QT base alone is 66mb on arch, not incl deps.

Chrome is ~100mb.

They're right along the same order of magnitude for size. Install size has very little connection to standards/api complexity. It's just a bad argument.

The right discussion (which you're nicely skipping by talking about install size) is "how does the complexity of QT widget selection compare to html?"

And... I find the spaces incredibly similar - this feels decidedly like browsing html components: https://doc.qt.io/qt-6/widget-classes.html

QT gets the perks of being able to remove deprecated items - so I fully expect theirs to be a more minimal set. That's a luxury not afforded to browsers.

So again...

---

> What the system gives is exactly a canvas to render stuff on.

Render fucking how? The deliverable wasn't code, it was an html document. That's the defining history of browsers.