1) Having seen a Signal client developed in QT, it was much more performant than Signal Desktop while using significantly less resources. 2) Electron apps don'

1) Having seen a Signal client developed in QT, it was much more performant than Signal Desktop while using significantly less resources. 2) Electron apps don't look native. People are used to this compromise from other frameworks, I wouldn't worry too much about it. If you really want to look native on Windows & Linux we have had a good time with Dotnet Core, kinda hilarious to use this with other libre components like Postgres/Nginx on Debian but hey, it is very lightweight, straightforward to write and amazingly performant, only Rust or C will perform better. In spite of all the hate lobbed on Electron, there are good Electron apps out there, Element being my favorite. Using Element alongside Signal Desktop or Teams, its wild to compare the garbage performance of the latter two to Element. Microsoft and Signal are using the same software stack (Electron, Sqlite) and have significantly more developer resources than Element, but yet only Element is ready to use nearly instantly after opening and has video calling that works flawlessly. In a similar vein, there is software written in well hated languages like PHP that most people would be happy to maintain & extend since it is well written, as the developers actually care. Often this seems to occur when the developers are directly interacting with the end users often, without intermediaries.