www. O S N E W S .com
News Features Interviews
BlogContact Editorials
.
The desktop belongs to Electron
By Thom Holwerda on 2018-05-16 23:09:04

This doesn’t have to be forever. Maybe in the future, developers will start using React Native to build desktop applications. Or perhaps Flutter! Electron apps have a bad reputation for using too much RAM, have potential security issues, can’t (yet) match the speed of C++, and they often lack the polish and familiarity of a great native app.

But it seems clear to me that OS-specific SDKs are becoming a liability for desktop OS vendors. Developers want to use the technologies they know, and they want maximum reach for the products they build. And they’re smart enough to get what they want. A lack of cooperation on the part of Apple, Google, and Microsoft will only hurt users.

Say hello to your new Electron overlord.

At 33, I'm perhaps staring to show signs of becoming an old man, but I really don't like Electron applications. I use Discord every day, and it just feels slow, cumbersome, and out of place on my virtually 100% Modern/Fluent Design Windows desktop, Surface, and my iPhone X. I greatly prefer proper, platform-specific native applications, but I feel that ship may have sailed with things like Electron and Progressive Web Apps.

I'm not looking forward to this future.

 Email a friend - Printer friendly - Related stories
.
Read Comments: 1-10 -- 11-20 -- 21-30 -- 31-40 -- 41-50 -- 51-60 -- 61-70 -- 71-80 -- 81-90 -- 91-100 -- 101-108
.
RE[14]: Yet
By kwan_e on 2018-05-17 10:45:11
> Someone is angry.

You misinterpreting me, calling me a liar, yeah I am angry.

Trying to take the moral high ground by comparing anger levels is TRULY pathetic.

You remind me of when Deepak Chopra tried to win an argument against Richard Dawkins by calling him angry. When you peddle bullshit, making reference to another person's state of mind, especially when you were involved in it, is typical bullshit peddler behaviour.

Edited 2018-05-17 10:47 UTC
Permalink - Score: 1
.
RE[15]: Yet
By coherence on 2018-05-17 11:07:06
I made an observation (which was correct). I didn't say I had an moral authority.

Also mate you aren't a Richard Dawkins.
Permalink - Score: 2
.
RE[16]: Yet
By kwan_e on 2018-05-17 11:25:02
> I made an observation (which was correct).

Nope.

> I didn't say I had an moral authority.

You can't even quote properly.

> Also mate you aren't a Richard Dawkins.

You continually prove you have trouble reading plain english.

I was comparing you to Deepak Chopra.
Permalink - Score: 1
.
RE[17]: Yet
By coherence on 2018-05-17 11:29:00
> You entered a discussion and quickly proceeded to complain about arrogance due to a mirage of your own making. That, to me, is truly pathetic. And also arrogant.

I quickly proceeded to call out this bullshit and unsubstantiated claim that by using a certain programming language you somehow developer "bad habits". BTW I still haven't heard a concrete definition of what a "Bad Habit" is. You decided for quite a few comments it was about the language, then it was developers getting bad habits (no idea what these habits are still) and then I am now arrogant.

I know what back-pedalling looks like.
Permalink - Score: 2
.
RE[18]: Yet
By kwan_e on 2018-05-17 11:35:33
> unsubstantiated claim that by using a certain programming language you somehow developer "bad habits".

Why don't you re-read the full section of that comment, eh?

> BTW I still haven't heard a concrete definition of what a "Bad Habit" is.

I already gave examples in my comment first mentioning those habits, you illiterate fool.

> I know what back-pedalling looks like.

I didn't take back anything I said (apart from the "Good Day").

Do you know what back-pedalling means, you fool?

Let me state this clearly: I hold by everything I have said till now, everything I have added to them, to the same strength and in their entirety that I held it when I first typed it out.

It is really not my problem that you are clearly illiterate.
Permalink - Score: 1
.
RE[18]: Yet
By kwan_e on 2018-05-17 11:39:29
Now I know why you quickly complained about arrogance.

Because you, individually, are probably an inferior programmer. You can't read for shit, and you can't reason for shit. And that triggered your inferiority complex to no end.

"Strongly implies" was all you got to back up your pathetic excuse for a whinge. f--k off, mate.

Edited 2018-05-17 11:40 UTC
Permalink - Score: 1
.
RE: This is the reason computers feel slow
By rener on 2018-05-17 11:42:02
yes, exactly, this is why our ExactScanPro is some 20 MB, including OCR and nearly 500 scanner drivers: https://exactscan.com Also macOS and such start to make me so sick, that I dedicated some of my videos to showing and re-exploring vintage things: https://youtube.com/renerebe
Permalink - Score: 2
.
RE[19]: Yet
By coherence on 2018-05-17 11:43:17
I just looked at your JS code, the SRP principle isn't something you really get is it. I particularly like the massively long anonymous functions inside of a 100 line function.

Once it gets past 30 lines you might wanna break it down a bit. Just saying :D

Edited 2018-05-17 11:51 UTC
Permalink - Score: 2
.
RE[17]: Yet
By coherence on 2018-05-17 11:44:21
> You continually prove you have trouble reading plain english.

I was comparing you to Deepak Chopra.


You can't read plain English as what I said was an insult. I said "you clearly aren't dawkins". It was an obvious backhanded statement.

Edited 2018-05-17 11:46 UTC
Permalink - Score: 2
.
RE[19]: Yet
By coherence on 2018-05-17 11:45:23
You changed your story of what you said like 3 times. Then claimed I could not assume your intent. I suppose you are correct, I can't assume your intent because I you kept on changing your story.
Permalink - Score: 2

Read Comments 1-10 -- 11-20 -- 21-30 -- 31-40 -- 41-50 -- 51-60 -- 61-70 -- 71-80 -- 81-90 -- 91-100 -- 101-108

There are 2 comment(s) below your current score threshold.

No new comments are allowed for stories older than 10 days.
This story is now archived.

.
News Features Interviews
BlogContact Editorials
.
WAP site - RSS feed
© OSNews LLC 1997-2007. All Rights Reserved.
The readers' comments are owned and a responsibility of whoever posted them.
Prefer the desktop version of OSNews?