4 ms·

The majority of users leverage these technologies for a reason. If you use cross-platform technology you can simply reach a broader audience and in the case of

The majority of users leverage these technologies for a reason. If you use cross-platform technology you can simply reach a broader audience and in the case of a commercial product, generate more revenue with only minimal additional effort. From my personal experience users don't care at all if the app has a native look or not, as long as the app looks decent and works. I assume having the native UI components of an OS is a very specific requirement, that does not apply to the vast majority of users. In fact, the majority of users likely prefer having the same, highly customized UI of an application, rather than having a completely different looking app when switching platforms. Take Visual Studio Code as an example. Within a few years, this editor became one of the most popular code editors. The app uses mainly web technology and a browser window and does not look like a native application at all, yet for the majority of users, it feels like a very fast native application.

ridiculous_fish 7y ago
Why do you say that "VSCode does not look like a native app at all?" It has a Mac menu bar, context menus, drag and drop, familiar key equivalents. It's not a completely foreign experience like (say) vim. Achieving these things has required heroics on Microsoft's part. Very few other electron apps go to those lengths. Users switch between applications far more often than they switch OSes. Native behavior allows users to bring expertise from one app to another. I'd be productive more quickly with Chime, because I already speak its UI vocabulary.
- jchw 7y ago
  Native menu bar and context menus are very much built into Electron, even Hello World will have a proper menu on macOS. Some of the stuff like integrated title bar is also pretty recent, and likely wasn’t a contributing factor to its adoption. Not to say VSCode doesn’t put any effort in or anything but I think Electron apps are about on par with Qt apps in terms of native look and feel, albeit they have their own strengths and weaknesses and are not easy to directly compare.
newscracker 7y ago
> From my personal experience users don't care at all if the app has a native look or not, as long as the app looks decent and works. The same can be said of Windows (that users don’t care about the user experience). But the users may just not be aware of choices or may have things foisted on them for various reasons. That doesn’t necessarily mean they don’t care for a good experience. This also depends on the platform and the age group of users. It’s possible that younger users and/or those on Windows don’t care much about annoyances or just give up thinking that this is what a computing experience will be. Users on the Mac, especially those who’ve used it extensively (and learned) are more likely to realize and talk about non-native apps. It’s the same reason why hardcore Mac users have panned the newer “Catalyst” apps from Apple in macOS.
pcr910303 7y ago
> The majority of users leverage these technologies for a reason. If you use cross-platform technology you can simply reach a broader audience and in the case of a commercial product, generate more revenue with only minimal additional effort. I understand the reason. I also understand the productivity/audience argument, since I also have done web-dev. It's just that it's suboptimal, and I expected at least some people to develop native apps. > From my personal experience users don't care at all if the app has a native look or not, as long as the app looks decent and works. In fact, the majority of users likely prefer having the same, highly customized UI of an application, rather than having a completely different looking app when switching platforms. No, it's not. Unless you're targeting Windows where nobody knows the advantages because nobody has ever seen a consistent application. People used to consider whether the app is Carbon or Cocoa in the early days of OS X; just because Carbon had a suboptimal integration compared to Cocoa (even when the two frameworks are both from Apple). > Take Visual Studio Code as an example. Within a few years, this editor became one of the most popular code editors. The app uses mainly web technology and a browser window and does not look like a native application at all, yet for the majority of users, it feels like a very fast native application. VSCode is a successful product in spite of being a electron app, not because of it. It doesn't feel native at all, and I know many people complaining about it. I expect many people to pass over when a native-based app that has a similar feature set with VSCode gets released. (One can have a contrary opinion that the web-based architecture allows VSCode to develop more features than native; but in my experience, today's native app development isn't really that hard anymore. It has a similar barrier level.)
rvz 7y ago
> Take Visual Studio Code as an example. Within a few years, this editor became one of the most popular code editors. Well I wouldn't expect normal users to even consider downloading VSCode in huge numbers. There isn't a reason for them to do so, but developers will and only should care about building and get things done. User experience is different for the type of user. Developers will make this judgement if a tool gets in their way, prevents them from working or forces them to Google the issue and fix it themselves. Perhaps Slack and Discord are better examples of apps that normal users are expected to download in large numbers. They won't care on how it looks, but they will start to question why their laptops are burning on the laps and their fans at full speed. If you run a browser + electron combo then the computer is likely to be reduced to crawling speed which negatively affects the user experience.
justinclift 7y ago
Been using Visual Studio Code recently for an embedded ARM project. It's the only electron application I've seen that's not dog-slow. Guessing most other developers don't put in the needed effort to make their Electron apps decent?

ridiculous_fish 7y ago

Why do you say that "VSCode does not look like a native app at all?" It has a Mac menu bar, context menus, drag and drop, familiar key equivalents. It's not a completely foreign experience like (say) vim. Achieving these things has required heroics on Microsoft's part. Very few other electron apps go to those lengths. Users switch between applications far more often than they switch OSes. Native behavior allows users to bring expertise from one app to another. I'd be productive more quickly with Chime, because I already speak its UI vocabulary.

jchw 7y ago
Native menu bar and context menus are very much built into Electron, even Hello World will have a proper menu on macOS. Some of the stuff like integrated title bar is also pretty recent, and likely wasn’t a contributing factor to its adoption. Not to say VSCode doesn’t put any effort in or anything but I think Electron apps are about on par with Qt apps in terms of native look and feel, albeit they have their own strengths and weaknesses and are not easy to directly compare.

newscracker 7y ago

> From my personal experience users don't care at all if the app has a native look or not, as long as the app looks decent and works. The same can be said of Windows (that users don’t care about the user experience). But the users may just not be aware of choices or may have things foisted on them for various reasons. That doesn’t necessarily mean they don’t care for a good experience. This also depends on the platform and the age group of users. It’s possible that younger users and/or those on Windows don’t care much about annoyances or just give up thinking that this is what a computing experience will be. Users on the Mac, especially those who’ve used it extensively (and learned) are more likely to realize and talk about non-native apps. It’s the same reason why hardcore Mac users have panned the newer “Catalyst” apps from Apple in macOS.

pcr910303 7y ago

> The majority of users leverage these technologies for a reason. If you use cross-platform technology you can simply reach a broader audience and in the case of a commercial product, generate more revenue with only minimal additional effort. I understand the reason. I also understand the productivity/audience argument, since I also have done web-dev. It's just that it's suboptimal, and I expected at least some people to develop native apps. > From my personal experience users don't care at all if the app has a native look or not, as long as the app looks decent and works. In fact, the majority of users likely prefer having the same, highly customized UI of an application, rather than having a completely different looking app when switching platforms. No, it's not. Unless you're targeting Windows where nobody knows the advantages because nobody has ever seen a consistent application. People used to consider whether the app is Carbon or Cocoa in the early days of OS X; just because Carbon had a suboptimal integration compared to Cocoa (even when the two frameworks are both from Apple). > Take Visual Studio Code as an example. Within a few years, this editor became one of the most popular code editors. The app uses mainly web technology and a browser window and does not look like a native application at all, yet for the majority of users, it feels like a very fast native application. VSCode is a successful product in spite of being a electron app, not because of it. It doesn't feel native at all, and I know many people complaining about it. I expect many people to pass over when a native-based app that has a similar feature set with VSCode gets released. (One can have a contrary opinion that the web-based architecture allows VSCode to develop more features than native; but in my experience, today's native app development isn't really that hard anymore. It has a similar barrier level.)

rvz 7y ago

> Take Visual Studio Code as an example. Within a few years, this editor became one of the most popular code editors. Well I wouldn't expect normal users to even consider downloading VSCode in huge numbers. There isn't a reason for them to do so, but developers will and only should care about building and get things done. User experience is different for the type of user. Developers will make this judgement if a tool gets in their way, prevents them from working or forces them to Google the issue and fix it themselves. Perhaps Slack and Discord are better examples of apps that normal users are expected to download in large numbers. They won't care on how it looks, but they will start to question why their laptops are burning on the laps and their fans at full speed. If you run a browser + electron combo then the computer is likely to be reduced to crawling speed which negatively affects the user experience.

justinclift 7y ago

Been using Visual Studio Code recently for an embedded ARM project. It's the only electron application I've seen that's not dog-slow. Guessing most other developers don't put in the needed effort to make their Electron apps decent?