4 ms·

This sentiment is very common among developers/enthousiasts and virtually non-existent among regular users. Some companies waste way too much money chasing some

by rapsey 8y ago

This sentiment is very common among developers/enthousiasts and virtually non-existent among regular users. Some companies waste way too much money chasing some ideal very few care about, trying to please a segment of the users that are generally never happy anyway.

rimliu 8y ago
I think you got it backwards.
- rapsey 8y ago
  If users rejected electron apps they would not exist. Platform native is not even a concept 99% of users are familiar with.
  - Kliment 8y ago
    Good luck rejecting something when it's mandated by your job, as is often the case with slack and other electron-crapware. Electron apps exist because it's not the users deciding what the things they use are built in, it's the people who build them. For the vast majority of electron apps there isn't a non-electron alternative that allows you to do the same on said platform, and that's not even starting to look at network effects.
    - yyyymmddhhmmss 8y ago
      Moot point. Parent did not suggest that users decide which libraries or methods to use in development. Nothing of the sort. Electron apps come at a steep price, so if it didn’t offer something to the users, it would be hard to understand the proliferation. In many cases, it offers extremely similar availability on more platforms for less expense than the native alternative dev processes. The argument is if it lost users, that would need to be accounted for. I don’t believe it does.
  - yyyymmddhhmmss 8y ago
    This is absolutely true. Even if they notice, they won’t have the familiarity with the functional differences to even measure whether either is a good or bad thing.
  - Volt 8y ago
    Same thing could have been said for Java apps 15 years ago.
1123581321 8y ago
What is this based on? I think it’s more accurate to say that developers and enthusiasts are the ones who articulate this sentiment. Regular users do not talk about it or understand the issue, but behave and retain usage differently depending on the intuitively of the interface.

by rapsey 8y ago

rimliu 8y ago

I think you got it backwards.

rapsey 8y ago
If users rejected electron apps they would not exist. Platform native is not even a concept 99% of users are familiar with.
- Kliment 8y ago
  Good luck rejecting something when it's mandated by your job, as is often the case with slack and other electron-crapware. Electron apps exist because it's not the users deciding what the things they use are built in, it's the people who build them. For the vast majority of electron apps there isn't a non-electron alternative that allows you to do the same on said platform, and that's not even starting to look at network effects.
  - yyyymmddhhmmss 8y ago
    Moot point. Parent did not suggest that users decide which libraries or methods to use in development. Nothing of the sort. Electron apps come at a steep price, so if it didn’t offer something to the users, it would be hard to understand the proliferation. In many cases, it offers extremely similar availability on more platforms for less expense than the native alternative dev processes. The argument is if it lost users, that would need to be accounted for. I don’t believe it does.
- yyyymmddhhmmss 8y ago
  This is absolutely true. Even if they notice, they won’t have the familiarity with the functional differences to even measure whether either is a good or bad thing.
- Volt 8y ago
  Same thing could have been said for Java apps 15 years ago.

1123581321 8y ago

What is this based on? I think it’s more accurate to say that developers and enthusiasts are the ones who articulate this sentiment. Regular users do not talk about it or understand the issue, but behave and retain usage differently depending on the intuitively of the interface.