3. I personally think (subjective!) that the C++ implementation is cleaner in wxwindows and doesn't need things such as MOC. It also promises to be as platform independant as possible.
I have experience with both and I have to second that Qt is much cleaner than wxWindows EVEN with MOC issues considered. Several people have this "disease" that software must be free of $$. Anything commercial just doesn't do it for them. While totally neglecting the fact that $$ of software is just a small fraction of what companies pay the developers. In commercial terms, the cost of development software is considered "change" or "drop in a bucket". For those kind of people wxWindows is more attractive. Notice that you could give the same argument for using Linux is the first place. As a matter of fact I STRUGGLED with some font issues for about an hour at work today (after which I gave up and decided to live with the problem). Ever seen a Windows user struggle with fonts? This time alone together with a few other days basically has made Linux itself more expensive than Windows. So back to wxWindows. Even it may be free, the time that you spend find good documentation and learning it will be more than Qt learning curve. I use Linux because I hate M$. If I hated TrollTech, maybe I'd be voting for wxWindows.