On a secondary remark, why is TI seemingly making it so hard for people to
develop applications targeting their processors, using community tools? The
easy answer is evidently to promote vendor tools, but in the end they still
end up selling chips even though people don't buy the software tools.
TI does promote CCS, but it's not particularly hard to develop applications
on the beaglebone. A matter of fact, it's just like with any Linux system,
but with added peripherals to toy with, or use. You would need the same
tools on an x86 Linux system to develop C/C++, GO, Nodejs( and much more )
applications. With perhaps some slightly different tool setup at the
With the SGX drivers however, it's been this way since the beginning. Well,
it's actually slightly better now, but 4 years later . . . not by much.
The board I'm bringing up right now is a customized BBB with integrated
I was just thinking this morning while trying to get QT to compile that it
would be so easy to switch to a different platform, including turnkey LCD
controllers from FTDI, to bypass the OpenGL mess of the BBB.
So I'm curious as to why exactly you need Qt, then assuming you really do
require Qt, why would you be required to use hardware acceleration. It's
been a long time since I've written anything using Qt, but it's my
understanding that Qt is just a set of API's that lend its self to
developing desktop applications(forms drop downs, buttons, etc ). There
should not be any hardware requirements period. Unless it's changed that
much in the last 3-4 years.
Anyway, the beaglebone's strong suite has never been it's graphics. It's
strong points have been the large amount of peripherals it has access to
out of the box. Including, but not limited to PRU's, ADC, PWMs, quadrature
encoders, eCAP modules, SPI, I2C, UART CANBus . . .
Plus a truly open source model, for hardware, and software.