3 ms·

> because in practice using a native webview loses a lot of the ostensible portability of a browser-in-a-desktop app (they claimed native webviews can differ a

> because in practice using a native webview loses a lot of the ostensible portability of a browser-in-a-desktop app (they claimed native webviews can differ a lot between OS's) OS Webview fragmentation was my concern from the beginning, but got pretty much shushed away by tauri proponents. Funny how after years they also came to the same conclusion that a webview running on win8 and one on linux do not necessarily render/behave the same, and the amount of bugfixes/normalisation one would have to include is just to vast. Still it might make sense if you exactly know the OS distribution of your user base.

madeofpalk 2y ago
Is there something specific to the browser-in-a-desktop app domain that's different from normal frontend web development, where you have to support a variety of different browsers? How is it any different for Tauri?
- pornel 2y ago
  On Linux you get WebKitGTK, which is more of a gamble than browser versions of Chromium or Gecko.
- hiccuphippo 2y ago
  I guess it's "your choice" vs "the user's choice". When it's the user's choice they can't complain to you.
- marcosdumay 2y ago
  The different bit is that if you decide to include an entire engine with your app, you don't need to support a variety of different browsers. Most people that go into browser-in-a-desktop app want to also provide a web app, so the difference is moot. But there are certainly a few people for whom it applies.
Tsarp 2y ago
For a lot of basic applications that do not need a lot of the extended browser APIs, Tauri is an amazing option. Consistency isn't really required in a lot of use cases. You just want things to work, you have a small team and Tauri works perfectly. Some Linux distributions still dont work smoothly. If you could optionally choose to bundle verso just there I think its a great cross platform option.
general_reveal 2y ago
[dead]

madeofpalk 2y ago

Is there something specific to the browser-in-a-desktop app domain that's different from normal frontend web development, where you have to support a variety of different browsers? How is it any different for Tauri?

pornel 2y ago
On Linux you get WebKitGTK, which is more of a gamble than browser versions of Chromium or Gecko.
hiccuphippo 2y ago
I guess it's "your choice" vs "the user's choice". When it's the user's choice they can't complain to you.
marcosdumay 2y ago
The different bit is that if you decide to include an entire engine with your app, you don't need to support a variety of different browsers. Most people that go into browser-in-a-desktop app want to also provide a web app, so the difference is moot. But there are certainly a few people for whom it applies.

Tsarp 2y ago

For a lot of basic applications that do not need a lot of the extended browser APIs, Tauri is an amazing option. Consistency isn't really required in a lot of use cases. You just want things to work, you have a small team and Tauri works perfectly. Some Linux distributions still dont work smoothly. If you could optionally choose to bundle verso just there I think its a great cross platform option.

general_reveal 2y ago

[dead]