How is supporting five very different web browsers easier than supporting five different operating systems, given that you can use cross-platform libraries for both?
Given that any dll library needs an installer, and that can crash during installation. Or if a downloader like Adobe, internet connection might drops... the list goes forever.
I've done desktop apps developing. And the worst part is releasing and testing on various VMs, it's just ugly!
Not if they just reside in the application directory. On Windows, Qt software, for example, usually comes in a ZIP archive with a gazillion of qt-something DLLs. So do Electron "apps", by the way. :-)
How is supporting five very different web browsers easier than supporting five different operating systems, given that you can use cross-platform libraries for both?
Given that any dll library needs an installer, and that can crash during installation. Or if a downloader like Adobe, internet connection might drops... the list goes forever.
I've done desktop apps developing. And the worst part is releasing and testing on various VMs, it's just ugly!
Not if they just reside in the application directory. On Windows, Qt software, for example, usually comes in a ZIP archive with a gazillion of qt-something DLLs. So do Electron "apps", by the way. :-)
The user needs to download a fat app in 2 mins... and in case of a website, just opens it in a 10 secs max
And have a sluggish app like popcorn or gitkraken, what's the point of having a native app then 😄
..., there still is a gazillion of JavaScript bloat to download and parse - including security implications, unlike on the desktop.
That's why you should not use Electron.
It's okay for js, though I hate it, but the user gets the product up and running in less than 10 seconds which is incredible.
That's why I think web assembly is something... similar efficiency with no JS!
... after having downloaded multiple 100 MB of Electron stuff. Sigh!
Who mentioned electron, it's a shitty tech... I meant normal web app with js.