I, and many others, don't care about "native". I've used Java applications and I will keep using them when they're useful.

And regarding Java application speed, IntelliJ is pretty much comparable with the "native" Visual Studio.

About the looks, I'm using right now Vim (GTK), Skype (I don't even know what toolkit it's using, but I'm pretty sure it's not native), Eclipse (SWT - sort of native), Pidgin (GTK), Firefox (XUL? I'm not 100% sure after 57), Chrome (Skia?), etc.

Users don't really care as long as the applications are useful and developed properly. I've used many crap and butt-ugly "native" apps...

I don't even use Atom, but this vitriol annoys me.

Look, I was being a bit snarky. I think all apps that are not native, or don't follow system convention, create an impedance in that they don't always follow system conventions, or something about them doesn't work exactly as it would in a native app. This can cause confusion in users. The level of impedance depends on the user skill, experience and expectations. I know traditionally, Mac users have cared a lot about consistency and following the HIG, whereas Linux users are more likely to pick the application they prefer and not care whether it is GTK or QT.

If you are someone who jumps between Windows, Linux and macOS using the same app then consistency in how the app works is a big gain for you, and then the impedance comes from the system you are using.

I didn't mean to imply that Java apps are bad, far from it. Many java apps are good, they just stick out like the proverbial, and performance historically was not as good as native apps. There was a time when the go to torrent application was java based and Netbeans and Eclipse were the IDEs of choice. But they made trade-offs, and two of the key ones are performance and consistent UX with the operating system. For many applications / users, this is a fine trade off to make. But Atom made a similar trade off and then the developers have spent all this time and effort trying to improve performance, and that is what I was trying to be snarky at, that its obvious why performance will always lag.

True. jEdit is one of the best editors i have used. Not my default editor but i use it from time to time and install it everywhere.

The usual counterpoint: VSCode.

Dude you are so off base. Atom for daily driving is not slow at all and on OSX feels perfectly native and well integrated with the OS. So your entire point is dependent on assumptions that the UX sucks and the performance is worse than many native apps, both of which in this case are completely wrong.

Please consider going back to the parent post and contrasting that with your way out of bounds response that ends with "everyone is so cynical, because it is so obvious" in light of the fact that all the outcomes you assume are just not right.

The last time I tried atom a year ago (for the second time) it was so slow I had to write this to warn my future self: https://github.com/QasimK/my-setup/blob/master/atom.md (Nov 19 2016). This was on a modern powerful desktop.

I'd imagine after a year of updates it would be the perfect time to give it another spin. Not saying it's any better but to negate something entirely because of a bad experience over a year ago is a little over the top IMO.

If they're so bad, why are so they popular?

https://insights.stackoverflow.com/survey/2017#technology-mo...

Being popular isn't a synonym for quality.

It proves that there was a need not met by other options. Do you resent Atom developers for giving away free tool that you consider subpar? Or are you angry at its userbase for choosing Atom over your preferred option?

I don't use Atom but I'm glad it exists. It improves on state-of-art in some areas and that benefits everyone.

Yes, because of Atom many developers probably won't be giving money to e.g. Sublime Text or any other commercial alternative.

This is why good tools are only available to enterprise customers, the only ones willing to pay for their tools, just like in other professions.

There is nothing in Atom that I can consider state of the art.

> If this was 20 years ago, atom would be built with java using swing. It would be just as slow and just as un-native.

They did, and the result wasn't that bad: http://www.jedit.org/

I meant in terms of performance and nativeness. I was thinking of like Netbeans and Eclipse, which were both great IDEs yet sucked with performance (i.e. start up time, memory consumption) and fitting in with system idioms.