HTML and CSS are actually a pretty terrible syntax for building interfaces, which is unsurprising given HTML is a document format, and CSS is designed to style documents. If they were really the best possible syntax, you wouldn't have so many popular frameworks.

Rather, HTML/CSS/JS is what you're stuck with if you're treating the web as your platform, which is tempting when your code is really just a front-end for a remotely hosted system anyway.

Electron is the result of people trained in web development turning their hands to desktop development, but not wanting to learn something completely new.

Your argument would be much stronger if you actually provided the better alternative, instead you don't bring anything new to the conversation.

Qt Quick. Really, anything that has layouts (Windows Forms, for instance).

>Electron is the result of people trained in web development turning their hands to desktop development, but not wanting to learn something completely new.

"Learning something new" has a massive cost when you apply that to an entire engineering team. A tool that can leverage existing resources to make people proficient in a new area simply through new technology would be a huge value added IMO.

Electron just externalizes the cost, it doesn't eliminate it.

Electron is a little like auto-translating your UI. It's easier for the developer and the user pays the price.

> HTML/CSS is the very best possible declarative syntax for building interfaces ever devised really.

Well... I wouldn't go that far, but over the years we've all managed to work around the warts of HTML/CSS and can put up with it.

My argument basically comes down to the alternatives. Have you tried them? Native iOS development was a nightmare without deep mobile expertise until React Native and the like came about. Windows/Linux/Mac cross-platform apps were in the same place before Electron. IT's far from perfect, but ask anyone today what they'd prefer to build an interface with and it's most like HTML/CSS. Especially for highly graphic intensive, responsive layouts, there's almost no competition really.

> Native iOS development was a nightmare without deep mobile expertise until React Native and the like came about.

Doing things well requires expertise.

> Windows/Linux/Mac cross-platform apps were in the same place before Electron.

Seriously?! Qt predates Electron and is a far superior solution. Of course, if you only know web development, your existing knowledge doesn't translate over easily, but the reverse is equally true.

> but ask anyone today what they'd prefer to build an interface with and it's most like HTML/CSS

Only if they are already experienced in web development. Otherwise, Qt Quick is much better, taking the positives from CSS, without the downsides of using a document format to layout a UI.

> Especially for highly graphic intensive, responsive layouts, there's almost no competition really.

Seriously, Qt Quick is far better. Though on the desktop, you'd be better off not building a "highly graphic intensive, responsive layout" and instead adhering to the established norms.

Well, I think it would be pretty easy to take the best ideas from HTML/CSS and make something MUCH MUCH better that would be completely incompatible with these- See for instance subform (https://medium.com/subform) The problem with this of course is that these alternative systems aren't widely supported, but at some point I expect one of the AFGAMs to publish and push one of these alternate layout systems and attempt to get higher adoption.

(Amazon Facebook Google Apple Microsoft)

There is a big difference between being the 'best possible' and being the best out of a variety of crappy alternatives.