4 ms·

The problem is, you can forget about the entire web and node ecosystems of libraries, because it's just not compatible with any of the standard stuff. You'll pr

The problem is, you can forget about the entire web and node ecosystems of libraries, because it's just not compatible with any of the standard stuff. You'll probably end up having to write almost everything from scratch. Also, whatever you write won't then be usable in normal browsers. So it's essentially just another cross-platform UI library, with a DSL for the UI parts - of course that's still good enough for many people.

hexo 4y ago
- solardev 4y ago
  > Web and node ecosystem is rotten to the core. As a web dev, I agree 100%. It's a mess. > That's not a problem, but a very big plus. ...but if your business need/use case is to port with your existing web app to the desktop with minimal fuss (and you're willing to sacrifice UX), this in no way helps (unlike Electron). If you're going to have to manually rewrite everything for the desktop anyway, why would you want to do it in the DOM, using an older HTML version, a CSS subset, and a somewhat-compatible JS-lookalike? Why wouldn't you just write it in a desktop-native UI kit?
  - RyanGoosling 4y ago
    Bro I’m still rockin’ jQuery. I did some projects using React, then stepped back for a bit and asked why, then never used it again.
    - folkrav 4y ago
      Even jQuery doesn't work on Sciter.
    - solardev 4y ago
      Nothing wrong with jQuery if it suits your use case! Sometimes mutating the DOM directly is simpler and more maintainable. IMO React is a response to a problem that not all websites have (complex state-dependent nested UIs). At a certain level of complexity it's worth it, at another level it's necessary, beyond that it's insufficient... but below that it can totally be unnecessary and more pain than it's worth :) Go with what works for you and your team!
  - hexo 4y ago
    > ...but if your business need/use case is to port with your existing web app to the desktop with minimal fuss... I pretty much understand this point and see that Electron help. I would definitely write desktop-native UI, maybe just because I prefer it. And in large programs it might be somewhat expensive. But on the other hand, I found writing QT programs to be much easier than messing with web stacks.

hexo 4y ago

solardev 4y ago
> Web and node ecosystem is rotten to the core. As a web dev, I agree 100%. It's a mess. > That's not a problem, but a very big plus. ...but if your business need/use case is to port with your existing web app to the desktop with minimal fuss (and you're willing to sacrifice UX), this in no way helps (unlike Electron). If you're going to have to manually rewrite everything for the desktop anyway, why would you want to do it in the DOM, using an older HTML version, a CSS subset, and a somewhat-compatible JS-lookalike? Why wouldn't you just write it in a desktop-native UI kit?
- RyanGoosling 4y ago
  Bro I’m still rockin’ jQuery. I did some projects using React, then stepped back for a bit and asked why, then never used it again.
  - folkrav 4y ago
    Even jQuery doesn't work on Sciter.
  - solardev 4y ago
    Nothing wrong with jQuery if it suits your use case! Sometimes mutating the DOM directly is simpler and more maintainable. IMO React is a response to a problem that not all websites have (complex state-dependent nested UIs). At a certain level of complexity it's worth it, at another level it's necessary, beyond that it's insufficient... but below that it can totally be unnecessary and more pain than it's worth :) Go with what works for you and your team!
- hexo 4y ago
  > ...but if your business need/use case is to port with your existing web app to the desktop with minimal fuss... I pretty much understand this point and see that Electron help. I would definitely write desktop-native UI, maybe just because I prefer it. And in large programs it might be somewhat expensive. But on the other hand, I found writing QT programs to be much easier than messing with web stacks.