Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • Home
  • SEARCH
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 725237
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 14, 20262026-05-14T06:18:51+00:00 2026-05-14T06:18:51+00:00

XulRunner/Gecko seems to be really interesting for developing GUI-intensive applications (by using widely used

  • 0

XulRunner/Gecko seems to be really interesting for developing GUI-intensive applications (by using widely used technologies such as HTML / CSS / SVG / XUL / Javascript). But the underlaying C++ APIS (XPCOM, NECKO, …) looks so old and complex. Moreover the general lack of documentation/developper tools is really frightening.

On the other hand, QT have a quite nice platform, and is well documented and supported. The UI part is really “traditional” though.

What are your experiences with XULRUNNER, specially compared to other C++ desktop applications frameworks such as QT/GTK/MFC…? What is missing? What is awesome?

Side question: If I wanted to migrate an existing MFC app to a cross platform C++ desktop application framework, would it be wise to use XULRUNNER instead of QT or GTK?

  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-05-14T06:18:52+00:00Added an answer on May 14, 2026 at 6:18 am

    There aren’t actually that many applications built using XulRunner, as far as I’m aware. And I should know, as I was Tech Lead for one of them and we tried to hire experienced people. In hindsight, this doesn’t surprise me. Our decision to use XulRunner was made by a non-developer, against my advice. Many things took twice the time they would have taken in wxWidgets, which we used before. Now I have also used Qt in other projects, and I’d have to say it’s even better than wxWidgets. So I can fairly reliably state that Qt will be more than twice as efficient as XulRunner, and besides you will have a much easier time finding experienced developers.

    Sure, Javascript in XulRunner is nice. But Qt also comes with QtScript, which wraps JavaScriptCore. And when it comes to building truly rich UI’s – i.e. more than just a stack of images – then HTML+SVG+CSS+JS just don’t cut it. They were developed to make simple things easy, not to make complex things possible. Just look at the newest feature, video. HTML5’s solution: a tag, and let some C++ code behind the scenes do the real work. Even though video is just a big stack of images shown one at a time.

    So, the problem isn’t so much that there are things missing. It’s just that development is slow, and the result is slow.

    On the awesome side, the plugin mechanism actually works quite well.

    Now, this all applies if you start from scratch. If you already have a lot of MFC/C++ code, stick with C++ and drop only the MFC part. That means Qt or possibly wxWidgets are the obvious winners.

    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

No related questions found

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.