5 ms·

I know quite a lot of folks here are fed up with moves away from native apps and towards Electron-wrapped web apps (and often for totally valid reasons) but it'

by 1986 6y ago

I know quite a lot of folks here are fed up with moves away from native apps and towards Electron-wrapped web apps (and often for totally valid reasons) but it's been a godsend for making Linux a usable daily driver OS. IMO if you're doing eg web dev work in a GSuite / Slack / Figma / etc organization, it's never been a better time to try desktop Linux!

kylebenzle 6y ago
Can anyone say why browser based IDEs like Jupyter Notebook are taking over desktop programs? I'm finding I keep getting pushed to Jupyter and just am not crazy about it.
- oivey 6y ago
  People want something like a persistent REPL, and for whatever reason most IDEs have either not supported this or supported it badly.
StavrosK 6y ago
Why do you need web apps wrapped in their own window, though? Just open a browser. Relatedly, Electron is a problem because desktop apps nowadays require a huge browser just to display a window, not because web apps are packaged in a browser to get slightly better desktop integration.
- ben-schaaf 6y ago
  Unfortunately you have things like Discord that require access to native APIs in order to properly function (eg. Push to talk).
- fiddlerwoaroof 6y ago
  I like Slack and similar having their own icon and entry in the alt-tab switcher. Absent ubiquitous PWA support, electron is sort of the least bad alternative.
  - StavrosK 6y ago
    Ah, fair point. Electron is a good fit for web apps that would otherwise live in a browser, I agree.
  - mixmastamyk 6y ago
    Sounds like there is an opportunity for someone to provide a way to display an icon in the window manager that saves a gigabyte of RAM. :D
    - keithnz 6y ago
      ironically, windows just included this for Edge, you can alt tab between browser windows and you can put websites as taskbar apps ( and will also jump to all windows of the app easily as well)
    - fctorial 6y ago
      Chrome apps?
      - est31 6y ago
        .lnk files. Or on Linux, .desktop files. Can contain an URL. You click it, a browser opens. The tech is decades old at this point.
        mixmastamyk 6y ago
        I believe he meant an icon for the running window, not one on the desktop or menu.
  - ubercow13 6y ago
    You can kind of do this with Chrome for any website. More tools->create shortcut in the menu.
    - crazyjncsu 6y ago
      We’ve used this for years as our answer to users who request a desktop app. They’re generally pleasantly surprised and satisfied with the result.
- mikeryan 6y ago
  File system access? Ability to Play a Video stream without a user click? Access to non-CORS enabled APIs if needed?
  - est31 6y ago
    Most apps don't need that feature. In fact, the apps which insist on electron experience often misuse it. Think of the zoom daemon that remained on mac desktops even if you uninstalled zoom.
    - fiddlerwoaroof 6y ago
      Every time I click a zoom link these days on macOS, I get really annoyed that I have to click again to get into the video call: the security issue was unfortunate, but (for me) Zoom was absolutely right about the UX.
    - eptcyka 6y ago
      Zoom has nothing to do with electron
  - pjmlp 6y ago
    All of them doable with daemon applications, plus file system access APIs are already available.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- im3w1l 6y ago
  Electron app: works offline has more permissions can use udp separate alt-tab, tray display is not throttled because it's in the background (on desktop) unaffected by browser settings unaffected by clear cookies unaffected by extensions less confusion over who handles keybinds
  - jamesgeck0 6y ago
    Web apps have been able to work offline for like a decade now, iirc.
    - danShumway 6y ago
      Not well. I'm optimistic about the web in general, but I consider good, reliable clientside storage to still be an unsolved problem, at least for the moment. Some of the things we're still missing: - the ability to easily share data between domains without opening yourself up to massive security risks. - the ability to share data with native apps. - the ability to move data between browsers without syncing it to an online account. - the ability for normal users to inspect offline data. - the ability to trust that browsers like Safari won't just arbitrarily delete your data one day.[0] - the ability to trust that browser upgrades won't ever corrupt the data you have stored.[1] - the ability to share large amounts of data without worrying about storage limits (this matters a lot if you're making an editor like Atom or Visual Studio). Typically, what I see with offline apps is that they'll use offline storage, but they don't trust it. They use it when possible as a progressive enhancement, but then they have to sync that data to a server someplace if it's something that users actually care about. And that matches my experiences as a web developer as well. I can't imagine building something like a password manager or text editor in-browser that was only storing data locally, I wouldn't trust that. It's also not just a technological problem, it's a problem of UX. If I tried to make a purely offline web app, I'd be getting angry customer calls in a week asking where their data went just from them clearing browser history and not realizing that it deleted all their data as well. There isn't a user-friendly, user-controlled way to indicate that storage for one website should be permanent, and users aren't really trained to think that way about the web anyway -- their instinct is to think of it as transient. ---- [0]: https://ar.al/2020/03/25/apple-just-killed-offline-web-apps-while-purporting-to-protect-your-privacy-why-thats-a-bad-thing-and-why-you-should-care/ https://ar.al/2020/03/25/apple-just-killed-offline-web-apps-... [1]: https://www.androidpolice.com/2019/12/17/google-fixes-chrome-bug-that-broke-local-storage-for-some-web-and-android-apps-no-data-is-lost/ https://www.androidpolice.com/2019/12/17/google-fixes-chrome...
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
Subsentient 6y ago
Honestly I'd suggest they just use Qt then. Our company is writing a portable replacement to our Electron client right now. The electron option was absolute garbage, very limited, and caused us untold pain. We got tired of telling customers "we can't really do that". The Qt version is already working on Linux and Windows, and on whatever CPUs we compile it for. There's no excuse for Electron, because there are good, portable GUI frameworks and libraries to use instead. Hell, don't like Qt? Use GTK+! I use GTK+ for my own portable personal projects, I like the API better and it integrates better with XFCE.
- est31 6y ago
  Qt is nice but costs money for developers of proprietary software. Electron has its own costs but most of them are externalized to the user. So it wins out.
  - maple3142 6y ago
    I guess there will be people going to say that QT is LGPL, which allows people to use in proprietary applications. But I think there must be people who just want permissive alternative, and Electron is MIT, so it is indeed more viable (liceise wise).
  - berkut 6y ago
    ? It's LGPL, so as long as you link dynamically, it's fine for proprietary software to use it. A lot of commercial proprietary software in the VFX industry does this (Nuke, Katana, Mari, Maya, Houdini, etc).
    - est31 6y ago
      IDK a lot of proprietary developers don't understand the LGPL and are scared by its copyleft. They like how simple the MIT license is. Also, apple's app store is famously LGPL-incompatible.
      - heavyset_go 6y ago
tiltrus 6y ago
Agreed. Between Gsuite, Gitkraken, Figma, VSCode, PopOS, and my $700 Ryzen 4700u laptop, web dev is absolutely stellar. Would never go back to Windows or MacOS. Everything with PopOS and this AMD laptop works out of the box. I can definitely understand people sticking to Windows though if they need gaming or Office.
the_only_law 6y ago
On the flip side side: my low end machines no longer seem to be usable anymore.

by 1986 6y ago

kylebenzle 6y ago

Can anyone say why browser based IDEs like Jupyter Notebook are taking over desktop programs? I'm finding I keep getting pushed to Jupyter and just am not crazy about it.

oivey 6y ago
People want something like a persistent REPL, and for whatever reason most IDEs have either not supported this or supported it badly.

StavrosK 6y ago

Why do you need web apps wrapped in their own window, though? Just open a browser. Relatedly, Electron is a problem because desktop apps nowadays require a huge browser just to display a window, not because web apps are packaged in a browser to get slightly better desktop integration.

ben-schaaf 6y ago
Unfortunately you have things like Discord that require access to native APIs in order to properly function (eg. Push to talk).
fiddlerwoaroof 6y ago
I like Slack and similar having their own icon and entry in the alt-tab switcher. Absent ubiquitous PWA support, electron is sort of the least bad alternative.
- StavrosK 6y ago
  Ah, fair point. Electron is a good fit for web apps that would otherwise live in a browser, I agree.
- mixmastamyk 6y ago
  Sounds like there is an opportunity for someone to provide a way to display an icon in the window manager that saves a gigabyte of RAM. :D
  - keithnz 6y ago
    ironically, windows just included this for Edge, you can alt tab between browser windows and you can put websites as taskbar apps ( and will also jump to all windows of the app easily as well)
  - fctorial 6y ago
    Chrome apps?
    - est31 6y ago
      .lnk files. Or on Linux, .desktop files. Can contain an URL. You click it, a browser opens. The tech is decades old at this point.
      - mixmastamyk 6y ago
        I believe he meant an icon for the running window, not one on the desktop or menu.
- ubercow13 6y ago
  You can kind of do this with Chrome for any website. More tools->create shortcut in the menu.
  - crazyjncsu 6y ago
    We’ve used this for years as our answer to users who request a desktop app. They’re generally pleasantly surprised and satisfied with the result.
mikeryan 6y ago
File system access? Ability to Play a Video stream without a user click? Access to non-CORS enabled APIs if needed?
- est31 6y ago
  Most apps don't need that feature. In fact, the apps which insist on electron experience often misuse it. Think of the zoom daemon that remained on mac desktops even if you uninstalled zoom.
  - fiddlerwoaroof 6y ago
    Every time I click a zoom link these days on macOS, I get really annoyed that I have to click again to get into the video call: the security issue was unfortunate, but (for me) Zoom was absolutely right about the UX.
  - eptcyka 6y ago
    Zoom has nothing to do with electron
- pjmlp 6y ago
  All of them doable with daemon applications, plus file system access APIs are already available.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
im3w1l 6y ago
Electron app: works offline has more permissions can use udp separate alt-tab, tray display is not throttled because it's in the background (on desktop) unaffected by browser settings unaffected by clear cookies unaffected by extensions less confusion over who handles keybinds
- jamesgeck0 6y ago
  Web apps have been able to work offline for like a decade now, iirc.
  - danShumway 6y ago
    Not well. I'm optimistic about the web in general, but I consider good, reliable clientside storage to still be an unsolved problem, at least for the moment. Some of the things we're still missing: - the ability to easily share data between domains without opening yourself up to massive security risks. - the ability to share data with native apps. - the ability to move data between browsers without syncing it to an online account. - the ability for normal users to inspect offline data. - the ability to trust that browsers like Safari won't just arbitrarily delete your data one day.[0] - the ability to trust that browser upgrades won't ever corrupt the data you have stored.[1] - the ability to share large amounts of data without worrying about storage limits (this matters a lot if you're making an editor like Atom or Visual Studio). Typically, what I see with offline apps is that they'll use offline storage, but they don't trust it. They use it when possible as a progressive enhancement, but then they have to sync that data to a server someplace if it's something that users actually care about. And that matches my experiences as a web developer as well. I can't imagine building something like a password manager or text editor in-browser that was only storing data locally, I wouldn't trust that. It's also not just a technological problem, it's a problem of UX. If I tried to make a purely offline web app, I'd be getting angry customer calls in a week asking where their data went just from them clearing browser history and not realizing that it deleted all their data as well. There isn't a user-friendly, user-controlled way to indicate that storage for one website should be permanent, and users aren't really trained to think that way about the web anyway -- their instinct is to think of it as transient. ---- [0]: https://ar.al/2020/03/25/apple-just-killed-offline-web-apps-while-purporting-to-protect-your-privacy-why-thats-a-bad-thing-and-why-you-should-care/ https://ar.al/2020/03/25/apple-just-killed-offline-web-apps-... [1]: https://www.androidpolice.com/2019/12/17/google-fixes-chrome-bug-that-broke-local-storage-for-some-web-and-android-apps-no-data-is-lost/ https://www.androidpolice.com/2019/12/17/google-fixes-chrome...

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

Subsentient 6y ago

Honestly I'd suggest they just use Qt then. Our company is writing a portable replacement to our Electron client right now. The electron option was absolute garbage, very limited, and caused us untold pain. We got tired of telling customers "we can't really do that". The Qt version is already working on Linux and Windows, and on whatever CPUs we compile it for. There's no excuse for Electron, because there are good, portable GUI frameworks and libraries to use instead. Hell, don't like Qt? Use GTK+! I use GTK+ for my own portable personal projects, I like the API better and it integrates better with XFCE.

est31 6y ago
Qt is nice but costs money for developers of proprietary software. Electron has its own costs but most of them are externalized to the user. So it wins out.
- maple3142 6y ago
  I guess there will be people going to say that QT is LGPL, which allows people to use in proprietary applications. But I think there must be people who just want permissive alternative, and Electron is MIT, so it is indeed more viable (liceise wise).
- berkut 6y ago
  ? It's LGPL, so as long as you link dynamically, it's fine for proprietary software to use it. A lot of commercial proprietary software in the VFX industry does this (Nuke, Katana, Mari, Maya, Houdini, etc).
  - est31 6y ago
    IDK a lot of proprietary developers don't understand the LGPL and are scared by its copyleft. They like how simple the MIT license is. Also, apple's app store is famously LGPL-incompatible.
    - heavyset_go 6y ago

tiltrus 6y ago

Agreed. Between Gsuite, Gitkraken, Figma, VSCode, PopOS, and my $700 Ryzen 4700u laptop, web dev is absolutely stellar. Would never go back to Windows or MacOS. Everything with PopOS and this AMD laptop works out of the box. I can definitely understand people sticking to Windows though if they need gaming or Office.

the_only_law 6y ago

On the flip side side: my low end machines no longer seem to be usable anymore.