3 ms·
From a desktop-application standpoint, the Web provides something very useful: easy upgrading. Like, you go to a URL, and if you aren't seeing the latest produc
by i336_ 10y ago
From a desktop-application standpoint, the Web provides something very useful: easy upgrading. Like, you go to a URL, and if you aren't seeing the latest production revision of the site code, that's a bug.
IMO, if you think you'll ever have edge cases where users might struggle to stay connected to the Web, think about doing a desktop app - but even then, consider using eg Electron/QTWebKit/similar so you can continue to use HTML.
The only situation I would shy away from using the HTML/CSS/JS approach with new general-purpose PC-centric applications is supporting older hardware - I like my apps to remain snappy, but sadly even Webkit tends to lag (generally speaking) on anything older than an i3 or so.
- windowsworkstoo 10y agoYet the same feature can be a pain in the ass as you don't control your upgrade destiny. I know, I know, git orf mah lawn! But when you see normal folks totally confused because the developer decided to "upgrade" their experience in a way that was totally out of the users hands, it can be cringey.
- i336_ 10y agoYeah... that's very true too, I hadn't considered it from that angle. I will admit that I far prefer software that runs fully locally; if I don't like the direction a particular program has gone, I can either just use an older version. And I do also find it jarring to open an app and be met with some new layout or design, or discover a new feature buried in a menu that wasn't there before. It would be really nice if app design was at the point where we could go "okay, here's a bunch of new features, click this button to switch over!"...