4 ms·

In the article, the claim is made: if many popular software products like Slack, VSCode, and Docker Desktop all use Electron, then it must be good. In response

In the article, the claim is made: if many popular software products like Slack, VSCode, and Docker Desktop all use Electron, then it must be good. In response, I would say: while Electron makes it easy for the software developer to build and distribute software, especially on multiple platform, as an end user it is NEVER the best experience. That's why there are people spending significant effort to develop better solutions than Electron. For instance, the Tauri project ( https://tauri.app/ https://tauri.app/ ) is a lightweight alternative to Electron. The article defends the minimum application bundle size of 100MB-300MB is as no issue, because streaming 4K video takes much more bandwidth than such a software download. But the bigger issue than disk space or download bandwidth is the RAM usage and overall low performance of Electron projects. Even with a 16 GB or 32 GB RAM system, when you're running many apps and doing serious multitasking, the gigabytes quickly get used up and then things slow down. For example, if you have used VSCode, try using the Zed editor (https://zed.dev/ https://zed.dev/). You will be blown away by its incredible speed. Launches in the blink of an eye, and it responds to every input with zero latency. We have forgotten that software can actually be fast. Jonathan Blow, "Will Software Stop Getting Slower?" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ka549NNdDk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ka549NNdDk

mystified5016 2y ago
> In the article, the claim is made: if many popular software products like Slack, VSCode, and Docker Desktop all use Electron, then it must be good. I don't know anyone who thinks these are good applications, with the (imo incorrect) exception of VSCode. I can't believe that any significant number of people involved in these UX designs have even the slightest clue what users want or value. We're just aping what the big guys are doing because they're big and refusing to examine this decision at all. Maybe what's best for users is not the most flashy, bloated application possible. Maybe users want interfaces that make it quick and easy to accomplish a task without being manipulated into spending as much time as possible in the app for.... reasons? My extremely cold take is that software should be useful first and pretty second. If your artistic vision gets in between the user and their task, then you have failed utterly as a designer.
turtlebits 2y ago
It doesn't have to be the best experience. It just has to be better than the alternative, which is in many cases no app (or in the case for Slack, the web app)
patrick451 2y ago
It's unreal anybody can think VScode is good software. It's the only electron app I use the only place where typing lags.
aurareturn 2y ago
>In response, I would say: while Electron makes it easy for the software developer to build and distribute software, especially on multiple platform, as an end user it is NEVER the best experience. People on HN have this idealistic view of software that it should always make the best use of the native platform. In reality, the vast majority of users don't care that much. Electron does 3 things very well: 1. Availability. If not for Electron, would this desktop app have been made? 2. Low cost. Electron apps are cheaper to make because they're cross platform which lowers the dev resources. 3. Uniform feature set no matter where you use it. Web, macOS, PC, Linux. All the same experience. No missing features. So while Electron uses more memory and it lags sometimes, the benefits outweigh the cost for a category of apps such as chat apps.

mystified5016 2y ago

> In the article, the claim is made: if many popular software products like Slack, VSCode, and Docker Desktop all use Electron, then it must be good. I don't know anyone who thinks these are good applications, with the (imo incorrect) exception of VSCode. I can't believe that any significant number of people involved in these UX designs have even the slightest clue what users want or value. We're just aping what the big guys are doing because they're big and refusing to examine this decision at all. Maybe what's best for users is not the most flashy, bloated application possible. Maybe users want interfaces that make it quick and easy to accomplish a task without being manipulated into spending as much time as possible in the app for.... reasons? My extremely cold take is that software should be useful first and pretty second. If your artistic vision gets in between the user and their task, then you have failed utterly as a designer.

turtlebits 2y ago

It doesn't have to be the best experience. It just has to be better than the alternative, which is in many cases no app (or in the case for Slack, the web app)

patrick451 2y ago

It's unreal anybody can think VScode is good software. It's the only electron app I use the only place where typing lags.

aurareturn 2y ago

>In response, I would say: while Electron makes it easy for the software developer to build and distribute software, especially on multiple platform, as an end user it is NEVER the best experience. People on HN have this idealistic view of software that it should always make the best use of the native platform. In reality, the vast majority of users don't care that much. Electron does 3 things very well: 1. Availability. If not for Electron, would this desktop app have been made? 2. Low cost. Electron apps are cheaper to make because they're cross platform which lowers the dev resources. 3. Uniform feature set no matter where you use it. Web, macOS, PC, Linux. All the same experience. No missing features. So while Electron uses more memory and it lags sometimes, the benefits outweigh the cost for a category of apps such as chat apps.