6 ms·

First off, the primary issues with Flash were that it was proprietary, had numerous security issues (due to its open source nature) and required custom, non-por

First off, the primary issues with Flash were that it was proprietary, had numerous security issues (due to its open source nature) and required custom, non-portable code. Electron is a free software platform that builds on the open web standards. It uses the Chromium browser, which is available on every major platform (that permits browser installation, that is). And it works with "walled garden" stuff like iOS/Safari, because the modern web actually does a pretty decent job of coordinating standards. If you use Linux desktop, you should be cheering loud and proud for Electron, because that's how Spotify, Discord, and many other apps have full feature parity between Linux and Windows and macOS.

kelnos 8y ago
As a Linux user, I've stopped using the Slack desktop app; I just keep tabs open in my browser for Slack. I agree that I'd rather have an Electron-based app on Linux than no ability to use an app at all, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't demand better (like React Native!). I run zero Electron-based apps on my laptop. They destroy battery life and slurp RAM to an unacceptable degree.
antoineMoPa 8y ago
Linux user not cheering here. I don't really get the point for desktop apps for things like discord... Why would I want another browser engine running when I can chat in discord in Firefox that is already running? Electron is like starting a tiny VM for every app. The only advantages I see here is for the app developer, who can be more intrusive (full access to run proprietary code on my laptop, send desktop notifications to make me an addict of their service, etc.)
- derefr 8y ago
  > The only advantages I see here is for the app developer, who can be more intrusive (full access to run proprietary code on my laptop, send desktop notifications to make me an addict of their service, etc.) From most people's perspective, that "intrusiveness" is the reason they're using a desktop OS with desktop apps, rather than e.g. ChromeOS.
- strokirk 8y ago
  Linux user cheering on here - I personally prefer having the option of a dedicated app.
  - dylan604 8y ago
    can you tells us why and elaborate on your preference of dedicated app vs webpage?
    - cschep 8y ago
      One specifically is just that Discord works well for me when used "natively", but doesn't work well (won't connect, worse latency, etc) when I used it from the webpage.
      - vram22 8y ago
        I have had the same problem with WhatsApp Web version vs. mobile. Web version had some issues. Mobile one works okay.
        dylan604 8y ago
        WebApp vs Mobile makes sense there would be differences. From the conversations here, Electron apps use the same code (???) as the web app would. Kind of an apples oranges thing
        vram22 8y ago
        Not necessarily. Any X vs. Y there would be differences. I'm a techie, but was speaking from a user perspective, in which case one does not care about whether same code is used or not, only about UX.
    - ronjouch 8y ago
      Not OP, but I share their sentiment that sometimes I also "prefer having the option of a dedicated app". Reasons for me: isolation, access to system tray and other desktop APIs, existence as a separate window which allows for windowmanager-level activation/minimization (I use my own https://github.com/ronjouch/marathon https://github.com/ronjouch/marathon for that), versioning / releases / archival through regular OS packages (e.g. with AUR in Arch Linux land). Also, people love stuff that will look like an "app" in their macOS dock. I maintain https://github.com/jiahaog/nativefier https://github.com/jiahaog/nativefier , which will make regular websites into "native desktop applications" based, obviously, on Electron. Yup, we've come full circle :D I'd offer a counterpoint to folks asking that question: if you love webpages so much, why don't you do write all your code in Cloud9 in your browser? See, sometimes, a separate window brings a different feel and lots of nuances that matter :) . Maybe you don't feel those nuances, so you prioritize other axes (like resource usage), but some people do.
- servercobra 8y ago
  I could definitely run a bunch of apps in my browser, but I prefer the desktop clients when possible. They show up in the dock (I'm sure I could do this with a browser app), they keep my browser clear for browsign, I can more easily Alt+Tab to them, and I don't have to worry about closing my browser and killing my chat client.
  - antoineMoPa 8y ago
    If there was something like an electron server with many client windows/apps, we could get all those nice features without launching many chrome instances...
    - stcredzero 8y ago
      So something like X-Windows, but with a VM.
  - tcfunk 8y ago
    I've also found (anecdotally) that the resource usage between a browser tab an the same electron app has been inconsequential.
  - felipeccastro 8y ago
    What you describe looks like the "install PWA" (Progressive Web Apps) feature coming to Chrome. It is available already in Chrome 72 if you enable a flag (#enable-desktop-pwas) - then, when visiting a PWA site (try https://mobile.twitter.com https://mobile.twitter.com) you have a menu option to install it like an app.
- jrs95 8y ago
  Some apps may legitimately benefit from having access to local native functionality that they can't access from a browser.
  - ljj1122 8y ago
    Like system-wide PTT to use Discord as an example.
  - morpheuskafka 8y ago
    balenaEtcher is a good example, it's written in Electron but obviously requires direct USB access that webUSB can't provide.
- pathartl 8y ago
  That's fine, most places that utilize Electron in this fashion have a web client as well. I personally would rather run a separate app and have a bit more integration with the desktop.
- KronenR 8y ago
  Touché
dylan604 8y ago
>First off, the primary issues with Flash were that it was proprietary, had numerous security issues (due to its open source nature) How can the primary issue being it was proprietary, yet you then say its open source nature was the security issue? Is there a way for something to be both open source and proprietary at the same time?
- AnIdiotOnTheNet 8y ago
  I assume they meant "closed source", but it isn't as though the open/closed nature had anything to do with its security problems.
  - morpheuskafka 8y ago
    Yeah, I was think of Electron being open source and Flash being closed, just wrote it wrong.
- tomnipotent 8y ago
  Flash and its VM were proprietary, but SWF/FLA/FLV file formats and related specs were not.
egypturnash 8y ago
"Flash burns through CPU and battery like crazy" is exactly why Apple wouldn't let it onto iOS.
blfr 8y ago
Spotify had a full-featured Linux client before Electron existed so, barring atemporal causation, it's not the reason.
- pitaj 8y ago
  Spotify didn't/doesn't use Electron, it uses something very similar called Chromium Embedded Framework (CEF)
_bxg1 8y ago
Exactly. The CPU and memory overhead isn't wasted; it's a tradeoff of computational resources for development resources. Being able to tap into the latest developments of the (much more active) web community instead of being stuck with neglected native APIs, and being able to code for all platforms at once without issue, are valuable. Making developers' lives easier at the cost of performance may seem like laziness, but it opens doors for things like builds that target niche platforms. That doesn't mean Electron and its use shouldn't be criticized, scrutinized, or optimized, but it's more than just "these young'uns being too lazy to learn a new language".
- stcredzero 8y ago
  The CPU and memory overhead isn't wasted; it's a tradeoff of computational resources for development resources. So the users are using more electricity and creating more carbon emissions so the development team can do more with fewer people. In a way, it's a way for a company to outsource a part of its development expense to its users and the environment.
  - dangus 8y ago
    My Slack instance is averaging 0.5% CPU usage at the moment. If you consider the 15 W TDP of this CPU we assume that Slack is using no more than .075 Watts of power. Probably much less, since there's no way a nearly-idle 15W TDP CPU is using 15W of energy. How much extra energy does allocated RAM use vs. unallocated RAM? RAM has to be powered as long as your computer is on. I don't think there's any difference. It's fine to be passionate about the environment but it's also important to be realistic and fact-driven. It really doesn't make sense to be telling people to make the most minuscule adjustments to carbon footprint instead of the easy low-hanging fruit (eating less red meat, buying fewer disposable products, being mindful of unneeded purchases, reusing and repairing possessions and purchasing them pre-owned). Turning your screen brightness down, banning Electron, or running Lynx instead of Chrome isn't going to save the planet, even if all 7 billion people in the world did it.
    - stcredzero 8y ago
Avshalom 8y ago
No, the primary issue with flash was that people used it to make unmutable autoplaying music and unskippable splash screens that took 10x longer to load than the actual page. Every technical complaint was trivial compared to that.
hsbaut76 8y ago
Linux user here - Im glad electron exists, even if it is incredibly resource hungry and inefficient. Rarely software is targeted for Linux, which means there are less mainstream apps than windows or OSX, which means less people using Linux. I want more people to use Linux, electron has been great at helping build that userbase, so despite its flaws, I welcome it.

kelnos 8y ago

As a Linux user, I've stopped using the Slack desktop app; I just keep tabs open in my browser for Slack. I agree that I'd rather have an Electron-based app on Linux than no ability to use an app at all, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't demand better (like React Native!). I run zero Electron-based apps on my laptop. They destroy battery life and slurp RAM to an unacceptable degree.

antoineMoPa 8y ago

Linux user not cheering here. I don't really get the point for desktop apps for things like discord... Why would I want another browser engine running when I can chat in discord in Firefox that is already running? Electron is like starting a tiny VM for every app. The only advantages I see here is for the app developer, who can be more intrusive (full access to run proprietary code on my laptop, send desktop notifications to make me an addict of their service, etc.)

derefr 8y ago
> The only advantages I see here is for the app developer, who can be more intrusive (full access to run proprietary code on my laptop, send desktop notifications to make me an addict of their service, etc.) From most people's perspective, that "intrusiveness" is the reason they're using a desktop OS with desktop apps, rather than e.g. ChromeOS.
strokirk 8y ago
Linux user cheering on here - I personally prefer having the option of a dedicated app.
- dylan604 8y ago
  can you tells us why and elaborate on your preference of dedicated app vs webpage?
  - cschep 8y ago
    One specifically is just that Discord works well for me when used "natively", but doesn't work well (won't connect, worse latency, etc) when I used it from the webpage.
    - vram22 8y ago
      I have had the same problem with WhatsApp Web version vs. mobile. Web version had some issues. Mobile one works okay.
      - dylan604 8y ago
        WebApp vs Mobile makes sense there would be differences. From the conversations here, Electron apps use the same code (???) as the web app would. Kind of an apples oranges thing
        vram22 8y ago
        Not necessarily. Any X vs. Y there would be differences. I'm a techie, but was speaking from a user perspective, in which case one does not care about whether same code is used or not, only about UX.
  - ronjouch 8y ago
    Not OP, but I share their sentiment that sometimes I also "prefer having the option of a dedicated app". Reasons for me: isolation, access to system tray and other desktop APIs, existence as a separate window which allows for windowmanager-level activation/minimization (I use my own https://github.com/ronjouch/marathon https://github.com/ronjouch/marathon for that), versioning / releases / archival through regular OS packages (e.g. with AUR in Arch Linux land). Also, people love stuff that will look like an "app" in their macOS dock. I maintain https://github.com/jiahaog/nativefier https://github.com/jiahaog/nativefier , which will make regular websites into "native desktop applications" based, obviously, on Electron. Yup, we've come full circle :D I'd offer a counterpoint to folks asking that question: if you love webpages so much, why don't you do write all your code in Cloud9 in your browser? See, sometimes, a separate window brings a different feel and lots of nuances that matter :) . Maybe you don't feel those nuances, so you prioritize other axes (like resource usage), but some people do.
servercobra 8y ago
I could definitely run a bunch of apps in my browser, but I prefer the desktop clients when possible. They show up in the dock (I'm sure I could do this with a browser app), they keep my browser clear for browsign, I can more easily Alt+Tab to them, and I don't have to worry about closing my browser and killing my chat client.
- antoineMoPa 8y ago
  If there was something like an electron server with many client windows/apps, we could get all those nice features without launching many chrome instances...
  - stcredzero 8y ago
    So something like X-Windows, but with a VM.
- tcfunk 8y ago
  I've also found (anecdotally) that the resource usage between a browser tab an the same electron app has been inconsequential.
- felipeccastro 8y ago
  What you describe looks like the "install PWA" (Progressive Web Apps) feature coming to Chrome. It is available already in Chrome 72 if you enable a flag (#enable-desktop-pwas) - then, when visiting a PWA site (try https://mobile.twitter.com https://mobile.twitter.com) you have a menu option to install it like an app.
jrs95 8y ago
Some apps may legitimately benefit from having access to local native functionality that they can't access from a browser.
- ljj1122 8y ago
  Like system-wide PTT to use Discord as an example.
- morpheuskafka 8y ago
  balenaEtcher is a good example, it's written in Electron but obviously requires direct USB access that webUSB can't provide.
pathartl 8y ago
That's fine, most places that utilize Electron in this fashion have a web client as well. I personally would rather run a separate app and have a bit more integration with the desktop.
KronenR 8y ago
Touché

dylan604 8y ago

>First off, the primary issues with Flash were that it was proprietary, had numerous security issues (due to its open source nature) How can the primary issue being it was proprietary, yet you then say its open source nature was the security issue? Is there a way for something to be both open source and proprietary at the same time?

AnIdiotOnTheNet 8y ago
I assume they meant "closed source", but it isn't as though the open/closed nature had anything to do with its security problems.
- morpheuskafka 8y ago
  Yeah, I was think of Electron being open source and Flash being closed, just wrote it wrong.
tomnipotent 8y ago
Flash and its VM were proprietary, but SWF/FLA/FLV file formats and related specs were not.

egypturnash 8y ago

"Flash burns through CPU and battery like crazy" is exactly why Apple wouldn't let it onto iOS.

blfr 8y ago

Spotify had a full-featured Linux client before Electron existed so, barring atemporal causation, it's not the reason.

pitaj 8y ago
Spotify didn't/doesn't use Electron, it uses something very similar called Chromium Embedded Framework (CEF)

_bxg1 8y ago

Exactly. The CPU and memory overhead isn't wasted; it's a tradeoff of computational resources for development resources. Being able to tap into the latest developments of the (much more active) web community instead of being stuck with neglected native APIs, and being able to code for all platforms at once without issue, are valuable. Making developers' lives easier at the cost of performance may seem like laziness, but it opens doors for things like builds that target niche platforms. That doesn't mean Electron and its use shouldn't be criticized, scrutinized, or optimized, but it's more than just "these young'uns being too lazy to learn a new language".

stcredzero 8y ago
The CPU and memory overhead isn't wasted; it's a tradeoff of computational resources for development resources. So the users are using more electricity and creating more carbon emissions so the development team can do more with fewer people. In a way, it's a way for a company to outsource a part of its development expense to its users and the environment.
- dangus 8y ago
  My Slack instance is averaging 0.5% CPU usage at the moment. If you consider the 15 W TDP of this CPU we assume that Slack is using no more than .075 Watts of power. Probably much less, since there's no way a nearly-idle 15W TDP CPU is using 15W of energy. How much extra energy does allocated RAM use vs. unallocated RAM? RAM has to be powered as long as your computer is on. I don't think there's any difference. It's fine to be passionate about the environment but it's also important to be realistic and fact-driven. It really doesn't make sense to be telling people to make the most minuscule adjustments to carbon footprint instead of the easy low-hanging fruit (eating less red meat, buying fewer disposable products, being mindful of unneeded purchases, reusing and repairing possessions and purchasing them pre-owned). Turning your screen brightness down, banning Electron, or running Lynx instead of Chrome isn't going to save the planet, even if all 7 billion people in the world did it.
  - stcredzero 8y ago

Avshalom 8y ago

No, the primary issue with flash was that people used it to make unmutable autoplaying music and unskippable splash screens that took 10x longer to load than the actual page. Every technical complaint was trivial compared to that.

hsbaut76 8y ago

Linux user here - Im glad electron exists, even if it is incredibly resource hungry and inefficient. Rarely software is targeted for Linux, which means there are less mainstream apps than windows or OSX, which means less people using Linux. I want more people to use Linux, electron has been great at helping build that userbase, so despite its flaws, I welcome it.