A common problem in comparisons like this is that people compare what GObject gives them with C++ (and go ranting on how this or that is ugly in C++ ). That is is the wrong comparison, as Qt is not just a set of libraries, but a full-blown framework (even more so than GObject/GTK) - if you're using Qt, the valid question is if Qt addresses the problems C++ has/had, and often the answer is yes, like in the case or various monitor patters, reference counting, etc (in fact, sometimes I feel as if it's a C++ compatible C derivative of it's own, given all the syntactic sugar and patterns it introduces)