3 ms·
Why not. We do it for websites, and here we're talking about Webkit, Edge, and whatever is on Linux (Webkit on many distributions?), while for any regular webs
by nkkollaw 10y ago
Why not.
We do it for websites, and here we're talking about Webkit, Edge, and whatever is on Linux (Webkit on many distributions?), while for any regular website you have to test against a dozen different browsers. Not to mention that many Electron apps are merely wrappers around already-working web apps that have been tested on different browsers.
If this can make Electron apps run fast, it's absolutely worth it.
Spotify is fine, but Atom and Hyper are about 100 times slower than Sublime Text and iTerm2.
- h1d 10y agoWeb sites and desktop apps are completely different... Web sites need to be slim or else people don't even bother to read your site but desktop apps, it's just one time download and each use has nothing to do with how fat the download was. And Electron being 100x slower than Sublime Text is just way over exaggerated... Compare that to Visual Studio code too. Why would you pick harder development over practically no gain?
- nkkollaw 10y agoWhy are you talking about download time? By slower I don't mean that they take a long time to download, but that they run slowly, i.e. the performance is bad. "100x slower" was a figure of speech. I know Atom is not 100 times slower (although sometimes it feels like it) ;-) As for "Why would you pick harder development over practically no gain?", I think it's pretty clear: for those who know web technologies, using Electron to develop a desktop app makes for much easier development. That's what they gain from using it: being able to develop a desktop app versus not being able to.