Because the licensing/support business is way outside of their area of expertise, and they were almost guaranteed to screw it up.
Why would they continue to invest?
For the same reason anybody invests in open source. Even with the big Windows shift, QT is still a part of their success moving forward. Without investing in QT, that part of their success would be controlled by a third party (or even worse, nobody).
Do I necessarily buy the above 2 statements? Not necessarily. Actions speak louder than words, but this action might not say much. How many QT developers they lay off is the action that means something. Currently, they're still hiring, so...
Because the licensing/support business is way outside of their area of expertise, and they were almost guaranteed to screw it up.
Why would they continue to invest?
For the same reason anybody invests in open source. Even with the big Windows shift, QT is still a part of their success moving forward. Without investing in QT, that part of their success would be controlled by a third party (or even worse, nobody).
Do I necessarily buy the above 2 statements? Not necessarily. Actions speak louder than words, but this action might not say much. How many QT developers they lay off is the action that means something. Currently, they're still hiring, so...