06PM (#22208836) Homepage

    You might say, "but then the community can fork Qt." Yes, a fork is possible. The fork will then be GPL2/GPL3, which is somewhat problematic, in that in the future we will never be able to write KDE apps in GPL4, should such be released (and I presume that Microsoft's attacks on FOSS will necessitate a GPL4 eventually, just as Microsoft's deal with Novell necessitated certain clauses in the GPL3).
    In 1991 the FSF was a rag-tag bunch of idealists that wrote a very non-legalese license based almost solely on US law and defintions, had some very strict conditions that make it incompatible with other OSS licenses, was not designed to withstand a malicious reading and failed to explicitly say many things yet it lasted some 15 years and is still very valid also for new projects.

    The GPLv3 is probably the most well reviewed license in history. It has some new features that are controversial but it's pretty much watertight exactly what it says. Try striking out the GPLv3-specific parts and try to do a side-by-side comparison and you'll see it. So far Tivo is the exception, not the norm and noone has a concrete example of Novell using the Microsoft patents in a way the GPLv3 forbids, nor are there any open source DRM systems to speak of.

    In short, there's still a lot of question whether the GPLv3 is needed at all. Not everyone is happy about it either, as has been reported here repeatedly. To put it this way, if the GPLv2 was good for 15+ years, I think this one is good for 50+ years.
  • Re:Smart move! (Score:4, Interesting)

    by dyefade ( 735994 ) on Monday January 28, 2008 @12:19PM (#22208976) Homepage Journal
    http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=154155 [sourceforge.net]

    Looks pretty active, release wise. I too am interested in looking at this, pretty excited to see this news if I must be honest.
  • by nuzak ( 959558 ) on Monday January 28, 2008 @12:36PM (#22209138) Journal
    KDE and TT each have two members on the FreeQt board. On the question of reverting the license to BSD, KDE will win a tie. The foundation itself isn't empowered to even take up the question unless the 12-month period has passed.

    It's a nice gesture, but if Nokia wanted to be evil (though all recent signs show that they won't) they could lock it up in court for years and years. If Nokia lets Qt stagnate, the easier option for the KDE people would be to just fork the GPL codebase.

    Personally I see the opposite happening, and Nokia pouring resources into Qt development. Clearly they want an alternative to Symbian where they own the whole enchilada, or at least don't have to play development politics with all the other Symbian partners.

  • by Rob Y. ( 110975 ) on Monday January 28, 2008 @01:09PM (#22209520)
    I'm personally crossing my fingers for Nokia to change the license to LGPL.

    Nokia doesn't make their money licensing software, and I don't think they want to change that now. TrollTech was relatively cheap, because there wasn't a really lucrative market for their commercial licenses. TT had to stick with the dual-license model, because they had no other revenue stream. Nokia is a hardware manufacturer, and I'd think running their hardware on a mainstream software platform would be important to them. Going LGPL would go a long way toward accomplishing that.

    Unless Nokia fears their competitors having equal access to the same software platform, a move to the LGPL would be all to the upside. And if they do fear that, then they could fork the Qtopia phone platform and keep that GPL. Or even drop the GPL version and go completely commercial on that. But these days, smart phones need a developer-friendly platform every bit as much as desktop systems do. QT would have some performance advantages over Google's Java-based phone platform. And Nokia, as the first mover and primary maintainer of the platform, ought to be able to leverage that into a huge lead.

    That's if they make the switch to LGPL. And if they don't? They'll have a great phone platform, but less open to 3rd party developers. If they think, based on that, they can win a competitive battle for setting smart phone standards with Google and Microsoft, go for it. But I don't think they can. They're smart. They understand why Linux has all the buzz , BSD does not, and OS/2 is gone. GPL for apps, LGPL for libraries. It's scary to a commercial enterprise, but it really works - at least better than anything else (except, maybe, having a monopoly on desktop operating systems...).

  • Good News (Score:5, Interesting)

    by MrCopilot ( 871878 ) on Monday January 28, 2008 @01:37PM (#22209718) Homepage Journal
    I see a lot of fear in the eyes of Geekdom. Relax my brethren.

    Your fear is unwarranted. My take on this: Nokia is a getting a little leary of MS gaining increasing control at Novell with their hand up Miguel.

    Besides, basing your products on GTK is hard, there I said it.

    QT is a programmer's dream to work with. Fully documented, Open Source, (or Closed if your PHB is twitchy) Cross compatible, and simple. Got a problem a shout out to the trolls usually clears it up. Licensor or not.

    Nokia makes hardware and wants to control their own destiny. Makes perfect business sense, but so does keeping the good will of the community. Recent foibles with the n700 taught them that.

    I use only KDE, I develop Desktop Applications and Embedded Devices using QT. It would be fair to call me a fanboy of the Trolls. I also have an unhealthy desire to own a n810, n700, and n800. The only thing holding me back was that I hate the GTK based Maemo toolkit. Recently KDE was ported, and with this development is making it difficult for me to contain the copious amounts drool.

  • by kripkenstein ( 913150 ) on Monday January 28, 2008 @01:48PM (#22209884) Homepage

    I'm personally crossing my fingers for Nokia to change the license to LGPL.
    Yep, me too.

    In retrospect, I consider Qt one of the two biggest 'misses' in open-source, the other being OpenSolaris. If Trolltech had 'gotten it' in time, GNOME wouldn't exist, and Qt/KDE would dominate the Linux desktop completely, a great vantage point from which to consider other markets. Likewise, if Sun had 'gotten it' way back then, OpenSolaris would be what Linux is today, Linux wouldn't exist, and Sun would be making a fortune. Yes, all of this is in retrospect, but the two stories are interesting, I think. And both revolve around fears of 'going all the way' with an open-source business model. Problem is, waiting too long is even worse. Maybe Nokia will get it right?

    GPL for apps, LGPL for libraries. It's scary to a commercial enterprise, but it really works - at least better than anything else (except, maybe, having a monopoly on desktop operating systems...).

    Good summary, I agree completely.
  • by amorsen ( 7485 ) <benny+slashdot@amorsen.dk> on Monday January 28, 2008 @03:55PM (#22211754)
    If Sun had gone open source early with their Unix, they would have stole the show.

    It's possible that Sun could have prevented Linux from being a success, and perhaps even from being started at all. I believe that corporate politics would have ruined it -- very few companies are willing to let their product go enough that it transcends them. Look at the free software that came out of companies: MySQL, OpenOffice.org, Asterisk, QT. They're still pretty much controlled by those companies. Firefox is an exception only because the parent company pretty much forgot about it.
  • by kelnos ( 564113 ) <[bjt23] [at] [cornell.edu]> on Monday January 28, 2008 @11:01PM (#22217168) Homepage
    Ah, I assumed the parent meant "Linux-native" in the sense that it's considered an integral part of the OS, like the Win32 API on Windows, or Cocoa on MacOS X. Meaning that, to have a "native" look on that platform, you'd want to either use those interfaces directly, or use a higher-level interface that makes use of those interfaces internally. Linux really has no "native look," hence my assertion that there isn't really a Linux-native GUI toolkit.

    At any rate, back to using the parent's definition, I still wouldn't consider GTK all that much more "Linux-native" than Qt. You mention GTK's Windows and MacOS X backends: I doubt new features/architecture would be accepted into GTK that would break the Windows backend. Ditto for the Mac backend, though it's nowhere near as mature as either the X11 or Windows backends. And similarly (as someone who reads gtk-devel-list regularly), I doubt new functionality would be added to GTK that didn't seem useful in some way on all platforms. I know discussions regarding this have come up in the past.

    I couldn't find that much on Qt's early history, but it seems the X11 port of Qt is at least as old as the Windows port, if not older. So I doubt any one platform can drive Qt's development in such a way that would ignore the others. And I'd tend to think that a toolkit designed from the start to be multi-platform would be much better-designed than one that targets only one platform.

    Anyhow, just the humble opinion of a developer who's worked with GTK, Qt, Win32 (unfortunately), Cocoa, and a few of others at various times.
  • by Capt. Beyond ( 179592 ) on Tuesday January 29, 2008 @03:50AM (#22218854)
    Unless there is money to be made by supporting QT for KDE, don't count on Nokia being as friendly toward the Open Source Community as Trolltech was.

    if you read the letter to the open source community, you would see that Nokia is applying to become a patron of KDE.

Say "twenty-three-skiddoo" to logout.

Working...