Not sure what you mean -- but I've never used Qt. I gather it's a controversial topic because I've heard exactly the opposite feedback than yours about it.
Still, I bet if more people used it then its community would have an incentive -- or a kick in the butt -- to quickly fix its deficiencies and it could become the de facto native GUI toolkit? Who knows.
Qt is really quick and is used at plenty of places. Places where (critical) software is needed for internal use will be written mostly as native apps. For example monitoring and the like. And these places often use Qt.
I suggest you to try out the Telegram Desktop app (I think mac has a non-qt version as well so be aware). I really like using it for it’s speed as well.
My only gripe with qt is that one has to use C++ or python, other bindings are not
Not sure I agree with this. I wrote a bunch of data vis GUIs with PyQt and Pyqtgraph, all Python, with everything keyboard shortcuts and accelerators, and it was Vim-like speed except where CPU bound by data processing (NumPy).
So I think it can be fairly easy yet Qt dies (frequently, on HN) on the altar of native look/feel/platform (ie doesn’t look/feel like a MacOS app on macOS).