Which is… Also a real desktop app. This shallow take is getting incredibly old, and doesn’t even contribute to actual valuable discussion… If you don’t see the value in this being shipped, then why try and tear the value down for others?
I main C#, and even I would rather build cross platform full applications with electron than any of the other options available. I’m definitely choosing it over QT or gtk. Why? Because I can actually ship the project with all the necessary features, in good time, and bake in a great user experience.
That’s the difference here. Practical problems vs reality. Shipping the project & features vs not.
Yes, there are many successful applications not built with electron, ofc there are, that’s not my point. My point is that the productivity difference is such that it’s the difference between not building the thing vs building it and successful shipping it to users. You can argue and shit on the difference, but at the end of the day the above is what really matters.
Electron apps are not real apps. They’re web apps and in that case I can have even a better experience with a browser since I can use extensions, tabs, saving favorites and so on.
There are really few electron apps that deserve to be called “desktop app” and from what I’m seeing from the screenshots, this isn’t one of them.
If I really wanted to have a separate icon and window for this website I can tell my browser to install the pwa icon in the start menu. Wow, instant made desktop app!
What are you talking about…? Please re-read my comment above :/
An electron app is a natjve application that renders a browser based UI. You appear to be conflating the browser-based UI with the whole “native application” thing.
It comes with all the advantages a native application does, like having hardware access, working natively offline, working with the filesystem, interfacing with the OS and installed OS packages, being able to use other native binaries, being able to use more native networking capabilities…etc
Sure lots of electron applications that people make could just be a web app, I’m not arguing that.
I am, however, pointing out that you are grossly incorrect that electron (and all other technologies like it, we’re not really just talking about electron here) is 'just a web app". It’s a native application server and a web-based UI, which means I can write an application in C# with all of the .Net advantages, with a web UI, that runs natively on your device for example.
This lets me ship a product much faster than if I was going to build that UI in QT or GTK, with a significantly upgraded user experience that is consistent across all platforms.
ok, but in this case, it’s just a webview of mail.proton.me
it doesn’t have hardware access, it doesn’t work offline (technically, if it cached the files it can work offline, but can’t work offline-offline like thunderbird), it doesn’t work with the filesystem, it doesn’t interface with the OS and installed OS packages, it doesn’t use other native binaries, doesn’t use more native networking capabilities, etc…
from what i saw, the electron apps that are to be considered real apps and not just a lazy webview around the webapp are:
Like I said, I’m not arguing that many apps are built as electron apps when they’re just glorified web apps. Though I’m neutral on whether that’s a bad thing or not. I’m definitely against apps being built with electron that don’t really have UIs, defeating the entire point of electron and friends…
VSCode is another example you’re missing. And they have put a LOT of work into making as many features available in the web-version as possible, the feature parity isn’t an accident.
Or Obsidian.
Examples aside, you might be surprised by applications you may not think of as not using native features, that rely heavily on them, expecting to be executing in a Node environment and not a browser one. Especially on the networking and process side. Browsers are extremely restrictive.
Which is… Also a real desktop app. This shallow take is getting incredibly old, and doesn’t even contribute to actual valuable discussion… If you don’t see the value in this being shipped, then why try and tear the value down for others?
I main C#, and even I would rather build cross platform full applications with electron than any of the other options available. I’m definitely choosing it over QT or gtk. Why? Because I can actually ship the project with all the necessary features, in good time, and bake in a great user experience.
That’s the difference here. Practical problems vs reality. Shipping the project & features vs not.
Yes, there are many successful applications not built with electron, ofc there are, that’s not my point. My point is that the productivity difference is such that it’s the difference between not building the thing vs building it and successful shipping it to users. You can argue and shit on the difference, but at the end of the day the above is what really matters.
Electron apps are not real apps. They’re web apps and in that case I can have even a better experience with a browser since I can use extensions, tabs, saving favorites and so on.
There are really few electron apps that deserve to be called “desktop app” and from what I’m seeing from the screenshots, this isn’t one of them.
If I really wanted to have a separate icon and window for this website I can tell my browser to install the pwa icon in the start menu. Wow, instant made desktop app!
What are you talking about…? Please re-read my comment above :/
An electron app is a natjve application that renders a browser based UI. You appear to be conflating the browser-based UI with the whole “native application” thing.
It comes with all the advantages a native application does, like having hardware access, working natively offline, working with the filesystem, interfacing with the OS and installed OS packages, being able to use other native binaries, being able to use more native networking capabilities…etc
Sure lots of electron applications that people make could just be a web app, I’m not arguing that.
I am, however, pointing out that you are grossly incorrect that electron (and all other technologies like it, we’re not really just talking about electron here) is 'just a web app". It’s a native application server and a web-based UI, which means I can write an application in C# with all of the .Net advantages, with a web UI, that runs natively on your device for example.
This lets me ship a product much faster than if I was going to build that UI in QT or GTK, with a significantly upgraded user experience that is consistent across all platforms.
ok, but in this case, it’s just a webview of mail.proton.me
it doesn’t have hardware access, it doesn’t work offline (technically, if it cached the files it can work offline, but can’t work offline-offline like thunderbird), it doesn’t work with the filesystem, it doesn’t interface with the OS and installed OS packages, it doesn’t use other native binaries, doesn’t use more native networking capabilities, etc…
from what i saw, the electron apps that are to be considered real apps and not just a lazy webview around the webapp are:
Like I said, I’m not arguing that many apps are built as electron apps when they’re just glorified web apps. Though I’m neutral on whether that’s a bad thing or not. I’m definitely against apps being built with electron that don’t really have UIs, defeating the entire point of electron and friends…
VSCode is another example you’re missing. And they have put a LOT of work into making as many features available in the web-version as possible, the feature parity isn’t an accident.
Or Obsidian.
Examples aside, you might be surprised by applications you may not think of as not using native features, that rely heavily on them, expecting to be executing in a Node environment and not a browser one. Especially on the networking and process side. Browsers are extremely restrictive.
Right i forgot about atom and vs code, the quality of those is excellent
Obsidian too