Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: Is there still a place for native desktop apps?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

371–380 of 777 posts

Re: Ask HN: Is there still a place for native desktop apps?

#371

Post by cosmotic »

theshetty wrote: post #334
jrockway wrote: post #221

Native desktop apps are great. The reason that people don't write them is because users aren't on "the desktop". "The desktop" is split between OS X and Windows, and your Windows-app-compiled-for-Mac is going to annoy Mac users and your Mac-app-compiled-for-Windows is going to annoy Windows users. Then you realize that most users of computing devices actually just use their phone for everything, and your desktop app…

Many desktop apps these days seems to be built on Electron, a JS framework for building desktop-class apps. https://www.electronjs.org/

What is a desktop-class app?

Re: Ask HN: Is there still a place for native desktop apps?

#372

Post by andai »

outside1234 wrote: post #369
AsyncAwait wrote: post #313

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Qt may not 'look' native, but it has native performance, whereas Electron really doesn't.

VSCode is indistinguishable from native, so not sure its Electron that's at fault here.

If your native apps are indistinguishable from VSCode, they're doing something wrong.

Re: Ask HN: Is there still a place for native desktop apps?

#373

Post by rattray »

PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #352
jcelerier wrote: post #322

Earlier quoted context omitted.

a few reasons : - Qt is actually the native toolkit of multiple operating systems (Jolla for instance and KDE Plasma) - you just need to have a Linux kernel running and it handles the rest. It also does the effort of going to look for the user theme for widgets to mix in with the rest of the platform, while web apps completely disregard that. - Windows has at least 4 different UI toolkits now which all render kinda d…

This is not really accurate. Qt relies on a lower level windowing system (X Window, Wayland, Cocoa, win32 etc. etc.). Also worth noting that many creation-centric applications for the desktop (graphics, audio, video etc. etc.) don't look "native" even when they actually are. In one case (Logic Pro, from Apple), the "platform leading app from the platform creator" doesn't even look native!

> Qt relies on a lower level windowing system

That's true of QtWidgets, but not QML / Qt Quick (the newer tool), correct? (I found this hard to determine online).

Re: Ask HN: Is there still a place for native desktop apps?

#374

Post by j88439h84 »

baddox wrote: post #355
KaoruAoiShiho wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

VS Code is slow at basic things like having characters show up on screen after hitting the key. It's good at everything else though so that lag doesn't matter as much.

Usually professionals using text editors for their work are not concerned with the absolute keystroke-to-screen latency. It’s totally fine if it’s fast enough, and it is.

Disagree on both points

Re: Ask HN: Is there still a place for native desktop apps?

#375

Post by colordrops »

PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #348
IvanK_net wrote: post #342

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think he did not mean "written 6 times", but more like Compiled 6 times, with 6 different sets of parameters, and having to be tested on 6 different devices.

Because you NEVER have to do that with browsers, right?

You don't have to sign and deploy your web app six times.

Re: Ask HN: Is there still a place for native desktop apps?

#376

Post by madeofpalk »

AsyncAwait wrote: post #313
avmich wrote: post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you count Qt apps as native, but not count web apps as native? Why?

Qt may not 'look' native, but it has native performance, whereas Electron really doesn't.

I would argue that the web platform is one of the most optimised and performant platforms for apps.

Re: Ask HN: Is there still a place for native desktop apps?

#377

Post by AlchemistCamp »

outside1234 wrote: post #369
AsyncAwait wrote: post #313

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Qt may not 'look' native, but it has native performance, whereas Electron really doesn't.

VSCode is indistinguishable from native, so not sure its Electron that's at fault here.

No. I like VS Code but it's a hog.

I still use Macvim or even Sublime Text a lot for speed reasons, especially on large files.

Re: Ask HN: Is there still a place for native desktop apps?

#378

Post by madeofpalk »

PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #352
jcelerier wrote: post #322

Earlier quoted context omitted.

a few reasons : - Qt is actually the native toolkit of multiple operating systems (Jolla for instance and KDE Plasma) - you just need to have a Linux kernel running and it handles the rest. It also does the effort of going to look for the user theme for widgets to mix in with the rest of the platform, while web apps completely disregard that. - Windows has at least 4 different UI toolkits now which all render kinda d…

This is not really accurate. Qt relies on a lower level windowing system (X Window, Wayland, Cocoa, win32 etc. etc.). Also worth noting that many creation-centric applications for the desktop (graphics, audio, video etc. etc.) don't look "native" even when they actually are. In one case (Logic Pro, from Apple), the "platform leading app from the platform creator" doesn't even look native!

What does “native” even mean?

Put a in an HTML page and you get a platform-provided UI widget.

Re: Ask HN: Is there still a place for native desktop apps?

#379

Post by jcelerier »

PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #352
jcelerier wrote: post #322

Earlier quoted context omitted.

a few reasons : - Qt is actually the native toolkit of multiple operating systems (Jolla for instance and KDE Plasma) - you just need to have a Linux kernel running and it handles the rest. It also does the effort of going to look for the user theme for widgets to mix in with the rest of the platform, while web apps completely disregard that. - Windows has at least 4 different UI toolkits now which all render kinda d…

This is not really accurate. Qt relies on a lower level windowing system (X Window, Wayland, Cocoa, win32 etc. etc.). Also worth noting that many creation-centric applications for the desktop (graphics, audio, video etc. etc.) don't look "native" even when they actually are. In one case (Logic Pro, from Apple), the "platform leading app from the platform creator" doesn't even look native!

> This is not really accurate. Qt relies on a lower level windowing system (X Window, Wayland, Cocoa, win32 etc. etc.).

Qt also supports rendering directly on the GPU (or with software rendering on the framebuffer) without any windowing system such as X11 or Wayland - that's likely how it is most commonly used in the wild, as that's one of the main way to use it on embedded devices.

Re: Ask HN: Is there still a place for native desktop apps?

#380

Post by madeofpalk »

IvanK_net wrote: post #342
jcelerier wrote: post #281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Meanwhile, your web app may not be as good as native apps, but at least you don't have to write it 6 times. I must be living in a parallel world because I use a ton of desktop apps that aren't "written 6 times" - and write a few, including a music & other things sequencer ( https://ossia.io ). Just amongst the ones running on my desktop right now, Strawberry (Qt), Firefox (their own toolkit), QtCreator (Qt), Telegr…

I think he did not mean "written 6 times", but more like Compiled 6 times, with 6 different sets of parameters, and having to be tested on 6 different devices.

I don’t know, I think they did mean that.

You write an app for the Mac... how do you ship on Windows as well?

Post reply on HN