> But none of them are close enough to the benefit of being able to use the tone of experience from the Web UI into the desktop.
Web UI is a gazillion shades of shit, please don't dump that rubbish on the desktop. Thank you.
Seriously, how can one take Web UIs, the most cumbersome, unreliable, inconsistent, unreactive UIs, as examples to be followed? That's beyond me.
Re:Electron is flash for the desktop (2016)
by brokenmachine on Wednesday April 12, 2017 @02:26AM
(#14095278)
Haha, "a gazillion shades of shit". So true.
Re:Electron is flash for the desktop (2016)
by ornitorrincos on Tuesday April 11, 2017 @05:17PM
(#14092533)
I do strongly disagree with the web having the only strong standard, specially since it switched to a living standard
I admit that for someone from the web electron is a godsend, but to be honest, responsiveness of the applications leave something to be desired
Re:Electron is flash for the desktop (2016)
by tigershark on Wednesday April 12, 2017 @12:07AM
(#14094670)
It's completely false.
The web at the beginning was a huge mess of static pages, hacked CGI scripts and no interactivity at all with the need to submit a form to trigger a full reload of the page.
Everything was absolutely synchronous and a lot of times the database was accessible directly from the public interface and some pages did actually have the connection string directly in the HTML for everyone to see.
I'm really not sure in which alternate reality you have seen web apps doing all that forever.
Re:Electron is flash for the desktop (2016)
by cableshaft on Tuesday April 11, 2017 @02:13PM
(#14090842)
Yep, completely agree with everything you said. I'd love for their to be a standard on the desktop side, but until then, I'll keep using a hodge-podge of technologies depending on the project, I guess.
Re:Electron is flash for the desktop (2016)
by Arizhel on Tuesday April 11, 2017 @03:54PM
(#14091832)
They should have adopted Qt; it makes it easy to write native C++ code that compiles on different platforms, so you get the performance and RAM usage of C++ but still most of the benefits that web coding offers, without so many drawbacks. (It's also quite nice to work with IMO.)
It's too bad it wasn't more universally adopted, by any of the 3 major platforms (including Linux, where the all-C Gtk+ has become the standard for the most part). Instead, it seems to have found its greatest success in, ironically, small embedded devices. Devices like this simply cannot take the performance hit of something like Electron.
Or anything in any other language.
But none of them are close enough to the benefit of being able to use the tone of experience from the Web UI into the desktop.
Eventually all GUI app toolkit ends up with a custom MVC framework, a client/server architecture, some kind of db for persistence, their own implementation of asynchronous event and communication models and a declarative layer to create the UI without code. For the most advanced this layer separate structure and layout.
Well guess what, this is what the Web has natively being doing for ever.
Since the web is now the most popular platform, with millions of libs and tutorials on it, people just reused that. It just makes sense.
The problem is not the concept. The problem is we should have driven this effort with a standard to sanely close the gap between the desktop and the web so that you don't have to spawn a freaking browser-engine-os for every one of your app.
But no, the web is the only platform with a standard. And it flourished while all the big players created closes gardens with proprietary shitty API. And this is the result.
Have you not seen Jurassic Park for god sake ? Life finds a way.