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

Electron is flash for the desktop (2016)

josephg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

671–680 of 1001 posts

Re: Electron is flash for the desktop (2016)

#671

Post by [deleted] »

skuzye wrote: post #438
cableshaft wrote: post #360

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, but Python still doesn't seem to have a great cross-platform desktop GUI, as far as I can find. I'd prefer to code entirely in Python if I could, but I haven't liked a single GUI library I've tried for Python. Although to be fair I haven't really tried PyQT out still, but I don't like the idea of having to buy a commercial license for it.

If you really want to use PyQT you may try PySide which is LGPL licensed. I'm not sure whether it restricts commercial use.

[deleted]

Re: Electron is flash for the desktop (2016)

#672

Post by _9olg »

dubcanada wrote: post #189
Philipp__ wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow, that's bullsh*t. Sorry but what you said was factually incorrect. What Electron did is it enabled all those web devs (even front end guys) to write "desktop" apps. And trade offs are certainly visible. I am boycotting Electron. I have zero Electron apps installed, and recommend strongly against it. I hate that web dev mindset that has been pushed into desktop userland. It just doesn't work that way. Write native…

Can you expand on your last sentence? How is React + browser rendering any different then QT rendering? How is HTML/CSS any different from QT layout xml? How is QT sockets/threading any different from NodeJS sockets/threading? They are very very close to each-other. Obviously they are not exactly the same, and I used QT in this example. But they are not wrong, or completely different.

Not OP but:

> How is React + browser rendering any different then QT rendering?

Qt has far less overhead. A small Qt program can be in the single digit megabytes in both disk and RAM consumption, while using near-zero CPU for the UI.

> How is HTML/CSS any different from QT layout xml?

My understanding is that Qt's layouts are translated to native code at compile time, resulting in native performance and overhead on desktop. Browsers' dynamic rendering is relatively intensive and expensive.

> How is QT sockets/threading any different from NodeJS sockets/threading?

When it comes to I/O I don't think there's a significant cost to using Node/V8. I'm totally fine with CLI applications written in Node but when it comes to UI, a browser is just too heavy.

Re: Electron is flash for the desktop (2016)

#673

Post by RedCrowbar »

Klathmon wrote: post #640
RedCrowbar wrote: post #628

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My figures exclude shared memory and are calculated as VmRss - Shared from /proc/ /statm. If you are using Windows 10, your missing Atom processes will be under Background Processes in Task Manager. For the sake of the argument, I just did a fresh install of Atom and this is what I see on the first run: https://i.imgur.com/0ZRSumF.png . ~220MiB (no files open, zero extensions).

That's really interesting! I have an up-to-date atom install that i've been adding plugins to for about a year now (up to like 50 or so), and has been running for at least 12 hours (windows 10), and currently has 7 ~500 line files open. Adding up all the processes' (7 of them) private memory gets me 194mb.

I installed the 64-bit version, you might be using 32-bit.

Re: Electron is flash for the desktop (2016)

#674

Post by harisamin »

sovande wrote: post #593
harisamin wrote: post #171

A while ago I had been working on a native Mac slack app. I was 70% complete but sidelined it. Should I pick it up again? Would ppl here be interested in paying for something like that? Here are some links to screenshots so you know its not just vaporware :) https://twitter.com/harisamin/status/727634194814373889 https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ChkTccjVAAAZ0Kt.png https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ChkTcbMUkAIYolx.png

Most users will accept issues with their free program if the alternative is to pay. I'm pretty sure the message pane you have there is a WebKit controller so it is debatable how native this would be.

There actually isn't any webkit here at all, except for the slack api oauth login. Everything is native. Trust me, I'm not faking this :)

Re: Electron is flash for the desktop (2016)

#675

Post by lobster_johnson »

user5994461 wrote: post #574
atombender wrote: post #298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I doubt you don't care. These are examples "integration with the host platform": * Text selection * Caret behaviour (e.g. Option-arrows on macOS) * Clipboard * Spell check * Open/save dialogs * File system access * Drag/drop * Window management * Accessibility (screen reader support etc.) * Standard right click menus * Indexing (e.g. Spotlight on macOS) * etc. You may be thinking to native UI idioms, which even Apple…

Google doc is a lost fight. Word and spreadsheet editors need to be proper desktop web applications. A web site inside a browser cannot resemble that and all the hacks to try to are not getting much close.

While true, Google Docs' collaboration capabilities are fantastic enough that it's worth using, though. We use it all the time to work, anything from tiny scratchpads to big documents.

To do the same in Microsoft Office, you need to dick around with OneDrive and/or SharePoint. The last decade or so, I've only touched Office when someone sends me some .xls or .ppt file and I'm being lazy and just want to view it.

Re: Electron is flash for the desktop (2016)

#676

Post by Arizhel »

coldtea wrote: post #445
sametmax wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Computing for ever. We use C to avoid writing assembly. Use Java to avoid writing C. Use Python to avoid writing Java. The world is asking for more and more software, and the resources to provide it are not following so people are taking shortcuts. Want something better ? Someone has to pay for it.

> Computing for ever. We use C to avoid writing assembly. Use Java to avoid writing C. Use Python to avoid writing Java. Yeah, but until Electron and they like, we seldom shipped desktop apps in anything than C, C++, Delphi etc even after all those decades. Which are all as close to the metal as can be. And in fact C/C++ can be as fast, or even faster than hand-rolled assembly most of the time (with few exception), s…

>And in fact C/C++ can be as fast, or even faster than hand-rolled assembly most of the time (with few exception)

This is generally true, but to be fair the reason is because we design CPUs differently these days. Modern CPUs use instruction sets that are specifically designed to work well with compilers, and aren't meant to be programmed in hand-coded assembly except for a few critical bits deep within OS code. Older CPUs weren't like this.

It still might be possible to write hand-rolled assembly that beats modern compilers, but you probably need to have seriously super-human mental abilities to do it.

Re: Electron is flash for the desktop (2016)

#678

Post by killin_dan »

anaisbetts wrote: post #74

Here'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…

You couldn't be less coherent about this.

Desktop development has stagnated because of the proliferation of web technologies, not because desktop frameworks aren't very good. Qt is great, gtk is great, hell, with the right configuration, working with WinForms can be pleasant.

Electron packs a browser with each app, and that's unacceptable. Adobe used to have something called AIR, years before electron, but idk if they were just packing up a browser or not. I used to use the desktop version of tweetdeck, which used AIR, and it was pretty damn fast.

Anyways, you clearly don't know anything about desktop development, so rather than make claims that are wrong, just stick to what you DO know.

Re: Electron is flash for the desktop (2016)

#679

Post by user5994461 »

lobster_johnson wrote: post #675
user5994461 wrote: post #574

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google doc is a lost fight. Word and spreadsheet editors need to be proper desktop web applications. A web site inside a browser cannot resemble that and all the hacks to try to are not getting much close.

While true, Google Docs' collaboration capabilities are fantastic enough that it's worth using, though. We use it all the time to work, anything from tiny scratchpads to big documents. To do the same in Microsoft Office, you need to dick around with OneDrive and/or SharePoint. The last decade or so, I've only touched Office when someone sends me some .xls or .ppt file and I'm being lazy and just want to view it.

You can use an old school network drive to share documents in an enterprise, irrelevant of their nature. Easy and simple.

Re: Electron is flash for the desktop (2016)

#680

Post by [deleted] »

cjcole wrote: post #162
paraboul wrote: post #14

FWIW, 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

Is there an opportunity for Servo here?

[deleted]
Post reply on HN