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

Tauri vs. Electron – Real world application

levminer.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 107 posts

Re: Tauri vs. Electron – Real world application

#71

Post by ripley12 »

api wrote: post #9

One thing I don't see mentioned is the horror of shipping for Windows. You'll need Windows to have the Edge runtime, which means you have to bundle it or install it as an add-on. People will complain about this, especially IT people, because Edge runtime runs some kind of stupid background service all the time for no clear reason. It's also brittle since you will have to constantly keep your installer up to date with…

Man, there are a lot of incorrect statements in this.

MS keeps the evergreen bootstrapper URL stable specifically so you can download it programmatically, it’s not fragile. And if you choose to ship the evergreen bootstrapper yourself, you don’t have to update it.

The WebView2 runtime ships with Windows 11, major applications like Office, and they’re currently rolling it out to most Windows 10 installs.

Re: Tauri vs. Electron – Real world application

#72

Post by eropple »

WorldMaker wrote: post #54
eropple wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your users don't care whose fault it is. Your app isn't working. You can choose to cut those users off, and that's totally an option...sometimes. Mac users are probably a little more tolerant of this than non-Mac users, because of the general upgrade treadmill, but whether you can get away with it is a question only you can answer for your app.

That's still a very different class of problem from a CVE break of a single-point-of-failure is the point. Someone decides to use your Electron app's old Chromium build and a known CVE in it as a target vector for infecting or remote controlling user's machines is a very different problem from "because we are using system webviews this small CSS/JS feature doesn't work in this version of macOS, please upgrade". Even…

It depends though, yeah? Like, at least then you can issue a patch. If a CVE sprouts up on an old version of an OS, you're pretty hosed.

Re: Tauri vs. Electron – Real world application

#73

Post by Octoth0rpe »

Kye wrote: post #64
BiteCode_dev wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you only provide a desktop app yes. If you also provide a web app, then the work needs to be done anyway.

Someone somewhere has already figured out how to run Electron through WASM.

Please delete, your sentence is absolutely cursed.

Re: Tauri vs. Electron – Real world application

#74

Post by miniBill »

hs86 wrote: post #36

Those RAM usage comparisons should consider the shared memory among those processes. Aren't those renderer and zygote processes forks of each other? I don't think that tools like htop or Process Explorer give us an easy at-a-glance answer to how much RAM multi-process browsers or Electron apps need. My current approach is to monitor the currently free RAM while at the same time closing the entire application. That de…

Those are shared but... Tauri is using less than 80 megs, Electron is using 143 for the main process alone, so it doesn't really make a difference. Tauri is way lighter

Re: Tauri vs. Electron – Real world application

#77

Post by synergy20 »

miniBill wrote: post #74
hs86 wrote: post #36

Those RAM usage comparisons should consider the shared memory among those processes. Aren't those renderer and zygote processes forks of each other? I don't think that tools like htop or Process Explorer give us an easy at-a-glance answer to how much RAM multi-process browsers or Electron apps need. My current approach is to monitor the currently free RAM while at the same time closing the entire application. That de…

Those are shared but... Tauri is using less than 80 megs, Electron is using 143 for the main process alone, so it doesn't really make a difference. Tauri is way lighter

assuming you use chrome, electron will reuse the chromium libraries, so the net increase on memory is not that large. with Tauri, it will have to spin a new set of (memory hungry) browser libraries(i.e. libwebkit2gtk on linux, similar stuff on Mac and Windows) that are all new memory usage on top of chrome(nothing to share), not to mention the libraries Tauri uses are not as "modern" as Chromium on html5/css/js/webapi support.

I still feel Electron is the best approach now.

Re: Tauri vs. Electron – Real world application

#78

Post by mccorrinall »

RussianCow wrote: post #65
pornel wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

CSS evolves and there’s always some new funky selector or effect coming, but the whole point is that you don’t need to follow this year’s latest hotness. If you slap rounded corners and box-shadow (very old by now) you have 90% of what Apple calls design lately. For Windows “metro” you don’t even need rounded corners :)

> but the whole point is that you don’t need to follow this year’s latest hotness You might not have a choice. Sometimes even seemingly trivial APIs/features like SVG, flexbox, or audio/video behave slightly differently in different browsers, and it's easy to sink a lot of time into debugging these differences. I'm not saying the effort isn't ever worth it, and it's certainly better now than it ever was in the past,…

Fyi you need to optimize for two browsers only: chromium (edge) is the webview on windows, and webkit is the webview on linux and macos.

Anyway, I’m curious about the svg and flexbox issues you mentioned. I have not experienced any differences with those across systems and browsers.

Re: Tauri vs. Electron – Real world application

#80

Post by animesh »

vindarel wrote: post #22
thegeekpirate wrote: post #5

There's also https://wails.io , which uses Go instead of Rust.

and https://neutralino.js.org/ Their exciting part is > You can extend Neutralinojs with any programming language (via extensions IPC) and use Neutralinojs as a part of any source file (via child processes IPC). still: > Neutralinojs doesn't bundle Chromium and uses the existing web browser library in the operating system (Eg: gtk-webkit2 on Linux). Neutralinojs implements a WebSocket connection for native operations…

> You can extend Neutralinojs with any programming language (via extensions IPC) and use Neutralinojs as a part of any source file (via child processes IPC).

I do not understand the second part of this sentence. What does it mean to use Neutralinojs as a part of any source file (via child processes IPC)?

Post reply on HN