It's a reasonable perspective, but I think it's also reasonable to point out that "native" is not just used as a technical term but also used a shorthand for al

It's a reasonable perspective, but I think it's also reasonable to point out that "native" is not just used as a technical term but also used a shorthand for all those benefits that the user really does care about. So "fast, standard widgets, and conforms to UI conventions of the environment" is a useful enough group of characteristics that I think it's natural that people are going to use the term to describe them. It's precisely because non-native apps are generally worse on all counts, so if you can go to the trouble of making something that is just as good, people are going to want to label it that way, and if the technology used doesn't affect the user experience in any way, it doesn't need to be mentioned. And I would say Office is native on Windows, I don't see how the flagship product written for that OS could be considered anything but. Even if they wrote the entire UI in an interpreted language and used all custom widgets, that would still be true according to my definition.