> I'll ignore the "obnoxious" and "Get off your high horse" comments. Despite your tone I think you have a good point that's worth addressing. You just blatant

> I'll ignore the "obnoxious" and "Get off your high horse" comments. Despite your tone I think you have a good point that's worth addressing. You just blatantly declared a large number of developers as unethical for a technology choice so maybe learn to take it if you're gonna dish it out. > That's a sum total of 687.1MB for a chat client. I'll admit I was entirely wrong on the amount of memory here. Taking the renderers into account it's a lot more like you say. However the base footprint of Electron is less than 100 and the amount that gets used depends heavily on implementation details regardless of underlying framework. > So why should I be happy with 687.1MB of _my_ memory used by a chat client, when a competent development team writing a native app could use a fraction of that and give me a better native user experience? The fact that there is currently no other chat application implemented natively that brings you the same set of functionality should tell you something. This is the problem with reducing technology choices down to this narrow idea that only one thing matters. In reality there are many factors that comes into play such as the core competency of the employees you have at hand, team scalability, maintainability, time to market, etc. Slack may never have existed for all we know if they had to build it natively. You don't need to be happy about their product but you seem to be blindly assuming something better can be created with native technology when there is no evidence to support this case. Yes it can in theory, but in reality there are practical constraints. > One point you may not have realised is that yes, memory has grown and is cheap, but the advantage of having more resources is to do more. I'd argue we ARE doing more. That's the problem right there. People get so wound up about something like memory consumption that they forget the innovation that some of these apps have brought that perhaps justifies the extra cost. VS Code has IMO taken the place as the number 1 IDE. Would it have had the same improvement rate and rich ecosystem of add-ons if it wasn't using web tech? Probably not. Slack was a groundbreaking product when it came out. There has never been a product that offered the same feature set. Discord is another amazing piece of technology (I'd argue outperforms Slack). Again, you can claim all day long that these products would be better if they had UIs implemented from ground up in C++ or Objective-C but until someone actually does that the onus is on you to prove that it in practice can be done.