My experience is that every Electron app I’ve ever tried has a terrible “user experience” compared to average competently made native Mac apps. Their core UI widgets are non-standard for the platform and are full of bugs and inconsistencies. Latency is through the roof on all sorts of common interactions. They don’t integrate well with standard expected OS features/services. They burn massive amounts of system resources.

From my perspective as a user, Electron apps are for companies who don’t really care much about quality and are too cheap and lazy to write native apps. YMMV.

Electron is basically "write a web app, package it with a browser, and call it a desktop app."

Ironically, Microsoft was one of the early adopters of the idea of "web technologies for desktop apps":

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTML_Application

I’m a company of one and I care about quality. I’ve shipped native apps for Mac, iOS and Android.

About a year ago I began work on Label LIVE, an Electron app to interface with thermal label printers. It’s not perfect but it fills a niche. It wouldn’t exist if it wasn’t for Electron. Check out the video or download and give it a try. http://label.live

My argument is that the UI requirements are almost always nonsense. I hate launching a new app and trying to figure out a new interaction model or fighting a themes/fonts that fight my needs (font sizes, contrasting colors, etc). Basic stuff is often broken and there's a long tail, if ever, for them to get fixed. They're also the best candidates to break during an OS or other library update.

The whole reason OSes give you reusable components is so its easy to implement the conventions users are familiar with. Those are the things that are supposed to be fast and easy.

This likely violates the delivery timelines, but Maya, Nuke, and Houdini are all professional, heavily customized apps that were written in their own UI toolkits but were ported years ago to Qt and are cross platform.

Easily with XAML/QML.