3 ms·
that IMO is not a valid comparison, not even remotely valid, because those two products are built with completely different stacks. Krita is native, slack is we
by soapdog 8y ago
that IMO is not a valid comparison, not even remotely valid, because those two products are built with completely different stacks. Krita is native, slack is webby. Also assuming that just because it is developed by unpaid open-source volunteers it should somehow be slower than something developed by an expensive for-profit company is passing judgement on people who are donating their free time and effort into building this, and that is not cool.
We should all just stop comparing native apps to electron based apps, those things are soooo different. Electron/Chrome/Firefox/$browser are doing a ton of stuff behind the scenes, they are basically little virtual machines running the web platform. Comparing that to native is meaningless. You can of course prefer native apps, no one is arguing that, and yes you're correct that native apps will often use less resources, but it is the same as saying that a jumbo jet is much faster than a kickscooter, it might be true but what kind of comparison is that?! people are not building stuff with electron because they want to use less resources, the reasoning behind it is usually something else that those teams think is a valid trade-off
- lucideer 8y agoIt's a valid comparison because of all of your points. The question here is: why use Electron as a stack at all. The general arguments are to do with building modern, aesthetic, easy-to-use cross-platform apps with less dev resources. Slack as a company are not dev-resource-constrained, so this makes Krita an exemplary counter-example to anyone who ever defended Electron for these reasons.
- boudewijnrempt 8y agoGive me, and I'm the Krita maintainer, Qt and C++ every and any day...