Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm probably in that camp too, I thought it was just for android and iOS still (even though I consider myself to keep up to date with these types of things). Do you know if they have anything for linux yet?
I originally thought React Native was for all platforms, then I read their website and docs which made me realize it was only for mobile. That all went down a few weeks ago. Now, today, I find out I had it right the first time. How big a shortcoming is it of their website that it made me go away thinking it was something it wasn't when I had the right thing in mind?
Electron is flash for the desktop (2016)
191–200 of 1001 posts
Re: Electron is flash for the desktop (2016)
#192Earlier quoted context omitted.
The cost argument is indeed a moot point - look at all of the major software companies, and you'll see that actual development is nowhere near their primary expense. They can afford to implement their own programming languages and OSes (and some do), but apparently it's too expensive or too difficult to make native apps for the respective platforms? This goes for mobile too.
It's moot if you're an established company with deep pockets moving slowly. If you're starting from scratch with limited funds, it is definitely not a moot point. Would Slack have been as wildly successful if they had to implement native apps on all 3 platforms + iOS + Android + etc? I'd have a hard time believing so.
But that doesn't excuse the abuse of that platform. Spotify used to have a pretty convincing native Mac app, which was spiked in favour of their current abomination, and I've watched performance plummet.
Using Electron as a cost-cutting measure is fine, but it's not good for user experience and it's OK to be honest about that.
Re: Electron is flash for the desktop (2016)
#193Earlier quoted context omitted.
The cost argument is indeed a moot point - look at all of the major software companies, and you'll see that actual development is nowhere near their primary expense. They can afford to implement their own programming languages and OSes (and some do), but apparently it's too expensive or too difficult to make native apps for the respective platforms? This goes for mobile too.
It's moot if you're an established company with deep pockets moving slowly. If you're starting from scratch with limited funds, it is definitely not a moot point. Would Slack have been as wildly successful if they had to implement native apps on all 3 platforms + iOS + Android + etc? I'd have a hard time believing so.
It's ridiculous to pretend that you have to write 3 distinct codebases to get a multiplatform application. Are there 3 Firefoxes? 3 Chromiums? 3 VLCs? Back in the day, applications like Banshee, which written in C#, were the rage and were distributed as core parts of GNOME.
Why is there this belief that we have to use JavaScript for multiplatform?
Re: Electron is flash for the desktop (2016)
#194Earlier quoted context omitted.
Bullshit. Spotify, for example, existed before Electron, and it was very fast. Text editors existed before Electron, and they didn't require 300 MB minimum to run. Same with collaborative chat programs. Electron is just a way to reuse web developers for desktop development - I.e. a way companies now have to cut development costs.
clearly you aren't talking about emacs :)
Re: Electron is flash for the desktop (2016)
#195I fully agree with the author, only I'd call Electron the PHP for the desktop (it does help people get started quickly, at a cost). There are working solutions for cross-platform native UI development and high-performance, slim code: http://wiki.lazarus.freepascal.org/Multiplatform_Programming... The problem is: most people don't bother learning new languages unless it's very easy (well, Pascal is!). I hope Go will h…
What does PHP have to do with this? And Go already has bindings for QT which is a cross-platform UI framework. This has nothing to do with people not wanting to learn new languages, it's just the time it takes to build an app. For you to build a QT hello world app takes probably 20 minutes worth of downloading, setup, and coding. To do the same you download electron, create an index.html with hello world and drag and…
It's the RAD choice for beginners since... ca. 1997?
> For you to build a QT hello world app takes probably 20 minutes worth of downloading, setup, and coding. To do the same you download electron, create an index.html with hello world and drag and file into electron, bam a hello world app.
Perhaps the first time ever, the 2nd attempt you will be equally fast.
Does a well-funded startup not have 20 minutes to test a platform?
As far as Lazarus is concerned: give it a try, it won't take 20 mins.
> What we need to do is find a way to create a very slim browser that contains just an HTML/CSS to 2d context and a Javascript engine.
Christ, no. There are no slim browsers anymore and it's a pitiful environment for native applications.
Re: Electron is flash for the desktop (2016)
#196Node.js too was a terrible idea. Who in their right mind would write server-side javascript? It turns out: pretty much anyone who didn't want to have to screw around for hours before being able to respond to a simple http request.
Similarly, it is way harder to write a desktop app than a browser app. DOM / CSS manipulation, however bad they are, are years ahead compared to what you can easily do with WPF and friends.
And what about Python for data analysis? The one language that is known to be 10x slower than C becomes the de-facto standard for a field where what matters most is code performance. Again: ease of programming.
The success of electron only shows that there is a market for a UI library that can be written just like what you do in the browser but for native desktop apps... Please someone, write that !
Re: Electron is flash for the desktop (2016)
#197FWIW, we're working on https://github.com/nidium/Nidium presicely to fix this. A new kind of browser engine, not based on any existing engine, allowing developers to use a subset of the web (webgl, 2d, layout) without being forced to use a bloated ecosystem (and which also works on mobile and low end device). Previous HN discussion : https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6314961
Re: Electron is flash for the desktop (2016)
#198Here's the thing. You know what the alternative to all of these Electron apps coming out is? If your answer is "A native Cocoa/WPF app", you are on another planet, the answer is, "It wouldn't exist at all". Nobody in the last 5-10 years cared about writing Desktop apps before Electron came along, there's basically zero money in it, and it's massively expensive, both in terms of actual dev time per feature (easily 10x…
That's nonsense . Desktop apps have been frequently released since forever. The underlying issue here is that Electron reduces the barrier to entry for cross-platform development . That is, it's cheaper to build a single cross-platform application in Electron than it is to build two or three native applications, and you can re-use your existing web experience. I can completely understand why companies might choose th…
> The trade-off — and there is a trade-off — is that Electron applications are shite in comparison with proper native applications.
There's nothing inherently electron-specific that makes an app "shite" any more than writing one in Qt would. You can write shit in any language, framework or platform. The day someone invents a system that protects us from our own stupidity will be the day humans become obsolete.
> They fail to integrate with the host platform,
Untrue. You can—if you need to—integrate with the host platform by writing a native node module, however it becomes less cross-platform at this point.
> they are slow, they hog memory and drink power.
Yes web apps use a bit—sometimes considerably, depending on what you do—more memory, and a bit more CPU (and hence bettery), but they are not perceivably slower, unless you're doing something stupid (in which case the equivalent Qt app would probably suffer in the same way).
> But let's be honest here – there is nothing preventing e.g. Spotify or Slack from building native clients for each platform they support, and I find it difficult to believe that the costs would be prohibitive.
Maybe, maybe not. I think using a cross-platform solution wouldn't be ideal for them (they'd need to either rely on something like Qt, write their own rendering engine, or use something like SFML; all of these are overkill compared to Electron), and the alternative is writing it in different languages for each platform, which would probably inevitably cause the projects to get out of sync in one way or the other over time.
Re: Electron is flash for the desktop (2016)
#199Earlier quoted context omitted.
Spotify, Slack and Atom are no longer hip startups though - they're established applications, and at least two of them have a very lucrative monthly subscription model. They can afford to optimize.
But the user experience is already great, so what's the gain? Electron and the web clearly make a first class app platform on desktop. EDIT: thanks for the downvotes. I'd love to hear your thoughts on how electron is keeping Slack and Spotify from building a massive business and how their desktop users find the experience so bad they don't use the tools obsessively. Clearly there are things to improve w/ Electron (en…
But its worse than that - most users don't even know why their battery life is awful. So they blame apple, or microsoft, or dell or whoever. And they just don't use their computers as much, because its all a bit gross and slow. And thats bad news for our entire industry.