5 ms·

Dealing with the rendering differences isn't any more difficult with Tauri than it is when making a normal web app, is it?

by mort96 1y ago

Klonoar 1y ago
No, WebkitGTK is notoriously an issue.
- mort96 1y ago
  Is WebKitGTK as used by Tauri worse than WebKitGTK used by a web app user's web browser?
  - porridgeraisin 1y ago
    No. But also, nobody(first order approximation) uses Gnome web. I would wager most javascript web apps don't work on that browser anyways due to webkitgtk. The most popular gnome distros all come with firefox installed so even the "just use the default" folks won't be using gnome web.
    - oblio 1y ago
      But the thing is, if you're using Tauri, you control the web app. So you need to test it on WebkitGTK, I guess that's the extra burden?
      - porridgeraisin 1y ago
        Have you actually tried deploying to webkitgtk ever? Good luck "testing" your video conferencing app on webkitgtk - it doesn't support webrtc! It is still useful to test your error page I suppose. Note that this is one example among many of missing features, bugs and/or horrible performance. Here's a preview: no notifications, no :has, no TLA. (Not blaming the epiphany devs for the situation here to be clear)
        oblio 1y ago
        The thing is, Firefox/Gecko isn't embeddable (probably the one of worst tech blunders ever). I wonder if Tauri could wrap around Blink, instead? Then your app could just ask for Chrome to be installed.
        mort96 1y ago
        The modern Qt web view component, QtWebEngine, is actually Chromium-based. So you could imagine a Tauri which uses Qt instead of GTK and uses QtWebEngine as its renderer instead of WebKitGTK.
        anthk 1y ago
        Ahem https://github.com/tauri-apps/tauri/discussions/8426 https://github.com/tauri-apps/tauri/discussions/8426
        Klonoar 1y ago
        That's a significant amount of workaround for something that "just works" elsewhere (and if I'm reading correctly doesn't work under Wayland). It proves what everyone knows: that there's no reason WebRTC can't work in Tauri/Linux environments. It also proves the point here: there are legitimate issues with the system-provided webview approach that are not always apparent.
    - ameliaquining 1y ago
      WebKitGTK benefits from sharing a codebase with WebKit for iOS, which web developers do care about supporting. There can still be bugs in the Linux-specific platform integration code, but that's not most of the codebase, so any given app is less likely to run across a bug in it. It's not as reliable as more mainstream browser-OS combinations, but saying that most apps don't work is an exaggeration.
      - Klonoar 1y ago
        Last I checked, WebkitGTK does not have parity with WebKit on iOS, and plenty of devs do test on that platform anyway - so I'm not sure what you're talking about? You're right to correct someone saying _most_ apps don't work, but it's also not cool to just sweep the WebkitGTK issue under the rug and pretend it's not an issue at all. It's bitten plenty of people who build on Tauri. Additionally, the issues people find with WebkitGTK/Tauri aren't always web related, usually moreso Linux related (weird blank screens, issues with rendering certain stacked items, etc).
    - anthk 1y ago
      Gnome Web sucks, it's has shitty defaults and a horrid performance. But luakit/vimb can be really fast. Luakit even ran under a netbook. Single page bound, ok,, but not bad from an n270 with 1GB of RAM.
    - anthk 1y ago
      Gnome Web sucks, it has shitty defaults and a horrid performance. But luakit/vimb can be really fast. Luakit even ran under a netbook. Single page bound, ok,, but not bad from an n270 with 1GB of RAM.
      - Narishma 1y ago
        > Luakit even ran under a netbook. Single page bound, ok,, but not bad from an n270 with 1GB of RAM. I have one such device and Firefox and Chrome also run on it. They're slow but still usable.
- blurbleblurble 1y ago
  It's awful. I'm cautiously optimistic (hopeful? naive?) that progress on servo will make it unnecessary!
- cosmic_cheese 1y ago
  The Linux port of Orion (Kagi’s power user oriented web browser) is built with WebKitGTK, some hopefully the Orion team will be patching up some of the more glaring issues. At minimum the port will put it in front of pairs of eyeballs that hadn’t been looking at it before which should help bring attention to bugs.
logankeenan 1y ago
With Electron, it will bundle chrome into the app so you only have to handle that single rendering engine. Tauri uses whatever is the default browser on the system the app is installed on
- mort96 1y ago
  I know. I'm saying that Tauri doesn't make things more difficult than any normal web app development, it's not like making web apps which work across browsers is a new and scary thing
  - yojo 1y ago
    It's not a new or scary thing, but it's way more expensive (in time or money) than relying on "it looks good on my machine, so it looks good everywhere." I've worked on large consumer-facing web-apps where we had a dedicated QA team (and/or contracting firm) that runs visual regression testing on multiple platforms and browser versions. As a solo developer, I have no interest in being that team for my hobby project. So the tradeoff with Tauri for me was "accept that I will ship obvious UI bugs" vs "accept that I will ship a bloated binary." Reading anecdata on forums, it seems like the only people who get up in arms over an extra 200MB are HN readers, and my app isn't really targeted at them.
    - Capricorn2481 1y ago
      > Reading anecdata on forums, it seems like the only people who get up in arms over an extra 200MB are HN readers, and my app isn't really targeted at them I think it's good to be wary of overly sensitive advice that regular users don't care about. But would a regular user realize they have 10 electron apps running and their ram is maxed out all the time? The argument against Electron isn't just a single bloated binary, but everyone shipping an app that uses way more RAM than necessary.
      - yojo 1y ago
        That's a fair point. My app (and possibly the OP's) is built assuming it is the user's current focus and priority, and that you'll quit it once you're done with the task. I don't feel bad about asking for a chunk of RAM for a focal app like this, but I would feel differently if I was shipping a background tool or small utility or something.
paxys 1y ago
Chrome has by far the most consistent cross-platform rendering.
- sieabahlpark 1y ago
  [dead]
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]

Dealing with the rendering differences isn't any more difficult with Tauri than it is when making a normal web app, is it?

by mort96 1y ago

Dealing with the rendering differences isn't any more difficult with Tauri than it is when making a normal web app, is it?

Klonoar 1y ago

No, WebkitGTK is notoriously an issue.

mort96 1y ago
Is WebKitGTK as used by Tauri worse than WebKitGTK used by a web app user's web browser?
- porridgeraisin 1y ago
  No. But also, nobody(first order approximation) uses Gnome web. I would wager most javascript web apps don't work on that browser anyways due to webkitgtk. The most popular gnome distros all come with firefox installed so even the "just use the default" folks won't be using gnome web.
  - oblio 1y ago
    But the thing is, if you're using Tauri, you control the web app. So you need to test it on WebkitGTK, I guess that's the extra burden?
    - porridgeraisin 1y ago
      Have you actually tried deploying to webkitgtk ever? Good luck "testing" your video conferencing app on webkitgtk - it doesn't support webrtc! It is still useful to test your error page I suppose. Note that this is one example among many of missing features, bugs and/or horrible performance. Here's a preview: no notifications, no :has, no TLA. (Not blaming the epiphany devs for the situation here to be clear)
      - oblio 1y ago
        The thing is, Firefox/Gecko isn't embeddable (probably the one of worst tech blunders ever). I wonder if Tauri could wrap around Blink, instead? Then your app could just ask for Chrome to be installed.
        mort96 1y ago
        The modern Qt web view component, QtWebEngine, is actually Chromium-based. So you could imagine a Tauri which uses Qt instead of GTK and uses QtWebEngine as its renderer instead of WebKitGTK.
      - anthk 1y ago
        Ahem https://github.com/tauri-apps/tauri/discussions/8426 https://github.com/tauri-apps/tauri/discussions/8426
        Klonoar 1y ago
        That's a significant amount of workaround for something that "just works" elsewhere (and if I'm reading correctly doesn't work under Wayland). It proves what everyone knows: that there's no reason WebRTC can't work in Tauri/Linux environments. It also proves the point here: there are legitimate issues with the system-provided webview approach that are not always apparent.
  - ameliaquining 1y ago
    WebKitGTK benefits from sharing a codebase with WebKit for iOS, which web developers do care about supporting. There can still be bugs in the Linux-specific platform integration code, but that's not most of the codebase, so any given app is less likely to run across a bug in it. It's not as reliable as more mainstream browser-OS combinations, but saying that most apps don't work is an exaggeration.
    - Klonoar 1y ago
      Last I checked, WebkitGTK does not have parity with WebKit on iOS, and plenty of devs do test on that platform anyway - so I'm not sure what you're talking about? You're right to correct someone saying _most_ apps don't work, but it's also not cool to just sweep the WebkitGTK issue under the rug and pretend it's not an issue at all. It's bitten plenty of people who build on Tauri. Additionally, the issues people find with WebkitGTK/Tauri aren't always web related, usually moreso Linux related (weird blank screens, issues with rendering certain stacked items, etc).
  - anthk 1y ago
    Gnome Web sucks, it's has shitty defaults and a horrid performance. But luakit/vimb can be really fast. Luakit even ran under a netbook. Single page bound, ok,, but not bad from an n270 with 1GB of RAM.
  - anthk 1y ago
    Gnome Web sucks, it has shitty defaults and a horrid performance. But luakit/vimb can be really fast. Luakit even ran under a netbook. Single page bound, ok,, but not bad from an n270 with 1GB of RAM.
    - Narishma 1y ago
      > Luakit even ran under a netbook. Single page bound, ok,, but not bad from an n270 with 1GB of RAM. I have one such device and Firefox and Chrome also run on it. They're slow but still usable.
blurbleblurble 1y ago
It's awful. I'm cautiously optimistic (hopeful? naive?) that progress on servo will make it unnecessary!
cosmic_cheese 1y ago
The Linux port of Orion (Kagi’s power user oriented web browser) is built with WebKitGTK, some hopefully the Orion team will be patching up some of the more glaring issues. At minimum the port will put it in front of pairs of eyeballs that hadn’t been looking at it before which should help bring attention to bugs.

logankeenan 1y ago

With Electron, it will bundle chrome into the app so you only have to handle that single rendering engine. Tauri uses whatever is the default browser on the system the app is installed on

mort96 1y ago
I know. I'm saying that Tauri doesn't make things more difficult than any normal web app development, it's not like making web apps which work across browsers is a new and scary thing
- yojo 1y ago
  It's not a new or scary thing, but it's way more expensive (in time or money) than relying on "it looks good on my machine, so it looks good everywhere." I've worked on large consumer-facing web-apps where we had a dedicated QA team (and/or contracting firm) that runs visual regression testing on multiple platforms and browser versions. As a solo developer, I have no interest in being that team for my hobby project. So the tradeoff with Tauri for me was "accept that I will ship obvious UI bugs" vs "accept that I will ship a bloated binary." Reading anecdata on forums, it seems like the only people who get up in arms over an extra 200MB are HN readers, and my app isn't really targeted at them.
  - Capricorn2481 1y ago
    > Reading anecdata on forums, it seems like the only people who get up in arms over an extra 200MB are HN readers, and my app isn't really targeted at them I think it's good to be wary of overly sensitive advice that regular users don't care about. But would a regular user realize they have 10 electron apps running and their ram is maxed out all the time? The argument against Electron isn't just a single bloated binary, but everyone shipping an app that uses way more RAM than necessary.
    - yojo 1y ago
      That's a fair point. My app (and possibly the OP's) is built assuming it is the user's current focus and priority, and that you'll quit it once you're done with the task. I don't feel bad about asking for a chunk of RAM for a focal app like this, but I would feel differently if I was shipping a background tool or small utility or something.

paxys 1y ago

Chrome has by far the most consistent cross-platform rendering.

sieabahlpark 1y ago
[dead]

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]