5 ms·

Here's a few very valid reasons imo - Easy cross platform support - Singular language/framework (typescript/react) for everything you're doing - Can share a

by stnmtn 5y ago

Here's a few very valid reasons imo - Easy cross platform support - Singular language/framework (typescript/react) for everything you're doing - Can share a lot of components/logic with mobile apps if you use React Native

egypturnash 5y ago
- you want to make sure that people respect the importance of your app by not running it along with everything else because it needs 10x the amount of resources a native app would
- Veuxdo 5y ago
  It's a consideration.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- adamdusty 5y ago
  Users don't care anymore. Phones have 12GB of RAM. A $500 laptop will have plenty of RAM, CPU power, and storage for the average user to not even notice anything. HN and reddit are the only ones who can't seem to grasp the idea that it's not 1995 anymore, and apps taking even 1-2 GB of RAM isn't that big of a deal for the average user. Do I want my CAD software as an electron app. Obviously not, but for most applications electron is just as good an option as anything else.
  - 10000truths 5y ago
    Sure, if you constrain “average user” to America. If you go to other places like India, where people don’t have $500 lying around to drop on the latest notebook, you’ll find a lot of repurposed laptops that have several-year-old specs still finding active use. Machines with 2 GB RAM and 250 GB spinning rust are not as uncommon as you might think. And sure, if you just run one app and that’s it, you might get away with acceptable performance. But now try to install it over slow or metered Internet. Try to run it alongside Chrome/Discord/Eclipse/Spotify/Android Studio. Try to install all those apps without chewing up your disk space. These aren’t hypothetical scenarios, these are very real usability concerns.
  - jcelerier 5y ago
    > and apps taking even 1-2 GB of RAM isn't that big of a deal for the average user. I live in France, a first world country, just checked Amazon, the N°1 best seller laptop currently has 4GB of RAM, a 64GB SSD, and a 1366x768 screen and a dual-core Intel Celeron CPU which does not even reach 3Ghz: https://www.amazon.fr/HP-14s-dq0000sf-Ultraportable-Microsoft-Personnel/dp/B08XQXSWSL/ https://www.amazon.fr/HP-14s-dq0000sf-Ultraportable-Microsof... this is what the average user looks like (and will still look like in a few years, if people buy a laptop today it's generally to keep it 5 years). I have never ever ever seen anyone say "hey, my computer is fast" it's always "do you think you could look at it, it's super slow / it has viruses / ..."
a4isms 5y ago
The nice thing about this question for old-timers is that we can recycle the answers we already heard about using Java for cross-platform desktop development from 20+ years ago. Or the rationale for using a cross-platform toolkit with C++ from 30+ years ago. You get substandard desktop applications that tend to frustrate people who are deeply immersed in any one ecosystem and expect native applications to have deep integration with each platform and comply with each platform’s design sensibilities. But history shows that applications written against cross-platform toolkits have done just fine, as have applications that completely embraced “going native” on particular platforms. I’m left with the thought that either strategy works if you go “all in,” the mistakes come from: 1. Going cross-platform but then doing ridiculous back-flips to try to make the app feel really, really native. Just take what the platform gives you, and accept that you’re giving people a web-like experience that happens to have some native affordances. Learn to live with the few complaints from retro-grouches. Or, 2. Going native, but skimping on deep integration and fully embracing the look and feel of each platform. This is one of those “penny-wise, pound-foolish’ strategies: You ship faster, but you lose the big benefits of a cross-platform tool, and you don’t satisfy the users that appreciate what a native app offers in look, feel, and integration.
- stnmtn 5y ago
  I think Discord strikes the balance of your two mistakes well.
  - vxNsr 5y ago
    As in, their app is really bad all around? Totally agree.
    - stnmtn 5y ago
      Ha, I meant it in the opposite way, that it avoids making either mistake. Yes, it consumes a lot of resources, but it's success has proven that users don't mind this as much as commenters on hacker news seem to. And it's a program that is slick, intuitive, and supports so, so many use cases without ever feeling overloading.
0xDEEPFAC 5y ago
Yea, these are poor reasons imho. Relying on mommy Chrome and the hellscape of ECMA transpilers seems like the opposite of "cross platform" since you rely on a much more unstable foundation...

by stnmtn 5y ago

egypturnash 5y ago

- you want to make sure that people respect the importance of your app by not running it along with everything else because it needs 10x the amount of resources a native app would

Veuxdo 5y ago
It's a consideration.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
adamdusty 5y ago
Users don't care anymore. Phones have 12GB of RAM. A $500 laptop will have plenty of RAM, CPU power, and storage for the average user to not even notice anything. HN and reddit are the only ones who can't seem to grasp the idea that it's not 1995 anymore, and apps taking even 1-2 GB of RAM isn't that big of a deal for the average user. Do I want my CAD software as an electron app. Obviously not, but for most applications electron is just as good an option as anything else.
- 10000truths 5y ago
  Sure, if you constrain “average user” to America. If you go to other places like India, where people don’t have $500 lying around to drop on the latest notebook, you’ll find a lot of repurposed laptops that have several-year-old specs still finding active use. Machines with 2 GB RAM and 250 GB spinning rust are not as uncommon as you might think. And sure, if you just run one app and that’s it, you might get away with acceptable performance. But now try to install it over slow or metered Internet. Try to run it alongside Chrome/Discord/Eclipse/Spotify/Android Studio. Try to install all those apps without chewing up your disk space. These aren’t hypothetical scenarios, these are very real usability concerns.
- jcelerier 5y ago
  > and apps taking even 1-2 GB of RAM isn't that big of a deal for the average user. I live in France, a first world country, just checked Amazon, the N°1 best seller laptop currently has 4GB of RAM, a 64GB SSD, and a 1366x768 screen and a dual-core Intel Celeron CPU which does not even reach 3Ghz: https://www.amazon.fr/HP-14s-dq0000sf-Ultraportable-Microsoft-Personnel/dp/B08XQXSWSL/ https://www.amazon.fr/HP-14s-dq0000sf-Ultraportable-Microsof... this is what the average user looks like (and will still look like in a few years, if people buy a laptop today it's generally to keep it 5 years). I have never ever ever seen anyone say "hey, my computer is fast" it's always "do you think you could look at it, it's super slow / it has viruses / ..."

a4isms 5y ago

The nice thing about this question for old-timers is that we can recycle the answers we already heard about using Java for cross-platform desktop development from 20+ years ago. Or the rationale for using a cross-platform toolkit with C++ from 30+ years ago. You get substandard desktop applications that tend to frustrate people who are deeply immersed in any one ecosystem and expect native applications to have deep integration with each platform and comply with each platform’s design sensibilities. But history shows that applications written against cross-platform toolkits have done just fine, as have applications that completely embraced “going native” on particular platforms. I’m left with the thought that either strategy works if you go “all in,” the mistakes come from: 1. Going cross-platform but then doing ridiculous back-flips to try to make the app feel really, really native. Just take what the platform gives you, and accept that you’re giving people a web-like experience that happens to have some native affordances. Learn to live with the few complaints from retro-grouches. Or, 2. Going native, but skimping on deep integration and fully embracing the look and feel of each platform. This is one of those “penny-wise, pound-foolish’ strategies: You ship faster, but you lose the big benefits of a cross-platform tool, and you don’t satisfy the users that appreciate what a native app offers in look, feel, and integration.

stnmtn 5y ago
I think Discord strikes the balance of your two mistakes well.
- vxNsr 5y ago
  As in, their app is really bad all around? Totally agree.
  - stnmtn 5y ago
    Ha, I meant it in the opposite way, that it avoids making either mistake. Yes, it consumes a lot of resources, but it's success has proven that users don't mind this as much as commenters on hacker news seem to. And it's a program that is slick, intuitive, and supports so, so many use cases without ever feeling overloading.

0xDEEPFAC 5y ago

Yea, these are poor reasons imho. Relying on mommy Chrome and the hellscape of ECMA transpilers seems like the opposite of "cross platform" since you rely on a much more unstable foundation...