> if you want a truly universal UI

Right. If you want your app to look the same, custom way, ditching what the OS has to offer.

Some developers still believe an operating system has useful UI components and patterns worth adopting. From this thread it's clear that there's plenty who don't. Personally I view that as a regression.

▲

lmm 10 hours ago | parent | next [-]

The OS-component-oriented approach was defensible in the days of desktop only (though personally I think it was a mistake even then), but it's not sustainable now. People want your app on their PC to look and behave like your app on their phone (whichever combination of PC and phone they happen to have), and that's a lot more important to them than having it look and behave like other apps on their PC.

	▲	wolvesechoes 9 hours ago \| parent [-]
		> People want your app on their PC to look and behave like your app on their phone (whichever combination of PC and phone they happen to have), and that's a lot more important to them than having it look and behave like other apps on their PC. They don't. No one generates GBs of simulation data and create plots on their phones, and this is what "app" I am working on is doing.

▲

gf000 a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Well, maybe Java's AWT has been correct all this time.

Of course there is value in having "OS-native" buttons, transitions, windows etc. And many parts of GUIs are basically standardized. The problem is all the parts that are not, and have to look the same everywhere.

▲

actionfromafar a day ago | parent | prev [-]

Probably many Electron users also view that as a regression, but a tradeoff worth making.