It's not speed so much as cost. Native means developing the app 2-3 times over with different languages, apis, and patterns.
There is no reason for it to be this way other than vendor desire for lock in. In the end what the vendors will get is the web eating the desktop. Serves them right.
An application that actually exists for my platform is superior to a better made application that needs to be ported across.
It has very little to do with lazy developers. It just takes more resources to release native applications for all three major desktop platforms.
>An application that actually exists for my platform is superior to a better made application that needs to be ported across.
Not if it serves as a "good enough" stop gap that prevents the better made application from being ported.
Yeah, I'm sorry, if it's good enough, then it's good enough. I get that as a power user, you want the native speed, the native experience, and it's something I value too, I guess just not as much as you. Something in my hands that I can use today is more important to me.
I'm a web developer (though backend these days) myself.
My hostility towards Electron is purely as an end-user.
>Is this love for 'develop separately for 3 different platforms' backed by some practical/rational thinking?
Performance, memory, speed, following the platforms conventions and taking full advantage of its APIs, looking and behaving best for each platform.
So, anything else except "put something out there fast / attract JS programmers" (which are valid concerns too, but not user-first ones).