Electron is used because it allows near-free portability

the web and "native app" are the same, the UI is the same, there is zero extra cost and new features can be deployed to both with the same code

Of course there are tradeoffs.

Like everything else, stuff gets worse and cheaper because no one will pay for the better version. How many $300 knives does the average person own? How many shirts made of quality fabric? How much of your software is really fine-tuned for performance?

Electron is Good Enough for the purpose: getting working software to users.

We may hate it, but it also makes sense given the constraints.

▲

mrheosuper 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

"near-free", I would not call hogging gigabyte of RAM a "near free" experience.

	▲	PostOnce 4 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		near free to the developer. That's a very important part of "can we afford to produce this software?" Will you pay $100 or more extra to get a true native version instead of electron? If not, why would they go to the extra work of developing one?
	▲	AuthAuth an hour ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Its dirt cheap. We've all been running discord in the background for how long now.

▲

flykespice 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> Electron is Good Enough for the purpose: getting working software to users.

Define "working".

As in, at least it boots on your computer, despite the fact it takes a whole business day to finish loading?

Is that really good enough for you?

	▲	PostOnce 4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Good enough is what the users will pay for. If the users won't pay extra to get it to go faster, it won't go faster, because going faster takes more (unpaid) work.