7 ms·

This allows working offline and saving work locally using the native filesystem. A significant improvement over a webapp. My preference goes Full native app > e

This allows working offline and saving work locally using the native filesystem. A significant improvement over a webapp. My preference goes Full native app > electron >> webapp.

pjmlp 9y ago
I rather have native app > webapp. Really don't get the point of Electron, as I never got the point of XULRunner before. If it is to be a webapp, take advantage of HTML5 features for offline apps, if it is to be native then take advantage of the OS UI/UX features. Something in the middle just feels schizophrenic from UI/UX point of view.
- vogre 9y ago
  From the UX point of view working with local files without logging in somewhere is very precious. From the dev point of view Electron provides the fastest way to make cross-platform app in high-level language.
  - pjmlp 9y ago
    Only if the she/he doesn't know any other tech besides web. Electron apps are the clear example of putting developer comfort before the user UI/UX.
    - LeoNatan25 9y ago
      “Developer comfort” are strong words. It’s putting JS web “dev” comfort, as I certainly wouldn’t feel comfortable writing anything in JavaScript.
- natik 9y ago
  I agree it quite outrageous all the RAM & Size on disk & CPU an electron app requires. But on the other hand what are the other alternative for a one codebase multiplatform app ? Real OS native UI requires a re-write on each platform unless using libui which is limited to a button, a checkbox and a slider (okay for little app but you won't build a full blown UI editor out of that) Then there is GTK but it has lots of problems when you want to maintain a multiplatform app, looks ugly on other platform than linux, and performance is not amazing (but with GTK4 and the vulkan renderer it might improve I guess) At last the only real solution is QT (so it's not like there are zillions of solutions on the native side, there's only QT basically). And with QT if you use C++ then there's no package manager, all that prehistoric qmake stuff , etc... Also visually speaking QT is no more native than HTML, it has to emulate the style of the OS but is not using native OS widgets Also Electron might feel super heavy, but in the future we might one day have Servo (which seems even more efficient that QT by doing everything on the GPU (just as an example it does glyphs rasterisation on GPU unlike QT)) with either javascript (in this case it will be kind of the same as QT + QML&JS) or with WebAssembly. And concerning the size on disk we could provide it as a dependence common to all app using it (for eg as a FlatPack Runtime on linux). So right now Electron is outrageous but in the future the situation might improve a lot (with an alternative based on Servo if it ever happens)
  - pjmlp 9y ago
    Like we used to do in the good old days, before this Web 2.0 craziness, and many comercial apps still do. Create a small wrapper layer for the supported OSes, which is the option used by most comercial software actually, like Adobe or Office, and many others. Electron apps basically put the confort of developer in front of the user they are supposed to serve.
    - LeoNatan25 9y ago
      Fuck user experience! All that matters to “developers” these days is “hackablility” and “velocity”. The user suffers? It’s his fault he is not using a better device.
    - hex13 9y ago
      There is one more thing. Developing in HTML5/JS (with all its ecosystem) is freaking fast in terms of developer productivity. You will probably build full fledge app in shorter time using JS than with C++. So you can deliver MVP to the market faster = profit $$$ And initial group of users are early adaptors anyway. They are usually eager to try new applications even if they are not perfect. The problem is: "what next?", when users will start complaining about speed or other things. Should company rewrite original HTML5 based MVP to C++ to gain speed? Or should they optimize existing HTML5 solution? (many HTML5 apps are running with nearly native responsiveness). Or something else? Or maybe HTML5 even for MVP is a bad idea?
      - LeoNatan25 9y ago
        How did you make the conclusion that JS is faster than C++? An experienced C++ developer, or better yet, an experience C++ developer team, moves “freaking” fast. The only advantage to the HTML/JS stack is you can get cheap labor from dime a dozen web “devs”. That’s it. Case in point, look at Atom. Let’s assume your “MVP”, “profit $$$” and what not is somewhat correct. Yet, the amount of engineering time and effort it has taken to optimize that tech to fix things that are trivial in the native world is staggering. How does that fit in your “profit $$$” equation, as an initial core team of experienced C++ developers would have developed with these issues in mind and created a product that is viable in the same scenarios.
- StevePerkins 9y ago
  Just a reminder that you're talking about an open source project, sustained entirely by volunteers. I'm sure they'd rather have people contributing, or speaking through their financial donations > complaining that they don't have the resources to write native versions for every platform. The bottom line is that cross-platform desktop development is HARD. Qt and Wx eventually push you toward C++, which few people under the age of 40 want to learn. GTK looks awful on every platform. JavaFX is actually quite nice now, and embedding a Java runtime takes up no more space than embedding Chrome. But you still have to deal with sluggish startup times, and similar complaints as C++... that Java isn't "cool" now, or whatever. So if you want something that looks decent on Windows, OS X, and Linux, and is written in languages that 19-year olds approve of, then your options are: 1. Write separate native versions for each platform, using C# for Windows, Swift for OS X, and whatever for Linux, or 2. Electron. If you're a commercial entity, selling products or services for money in the face of competition, then you should probably go with option #1. If you're an open source project or hobbyist, then just go with #2 and take solace in the fact that the people bitching were never going to contribute regardless.
  - pjmlp 9y ago
    > C++, which few people under the age of 40 want to learn Thanks for making us aware that it is going to be easier to find jobs in High Performance Computing, Fintech, Games, OS and compiler development, machine learning, GPGPU computing, robotics, automotive industry, database engines, audio processing, medical devices, IoT,....
    - StevePerkins 9y ago
      Learn COBOL or RPG, and the world will really be your oyster. Not criticizing C++ (I'm in my 40's and spent the first several years of my career working with it). Just stating the reality of what people whine about on web forums (when they're not whining that open source developers should do even more free work).
      - pjmlp 9y ago
        The thing with these youngsters, is than they eventually see that the old guys had some point. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14613142 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14613142

This allows working offline and saving work locally using the native filesystem. A significant improvement over a webapp. My preference goes Full native app > electron >> webapp.

pjmlp 9y ago

I rather have native app > webapp. Really don't get the point of Electron, as I never got the point of XULRunner before. If it is to be a webapp, take advantage of HTML5 features for offline apps, if it is to be native then take advantage of the OS UI/UX features. Something in the middle just feels schizophrenic from UI/UX point of view.

vogre 9y ago
From the UX point of view working with local files without logging in somewhere is very precious. From the dev point of view Electron provides the fastest way to make cross-platform app in high-level language.
- pjmlp 9y ago
  Only if the she/he doesn't know any other tech besides web. Electron apps are the clear example of putting developer comfort before the user UI/UX.
  - LeoNatan25 9y ago
    “Developer comfort” are strong words. It’s putting JS web “dev” comfort, as I certainly wouldn’t feel comfortable writing anything in JavaScript.
natik 9y ago
I agree it quite outrageous all the RAM & Size on disk & CPU an electron app requires. But on the other hand what are the other alternative for a one codebase multiplatform app ? Real OS native UI requires a re-write on each platform unless using libui which is limited to a button, a checkbox and a slider (okay for little app but you won't build a full blown UI editor out of that) Then there is GTK but it has lots of problems when you want to maintain a multiplatform app, looks ugly on other platform than linux, and performance is not amazing (but with GTK4 and the vulkan renderer it might improve I guess) At last the only real solution is QT (so it's not like there are zillions of solutions on the native side, there's only QT basically). And with QT if you use C++ then there's no package manager, all that prehistoric qmake stuff , etc... Also visually speaking QT is no more native than HTML, it has to emulate the style of the OS but is not using native OS widgets Also Electron might feel super heavy, but in the future we might one day have Servo (which seems even more efficient that QT by doing everything on the GPU (just as an example it does glyphs rasterisation on GPU unlike QT)) with either javascript (in this case it will be kind of the same as QT + QML&JS) or with WebAssembly. And concerning the size on disk we could provide it as a dependence common to all app using it (for eg as a FlatPack Runtime on linux). So right now Electron is outrageous but in the future the situation might improve a lot (with an alternative based on Servo if it ever happens)
- pjmlp 9y ago
  Like we used to do in the good old days, before this Web 2.0 craziness, and many comercial apps still do. Create a small wrapper layer for the supported OSes, which is the option used by most comercial software actually, like Adobe or Office, and many others. Electron apps basically put the confort of developer in front of the user they are supposed to serve.
  - LeoNatan25 9y ago
    Fuck user experience! All that matters to “developers” these days is “hackablility” and “velocity”. The user suffers? It’s his fault he is not using a better device.
  - hex13 9y ago
    There is one more thing. Developing in HTML5/JS (with all its ecosystem) is freaking fast in terms of developer productivity. You will probably build full fledge app in shorter time using JS than with C++. So you can deliver MVP to the market faster = profit $$$ And initial group of users are early adaptors anyway. They are usually eager to try new applications even if they are not perfect. The problem is: "what next?", when users will start complaining about speed or other things. Should company rewrite original HTML5 based MVP to C++ to gain speed? Or should they optimize existing HTML5 solution? (many HTML5 apps are running with nearly native responsiveness). Or something else? Or maybe HTML5 even for MVP is a bad idea?
    - LeoNatan25 9y ago
      How did you make the conclusion that JS is faster than C++? An experienced C++ developer, or better yet, an experience C++ developer team, moves “freaking” fast. The only advantage to the HTML/JS stack is you can get cheap labor from dime a dozen web “devs”. That’s it. Case in point, look at Atom. Let’s assume your “MVP”, “profit $$$” and what not is somewhat correct. Yet, the amount of engineering time and effort it has taken to optimize that tech to fix things that are trivial in the native world is staggering. How does that fit in your “profit $$$” equation, as an initial core team of experienced C++ developers would have developed with these issues in mind and created a product that is viable in the same scenarios.
StevePerkins 9y ago
Just a reminder that you're talking about an open source project, sustained entirely by volunteers. I'm sure they'd rather have people contributing, or speaking through their financial donations > complaining that they don't have the resources to write native versions for every platform. The bottom line is that cross-platform desktop development is HARD. Qt and Wx eventually push you toward C++, which few people under the age of 40 want to learn. GTK looks awful on every platform. JavaFX is actually quite nice now, and embedding a Java runtime takes up no more space than embedding Chrome. But you still have to deal with sluggish startup times, and similar complaints as C++... that Java isn't "cool" now, or whatever. So if you want something that looks decent on Windows, OS X, and Linux, and is written in languages that 19-year olds approve of, then your options are: 1. Write separate native versions for each platform, using C# for Windows, Swift for OS X, and whatever for Linux, or 2. Electron. If you're a commercial entity, selling products or services for money in the face of competition, then you should probably go with option #1. If you're an open source project or hobbyist, then just go with #2 and take solace in the fact that the people bitching were never going to contribute regardless.
- pjmlp 9y ago
  > C++, which few people under the age of 40 want to learn Thanks for making us aware that it is going to be easier to find jobs in High Performance Computing, Fintech, Games, OS and compiler development, machine learning, GPGPU computing, robotics, automotive industry, database engines, audio processing, medical devices, IoT,....
  - StevePerkins 9y ago
    Learn COBOL or RPG, and the world will really be your oyster. Not criticizing C++ (I'm in my 40's and spent the first several years of my career working with it). Just stating the reality of what people whine about on web forums (when they're not whining that open source developers should do even more free work).
    - pjmlp 9y ago
      The thing with these youngsters, is than they eventually see that the old guys had some point. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14613142 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14613142