4 ms·

I haven’t tried it, but isn’t JavaFX supposed to be the future of JVM based GUI’s? I’m actually very curious about others experiences with it.

by todd8 9y ago

sesteel 9y ago
I just went through a simple exercise; for my tests, a minimal JavaFX app starts at ~100MB while a minimal Electron app starts around ~65MB.
- olzd 9y ago
  So? If you want a lightweight app, both JavaFX and Electron are bad.
- Aaronmacaron 9y ago
  This is only the case if you bundle the JVM with your application. Without the JVM you can write a simple application without exceeding the .jar file size of 1 MB.
  - sesteel 9y ago
    I should have been more explicit; this is the default in memory footprint of a simple hello world app. I didn't really try to reduce the heap or stack of the JVM, I'm sure that would help.
    - Aaronmacaron 9y ago
      Oh I think this is a misunderstanding. I thought you were talking about the binary file size which is very big for electron apps since they ship a full-blown browser. It is possible that JavaFX apps also use a lot of memory (RAM) but I was referring to the file size of the .jar file of a JavaFX app.
  - whyever 9y ago
    If you just count the JS and HTML, then a minimal Electron app is (hopefully) also tiny.
    - Semaphor 9y ago
      That's not the same though. You have to bundle electron to run your app. Your Java app is fine as long as Java is installed.
      - whyever 9y ago
        Yes, but theoretically Electron apps could use the browser. (I think Google killed that option though.)
        PinkMilkshake 9y ago
        Yeah, it would be nice if the API's were standardized and then every browser had an "App Mode".
- perrylaj 9y ago
  Not sure how you built your minimal example, but current versions of Java will allow you to produce much smaller native bundles using jlink. Steve Perkins did a nice little writeup with an example repo at https://github.com/steve-perkins/jlink-demo https://github.com/steve-perkins/jlink-demo.

I haven’t tried it, but isn’t JavaFX supposed to be the future of JVM based GUI’s? I’m actually very curious about others experiences with it.

by todd8 9y ago

I haven’t tried it, but isn’t JavaFX supposed to be the future of JVM based GUI’s? I’m actually very curious about others experiences with it.

sesteel 9y ago

I just went through a simple exercise; for my tests, a minimal JavaFX app starts at ~100MB while a minimal Electron app starts around ~65MB.

olzd 9y ago
So? If you want a lightweight app, both JavaFX and Electron are bad.
Aaronmacaron 9y ago
This is only the case if you bundle the JVM with your application. Without the JVM you can write a simple application without exceeding the .jar file size of 1 MB.
- sesteel 9y ago
  I should have been more explicit; this is the default in memory footprint of a simple hello world app. I didn't really try to reduce the heap or stack of the JVM, I'm sure that would help.
  - Aaronmacaron 9y ago
    Oh I think this is a misunderstanding. I thought you were talking about the binary file size which is very big for electron apps since they ship a full-blown browser. It is possible that JavaFX apps also use a lot of memory (RAM) but I was referring to the file size of the .jar file of a JavaFX app.
- whyever 9y ago
  If you just count the JS and HTML, then a minimal Electron app is (hopefully) also tiny.
  - Semaphor 9y ago
    That's not the same though. You have to bundle electron to run your app. Your Java app is fine as long as Java is installed.
    - whyever 9y ago
      Yes, but theoretically Electron apps could use the browser. (I think Google killed that option though.)
      - PinkMilkshake 9y ago
        Yeah, it would be nice if the API's were standardized and then every browser had an "App Mode".
perrylaj 9y ago
Not sure how you built your minimal example, but current versions of Java will allow you to produce much smaller native bundles using jlink. Steve Perkins did a nice little writeup with an example repo at https://github.com/steve-perkins/jlink-demo https://github.com/steve-perkins/jlink-demo.