Hacker News

Every Windows 11 app should kill Electron, and Discord just showed why(windowslatest.com)

263 points by thunderbong 17 hours ago | 233 comments

I'm pretty sure this was known since the early days of Electron. It was even one of the chief complaints about VS Code when it was first launched.

Electron's value prop has always been about having one team producing one app that is supported on multiple platforms with minimal additional effort.

This article does nothing to address that.

[–] ksec 4 hours ago

>It was even one of the chief complaints about VS Code when it was first launched.

That was absolutely not the case at all. At least not on HN or twitter. It was for Chief Complaints for Atom. When VS Code first launched everyone was suggesting how much faster it was compared to Atom. And how a properly tuned Electron Apps could be fast. And Microsoft promised it will get even faster that makes everyone excited.

The only few of us who were complaining was how could everyone judge this to be fast when we have Sublime. And that was even before Sublime had GPU rendering.

[–] SideQuark 2 hours ago

Googling if it was a common complaint around launch time shows plenty of threads on it across all the usual sites at that time.

[–] eddythompson80 1 hour ago

I think OP is both right, and there was people still complaining about it. Atom was seriously slow. Everyone said you couldn’t build a fast text editor that could compare to native ones. VS Code came and it was significantly faster Atom was slow to the point of not being usable to some, while VS Code was perfectly usable. The people wanting vim or Sublime performance were still upset and wrote about it, but vscode was perfectly usable and fast enough for the majority of people. It was indeed held as an example of how to make a performant electron app. Still an electron app, but not absolute slog. Tbh, if you disable all extensions in vscode, it’s still fairly fast, and doesn’t even take that much memory. It’s not as usable without extensions though.

[–] accurrent 15 hours ago

A huge pain of desktop development is managing dependencies particularly if you are coming from C++/Native code. Imagine you wanted to make a simple app in the 2010s that accesses the webcam for instance: If you use chrome you got the full html5 runtime, whereas with other tools you'd need bespoke libraries which your end user may not have.

The only way to ship the same code between linux, macOS, and Windows would have been to either use something like Qt or the JVM back in the 2010s. The JVM desktop stuff was super ugly and Java itself had become notorious (also if you wanted anything remotely interesting like webcam/microphone or multimedia access you'd still have to ship dynamic libraries). Qt required special packaging skills to ship to the end user especially if third party libraries were involved. Electron killed that by bundling chrome (and chrome has a huge api surface).

Today, I would argue the package management situation for a language like rust is a lot different. You dont have to cobble different DLLs together, you can just statically compile dependencies and cargo/rust do a pretty good job of making sure it's bundled with your app. Other languages also now have similarly useful tools.

[–] 72deluxe 14 hours ago

But then the C++ libraries you mentioned also had the ability to statically link into a binary, which means you could statically link the webcam access in, in your example. So I don't see the advantage you're arguing for?

[–] cogman10 14 hours ago

It comes down to package distribution.

Chrome had already solved the hard problem of "how do we support webcams on linux, windows, and mac" and you as the dev just needed to use the Javascript webcam api. ( https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/MediaDevice... )

In C++ land, you are ultimately going to either need to cook up your own webcam library or look for a 3rd party (which, in 2010, likely didn't exist) to provide it.

Today, there are a few easy to discover rust crates which provide cross platform webcam apis. But further, rust does cross platform better than C/C++ IMO. It's really easy to change how code is compiled based on the target. That was all well thought out because rust was supposed to be a language for browsers.

[–] bluGill 4 hours ago

A cross platform webcam library isn't that hard to build at C++. I mean, it's tedious, and having to support multiple different operating systems makes it harder, so it certainly is going to cost a small pile of money, but this is not hard. The pile of money needed won't be all that large. Mind you, I prefer to use something that's off the shelf rather than writing my own, but it would not be hard to write my own.

The hard part of all webcam libraries is all the different webcams running all their different proprietary protocols.

[–] pjmlp 8 hours ago

Qt is easily obtainable via vcpkg or conan.

[–] edoceo 8 hours ago

Was that true in 2012?

[–] pjmlp 7 hours ago

Depends, it was easily obtainable via OS package managers, and installers in 2016.

However that has been true since 2016, and here we are, 10 years later.

[–] Krutonium 8 hours ago

Very yes.

[–] bluGill 4 hours ago

Neither existed in 2012, so of course not. On the other hand, QT has always been really easy to download from QT. I don't remember who owned QT in 2012. They've changed hands a couple times over the years, but in 2012 I was downloading QT from whoever on them. QT was large, so you needed a decent sized computer to build it, but in 2012 this was not a big deal.

People get too hung up on package managers. When you're building your own proprietary you don't really need a package manager, you just need a central place to download the tarballs from. Or you could do a monorepo and just build everything locally - in 2012, that means you start your build before you leave Friday afternoon, and when you come back Monday, everything's built.

[–] jasomill 11 hours ago

Dynamic vs static linking is mostly a red herring for desktop GUI application development unless you want to integrate into something like Linux distro package managers, as dynamic libraries on Mac and Windows can be self-contained within the application bundle/directory with no disadvantage beyond marginally longer startup time, and you can do similar things with Flatpak and friends on Linux.

The real difference is that Rust provides a package repository with a unified build system that's as simple to use as NPM or NuGet.

vcpkg which is similar exists today, but it didn't in 2015 when Discord started, still isn't anywhere near as comprehensive as package repositories for languages where package management is part of the standard toolchain, and the underlying build systems are far messier under the hood.

It can also be helpful in development to use libraries built from source as part of the application's build process, at least as an easily-accessible option, which wasn't common practice in most C/C++ ecosystems historically where different libraries used different build systems and if you wanted to integrate them into something like a Visual Studio solution for easy reference to source code during development and debugging you were often on your own.

[–] vrighter 1 hour ago

you can do that easily on linux too

[–] cosmotic 12 hours ago

Java desktop was only ugly if you chose for it to be. It was pretty minimal effort to get native look and feel. Nothing built in electron looks native. If we're accepting custom interface using electron, that was doable with Java too.

[–] NetMageSCW 5 hours ago

Why is it no one ever seems to do it then? I have never seen a Java app look or act native on Windows.

[–] dingaling911 2 hours ago

Eclipse

[–] sdthjbvuiiijbb 1 hour ago

I haven't used Eclipse in a decade, so maybe it's changed, but back then it was very much a Java UI, not a native feeling one.

[–] dingaling911 1 hour ago

I remember the Java UI, but at some point they switched to a version of Swing that made it look more native, at least on Linux.

[–] threetonesun 8 hours ago

JetBrains IDEs arguably look/behave better than VSCode as far as a native app goes. I wouldn't say either look great on MacOS but a truly "native feeling" Mac app is usually quite different than a Linux/Windows equivalent.

[–] johnny22 2 hours ago

I much prefer vscode to intellij

[–] pjmlp 8 hours ago

Long time ago, Apple had a proper OS X Swing L&F, when you could do Cocoa in Java, and there was still some uncertainty if Objective-C would be embraced by Mac OS development community.

[–] pjmlp 9 hours ago

Usually it is hard for those coming from scripting languages.

Strangely enough we managed to write portable code across platforms during the last century, and there were more than only three major desktop OSes.

[–] vivaldi_bt 4 hours ago

I never really understand this attitude. It isn't really hard it took one or two evenings to understand how native libraries work and you close this problem forever.

[–] skydhash 5 hours ago

> Strangely enough we managed to write portable code across platforms during the last century,

Yep, that argument always seems strange too me. Do people fear that much to design their own interface and hook to each platform ecosystem? You look at something like the BSD which runs brought one single kernel concept and various subsystems across a variety of hardware. And somethine like libao[0], which provides a common interface to various sound system.

Whatever the app, if you care enough, you can abstract the core features away from the GUI and other various dependencies.

[0]: https://xiph.org/ao/

[–] Barrin92 2 hours ago

>Qt required special packaging skills to ship to the end user especially if third party libraries were involved

How outrageous to demand that a software developer possesses the 'special skills' to ship a Qt application. It's not surprising that people think AI is killing programmers when this is the level the average 'programmer' has been operating at for 15+ years.

Imagine going to a chef and he tells you he can only warm up microwave lasagna because cooking the steak correctly requires special skills. The special skills are your job

[–] Grombobulous 15 hours ago

The article at least indirectly addresses that.

At the time Electron came out, there weren’t as many cross-platform UI frameworks available that they could have gone with.

You can see this with the comparison chart. GPUI effectively replaced Electron so the desktop app UI works across platforms. React Native is replaced with WebAssembly so that Rust can be the primary language across all platforms including mobile.

It seems like the new situation for Discord is rather elegant, and that none of this would have been available when it first came out.

[–] jenadine 14 hours ago

GPUI works well for Zed, but it's built for Zed's needs only. There is no official crates.io udates. Breaking changes land as Zed needs them, and outside PRs often get declined causing a mess of several forks.

[–] braiamp 4 hours ago

GPUI/Zed devs are trying to contact discord to see what can be improved:

> Hi Stanislav, I'm one of the core maintainers for GPUI at Zed, if anyone at discord would like to talk to us about improvements to the framework or to upstream your customizations, please get in touch! My DMs should be open :)

https://twitter.com/radgendervibes/status/211810701651020193...

[–] sbarre 5 hours ago

Herdr's new native app uses GPUI for it's mod framework, so hopefully as more apps adopt it, a better community/package/release process builds around it.

[–] pjmlp 9 hours ago

I love when folks complain about C++ in stuff like Qt, and then write C++ addons on Electron apps, to make them actually get an usable performance.

[–] AlienRobot 15 hours ago

Why https://gpui.rs/ doesn't have a single screenshot of how it actually looks?

The first thing anyone would want to know when choosing a GUI framework is how it looks by default. Every major GUI toolkit has screenshots on their websites.

This happens so often it makes me wonder if people just don't know how to take a screenshot and put it in a webpage with <img>.

[–] rstat1 6 hours ago

Click either of the 2 links at the top right of the page, and you get screenshots of GPUI apps.

[–] Grombobulous 14 hours ago

Probably because it's not meant to be like Bootstrap.js where everyone's UI looks identical?

[–] small_scombrus 14 hours ago

Even still, some screenshots of here's something we made earlier are always nice to see what's possible

[–] AlienRobot 14 hours ago

Even imgui has screnshots.

[–] NetMageSCW 5 hours ago

The article explains that the same Rust app runs on Windows, Linux and Mac just like the Zed editor where the GUI library originated, and with wasm, also runs on iOS and Android. What else do you need?

[–] Pxtl 5 hours ago

Oh, does rust have a good native cross platform ui framework?

[–] bluGill 4 hours ago

I'm not sure if a cross-platform UI framework is a good idea or not. I've been building with QT for 15 or 20 years now, and I'm still not sure if cross-platform framework is a better idea than just writing a different UI as a thin layer on top of your business logic for each platform.

Certainly, if you write a native UI for every platform, you're going to need a few more people because you have to have someone who understands each platform. However, with a little bit of work you can define some good interfaces to that UI and most of your needs are going to be things that are not the UI framework but they're logic that can be cross-platform.

What cross-platform frameworks give you more than the UI is all the other pieces you need. I've written a bunch of applications in Qt Core with no UI at all because it's so convenient to have those Qt abstractions.

[–] RunSet 16 hours ago

> Electron's value prop

"Now you can have the cross-platform compatibility of a single-page application just by bundling Chrome."

[–] zdragnar 15 hours ago

It's worth remembering that electron was first released back in 2016 (formerly atom shell fro 2013) so Internet Explorer was still very much a thing.

Not a great justification, but it made a bit more sense then.

[–] 72deluxe 14 hours ago

That's like saying it would make sense to make Internet Explorer work on all platforms. It doesn't make sense.

The solution is to use user interface toolkits that are available on each platform. For example, wxWidgets or Qt or appropriate bindings to them if you can't be bothered to write UI code for each platform you're targeting.

[–] toast0 9 hours ago

> That's like saying it would make sense to make Internet Explorer work on all platforms. It doesn't make sense.

Why not? Microsoft released IE for win16, win32, wince, macos system 7 through 9, macos X, Solaris, HP-UX. If it ran on all those platforms, Microsoft probably could have supported it on any platform that had the capability of running graphical web browsers.

[–] IshKebab 15 hours ago

> The article does nothing to address that.

I dunno if you've been living under an enormous rock, but they used AI to make this.

[–] llm_nerd 5 hours ago

> This article does nothing to address that.

This has been addressed many times now, and the article doesn't really need to re-address it.

Coding LLMs make managing cross-platform native apps significantly easier than it was in the past. The cost-reward analysis, where Electron and simile apps made sense because then you don't need to have an iOS expert, a macOS expert, etc, and having a bloated monstrosity of an app is an acceptable compromise, is simply no longer true.

I know there is some subset of HN that still thinks CoPilot 2024 is the state of the art and will declare this a foolish assertion that good developers like them disbelieve, but this is what all of the industry is moving to.

[–] ajross 6 hours ago

Exactly. This Discord Windows 11 rust app doesn't run on Mint or AOSP or an iPad and won't without extensive porting.

That can be done. It can be done well. It's not (or rather never has been) cheap or flexible or agile (in the market, not SWE sense). People love HTML/CSS/JS for very good reasons, and have been willing to accept the resulting tradeoffs.

Maybe that's changing now that you can vibe-port a lot of this stuff. We'll see.

[–] NetMageSCW 5 hours ago

The article says they can use the Rust code with wasm as the iOS app and that includes iPad and Android. And Mint is just Linux so it should run fine, just like Zed.

[–] dmix 2 hours ago

Using Rust/wasm for a mobile apps sounds crazier to me than using Electron on desktop. I'm not sure of the details there but the APIs/SDKs bringing consistency is one of the best parts of mobile. There's less of an argument for that on desktop which moves slower and is mouse/keyboard instead of complex set of touch workflows, paging, and notification schemes.

[–] tekla 16 hours ago

The problem is that it made everyone's life worse.

[–] johnh-hn 15 hours ago

Not mine. I loathe Electron like many people. But, as someone who is legally blind and has very limited vision, being able to have custom UI zoom levels, per application, has made my life much easier.

For a long time, and mostly out of frustration, I wanted to build my own stack of software around my vision. But the mammoth amount of effort it would require meant I never went through with it.

[–] freecodeio 15 hours ago

nice point, people like to shit on the web but it has one of the biggest accessibility features that most of the gui frameworks would just leave them as feature suggestions for years

[–] hajile 15 hours ago

I'd note that as stuff like A11y gets added into something like Discord, we'll see the app slowly bloat up to compensate.

Google Chrome generally used around 25mb per tab in 2010. Today, that number is often 500mb or even 1gb.

[–] masfuerte 14 hours ago

And Windows apps had accessibility before computers had 25MB RAM in total. Accessibility is not the cause of bloat.

[–] freecodeio 14 hours ago

do any of these native GUI libraries provide just as rich accessibility experiences to disabled people?

[–] afdbcreid 8 hours ago

The article implies that a11y will exist on launch and maybe already is.

And it doesn't require that huge amount of RAM, no. What requires the Chrome RAM is running JavaScript and do it fast, and a lot of extremely complicated features, most of which a single app will never use.

[–] Ygg2 14 hours ago

Would you really need 500mb for accessibility? Can't text to speech be outsourced to the OS or companion app?

[–] pjmlp 8 hours ago

All the native APIs across major platforms have accessibility features, how do you think browsers implement theirs?

[–] sitzkrieg 4 hours ago

i switched a cross platform application TO web stack for this reason. accessibility and screen reader usability is incredibly important and massively overlooked in many domains

[–] Grombobulous 15 hours ago

The electron hate train needs to pull in to the station and be retired. We can just admit that it was a good solution for the problems of its time just like JQuery. Electron was conceived over a decade ago and it was an imperfect solution, but there’s no denying that it was a solution.

Election predates WebAssembly by 5 years and hit the scene only one year after Rust was first created.

And just like JQuery, its time is coming to a close as better frameworks are available now that weren’t available back then.

[–] afdbcreid 8 hours ago

We could, if people would stop doing it today.

[–] hackernud3s 7 hours ago

I made a bunch of Electron apps in my time. I always tried to talk the client out of it. "Just make it a website" I would say. Still, there were times where it made sense.

[–] bigstrat2003 9 hours ago

> We can just admit that it was a good solution for the problems of its time just like JQuery.

We would be lying if we did that. Electron was never, ever a good solution. It was something solely used by devs who prioritized their own ease of work over the actual user experience, i.e. bad devs.

[–] rpdillon 7 hours ago

Its a straight-up business decision, generally made by MBAs and with advice from engineers and executed by the engineers. That's because it changes the shape of the org when you need a separate team for each platform, so any org where the benefit of doing so doesn't get articulated sufficiently, will end up with fewer devs covering more platforms.

Acting like this is a decision the ICs make is disconnected from why electron is so prevalent.

[–] Grombobulous 6 hours ago

If it’s so easy to provide a better user experience using something else besides Electron then logically you should be able to point to chat apps that won over more user adoption than Slack and Discord.

Someone would have been able to disrupt that market by making a much better chat app since Elecron is so bad for user experience.

[–] kristiandupont 9 hours ago

Do you have an employer?

[–] s3p 15 hours ago

I never thought election was a good solution for the problems of its time. Just call it a web app and don't lie to people releasing something "native" for them to download.

[–] Grombobulous 15 hours ago

Discord actually launched as a web app, and then moved to adding a desktop app, which has quite obviously become far more popular than visiting discordapp.com and using it in the browser.

Why do you think that is?

I'll give you a hint: if I close my web browser, how do I get a notification that I got a new message? Make sure you also pretend it's 2015 (launch year of Discord) and that I might be using Firefox, Safari, or Edge.

The funny part about this complaint is that you can literally just use the web app if you hate the desktop Electron app so much. That's one of the main benefits of Electron!

[–] Kuraj 15 hours ago

Noone is claiming that, though.

Discord isn't packaged as an Electron app simply because it pretends to be native, but because it has an entire system integration layer that isn't available in the web version.

[–] Brian_K_White 9 hours ago

It was never a good solution and there is no reason to ever stop calling a turd a turd.

[–] bee_rider 7 hours ago

Electron was an ok solution to the problem they were looking at, “how do I waste as much compute as possible.” Unfortunately it had the side effect of drawing a bunch of stuff on the screen.

Luckily in the modern era we have invented language models, which allow us to expend vast resources on text generation instead.

[–] EddieRingle 15 hours ago

Discord isn't really the model to follow here, IMO. They killed their native Android app and moved to React Native, and now they're dropping React Native (while mobile somehow keeps "native UI", according to their CTO's tweet). If they wanted to maximize code reuse and accelerate feature development, they should have instead considered Kotlin Multiplatform, then they could've skipped the React Native detour while actually building apps that are native to the platform. (Rust and its cacophony of UI frameworks are not really platform-native anywhere, as far as I'm aware. Maybe Pop OS, but I don't know anyone targeting that specifically.)

This bit is obviously subjective, but Rust as a language is simply not ergonomic enough for a lot of the use cases people are trying to apply it to, especially UI development. Most of the Rust UI libraries I've seen to date either use a more imperative style, or attempt to replicate more declarative approaches like Compose UI or SwiftUI, but without the nice language aesthetics that make it simple to read and write. And if the counter-argument there is for LLMs to be reading and writing this stuff, that's a whole other can of worms: (1) The subsidized inference era is quickly coming to an end and (2) if you're using LLMs anyway, why not maintain apps that are as native to each platform as possible?

[–] afavour 4 hours ago

IMO Rust is great for creating a shared library that native clients then use. Mozilla even made a great library to handle all the FFI bindings:

https://mozilla.github.io/uniffi-rs/latest/

Mobile UIs are different enough and, these days, easy enough to construct that to my mind there isn’t much value in the cross platform UI proposition these days. But logic? Sure.

[–] LaurensBER 16 hours ago

Electron is pretty awesome in that it allows a small team to build a decent GUI app using their existing web skillset but it also feels like it's time for something better at this point.

With the ram prices as crazy as they are. It's pretty frustrating to have to run multiple GB eating applications just to do some basic tasks (90% is read and write messages, in the case of Discord). I understand that other people might use the more advanced features (voice chat, etc) but these could be loaded on-demand.

It's a bit crazy to me that I can comfortable run an entire Linux stack (+ Podman, monitoring, alerting and multiple services) in 512 MB ram (with 40% free, just checked!). However my Windows PC needs 5.5GB just to show the desktop! Realistically it needs somewhere between 8GB and 16GB for some basic web browsing and even then it can feel slow if you have a few apps like Discord running in the background.

[–] pasc1878 16 hours ago

Sorry can you show a decent GUI app in Electron compared with a native one.

You show this by all your other comments on memory. The reason apps take memory is Electron.

Plus I prefer apps that behave like OS native apps not the reduced GUI of web apps.

[–] Peanuts99 15 hours ago

VS Code is a perfectly fine and pretty performant app.

[–] afdbcreid 8 hours ago

It has seen (major) optimization work, and it's still quite memory-heavy, although that's probably fine for a rich IDE. But it's not fine for many other apps.

[–] viraptor 7 hours ago

VSCode is absolutely not a rich IDE. It's a fancy text editor will extra plugins. Visual studio or IDEA are rich IDEs.

[–] afdbcreid 6 hours ago

With extensions it can be. And if it would be built on a custom GUI framework, it could not.

[–] viraptor 6 hours ago

Rich IDE is not something you achieve by slapping a few extensions on an editor. It's in the name - Integrated. It means that there's a GUI designer which is aware of local classes, inspector at runtime which can jump into the right areas of code, performance analysis that gets populated during runs, highlighting and compilation that's aware of the currently selected configuration, etc. There's an extension a few of those, but they're mostly independent and isolated.

[–] denimnerd42 9 hours ago

Erich Gamma started VS Code (through Monaco). That's saying a lot about Erich Gamma and not a lot about Electron.

It's also had a ton of work done to make it performant. (Microsoft level resources)

[–] bigstrat2003 9 hours ago

No it isn't. It takes over 1 GB of memory just to open up a handful of source code files that each are under 1 MB in size (and which, for reference, Sublime can open with 300 MB used). It's an absolute pig.

[–] anthk 7 hours ago

Just compare Sidex (VS Code clone in Rust) vs vanilla VS Code.

https://github.com/Sidenai/sidex

[–] codazoda 15 hours ago

Probably at the edge of being a good example. I recently switched to zed because of how bloated VS Code is becoming. I think it gained it’s momentum by being small, but enshitification seems to come for all software.

[–] letrix 4 hours ago

What do you consider bloated on a VSCode install without any extensions?

[–] thunky 13 hours ago

Based on the hype I tried zed thinking it would feel amazing compared to vscode, and it just didn't.

[–] brettermeier 14 hours ago

I don't know your Standards, but VS Code feels very smooth.

[–] Jtarii 7 hours ago

lmfao no.

[–] kelseyfrog 15 hours ago

I volunteer as the arbiter of decency!

[–] Doohickey-d 15 hours ago

One nice thing about Électron is that it supports accessbility and non-english IMEs correctly, and thus all Electron apps have decent accessibility out of the box, comparable to web apps.

Most Rust GUI toolkits, at least in 2025, did not have that good accessibility or IME: https://www.boringcactus.com/2025/04/13/2025-survey-of-rust-...

Hopefully this has gotten better and the new discord client isn't worse in that regard.

[–] robin_reala 15 hours ago

GPUI has a single-paragraph accessibility section in their guide that defers to AccessKit[1] for everything, and points to a raw RS file for more info.[2]

I haven’t tested it or written anything using GPUI, but I’d expect it to be considerably harder work, based on the maturity of the web stack in this area. My assumptions have definitely been proven wrong before though… Anyone from Discord working on accessibility want to chime in?

[1] https://accesskit.dev/

[2] https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/blob/main/crates/gpui/...

[–] numpad0 4 hours ago

oof. No proper support for IMEs is a huge non-starter for East Asia. Why don't they just use OS standard text renderers like everything before Rust?

Or is Discord planning to implement their own forks of existing IMEs into the app? Don't tell me they are going to just put in a tiny LLM and call it a day...

[–] mococa 14 hours ago

I don't understand this idiocracy - it's super easy (I did myself alone many times) to have a single codebase in Qt for all OSes, even BSDs.

I think people become super lazy... "Ah, it's will ocupie a few hundreds of RAM, no problem, let's ship it."

They are companies with billions or even trillions shipping shit with Electron.

[–] Aurornis 7 hours ago

> it's super easy (I did myself alone many times) to have a single codebase in Qt

I’ve worked in Qt apps on and off through my career.

I do not want Qt apps any more than I want Electron apps.

The solution is native apps using native platform tools, or one of the mature cross-platform toolkits.

[–] ptx 7 hours ago

Which cross-platform toolkits are more mature than Qt?

[–] Aurornis 5 hours ago

Mature was probably not the best word. The modern desktop UI toolkits produce a better UX to me.

Qt feels too locked in to old decisions that were the right choice at the time, but desktops and mobile have changed so much that it always feels like a clash of old and new.

[–] dagmx 3 hours ago

You can make Qt look however you want. The point is that it will give you native UI by default (for the most part and excluding QML)

That native UI will be faster than Electron and most other retained UI toolkits and will be just as capable of creating whatever your subjective view of “modern UI” is.

[–] 72deluxe 14 hours ago

This is definitely true. It seems to be the modern approach that the less effort in development, the better!

I too had code that worked across 3 platforms with wxwidgets and a 3D game toolkit incorporated in opengl for visualisation, with most 2d controls being drawn using wxwidgets OnPaint handlers for custom controls rendered natively on that platform. I wrote this single-handedly, with another colleague handling the network code and firmware on the remote hardware devices.

Everything else is sheer laziness as far as I am concerned. There's even less excuse today with the rise of LLMs to do the majority of UI coding for you.

[–] ip26 8 hours ago

Not a front end developer but I’ve always assumed it was ROI - nobody felt a smaller memory footprint would drive enough incremental revenue to offset the costs, compared to the other things they could be doing.

What seems to have changed is the size of the costs - LLMs are really good at this - such that you can now say “well, maybe the returns aren’t that big, in fact maybe they’re zero, but this is easy enough, so why not”

De minimus improvement has always suffered this problem - we’re all fairly sure it’s worth something. Maybe there’s even real perceptible value when you fix the whole basket. But making the case is hard.

[–] ivanjermakov 14 hours ago

> single codebase in Qt

Not if your promary UI is web.

[–] mococa 12 hours ago

Qt runs on web too.

[–] llbbdd 8 hours ago

Web version has 0 accessibility, which is a no-go for real products

[–] bemtevi 16 hours ago

I've rarely liked any Electron apps, both for the performance and because it seems to encourage a feeling of bloatedness, for want of a better word. Tried VS Code, but dropped it when they started putting too much AI in it and too much complexity. Sublime is so much better.

I don't know...there seems to be something unpleasant about all Electron apps.

[–] 72deluxe 14 hours ago

I agree. The lack of native user interface controls for accessing menus and the inability for them to properly track focus for keyboard usage for right clicking (for example) makes them really difficult to use. You have to use the mouse for everything.

I did use VS code for a while but I've just gone back to using QT Creator simply because it is so much faster to use in daily life.

[–] smusamashah 16 hours ago

We have gotten so used to slow app startup these days I believe. I have recently started using Task Slinger [1] and every single time I boot it, I get a feeling that it was already running and it's window just showed up. I wish all modern software were like this.

[1]: https://taskslinger.net/

[–] gopher_space 8 hours ago

The old System Shock 2 is an inspiration for my own loading times. Launching the game instantly shows the main menu with your last save paused in the background. Clicking Play actually unpauses the game. There's no loading time and no process as far as a player is concerned.

[–] ssernikk 7 hours ago

Do you know what tech stack do they use? The website only mentions custom Direct3D renderer.

[–] Jtarii 7 hours ago

>Do you know what tech stack do they use?

If you are asking this kind of question you have already lost the plot. You don't need a "tech stack".

[–] procone 2 hours ago

I'll pass on paid / proprietary task managers. But cool anecdote?

[–] swinglock 15 hours ago

All modern apps are like this. It's Electron apps which are all legacy.

[–] smusamashah 9 hours ago

No. Even windows' own task manager is not that fast. I don't think that most software most people use everyday on windows was built with strong focus on performance.

[–] swinglock 8 hours ago

My point is no Electron app should be considered "modern" at this point.

[–] spapas82 15 hours ago

I'm 100% on this since Electron is probably the worst thing that happened to the desktop development.

Hiwever, I'd like to hijack this front page article to for a related concern/question I've got.

It seems that all (popular) opensource LLM harnesses are either in JS or python (pi, hermes, opencode, paseo). The same seems to be true for closed source harnesses that I have used (deepseek, chatgpt).

I'd really like to ask why? I mean why somebody would use technologies like JS or python to implement a harness application instead of golang or rust or even C? I understand that before 1 year JS or python would be tempting but right now? Especially the LLm related companies have unlimited tokens and re-writing the harness software to golang or rust should be trivial.

This would benefit so many people (especiall considering the prices and scarcity of RAM these days).

So, why nobody does it? This is an honest question, I don't want to offend interpreted languages but it should be a universal truth that a compiled language is faster and consumes less ram.

[–] hamandcheese 15 hours ago

One good reason: extensibility. Pi is extremely malleable in ways that would probably be harder to achieve if it were in, say, Rust.

The resource usage of my harness is nothing compared to an electron app, and being able to easily customize it is more important to me than saving a few extra MB of ram.

[–] spapas82 14 hours ago

I guess it depends on the harness, for example: chatgpt.exe right now is 1 GB on my windows machine. peseo.exe is 500 mb. and opencode.exe + bun.exe is 300 mb.

[–] chrismustcode 7 hours ago

Chatgpt isn't a harness. OpenAI's harness is codex.

[–] orwin 14 hours ago

Because most of the recent improvements on correctness and 'memory' are from harnesses, my guess is that you want to iterate and test quickly on the software that seems to improve the most and differentiate your brand best. Once a harness is 'complete' (which might happen for specific harnesses, but probably never for code), the team might start to optimise it with compiled languages.

[–] 72deluxe 14 hours ago

The problem is that they never reach this point where they put it into native code. So you always have a plethora of JavaScript and Python files littering your system. It's baffling.

[–] davidmurdoch 15 hours ago

Because it used to cost extraordinarily more money to build for a performance increases almost no one cares about.

[–] spapas82 15 hours ago

chatgpt.exe right now is 1 GB on my windows machine. I have 16 GB and can spare none. So I don't think that nobody cares about such performance increases.

[–] astrange 14 hours ago

> chatgpt.exe right now is 1 GB on my windows machine. I have 16 GB and can spare none.

These are not the same units, because all modern OSes have compressed swap.

[–] davidmurdoch 14 hours ago

Most don't care or ever notice these things. Hacker News crowd does and always has, but the a non-technical user of a run-of-the-mill desktop app would rather have new features, and maybe some bug fixes, over performance.

Myself? I care. I regularly run a project that needs 6GB for the language server to provide type hints.

[–] Telaneo 8 hours ago

> but the a non-technical user of a run-of-the-mill desktop app would rather have new features, and maybe some bug fixes, over performance.

Ask anyone with a 5 year or older laptop that wasn't top of the line when it came out and can't afford a new one, and I think you'll find they're of the exact opposite opinion. And even if they aren't explicitly, they might have abandoned their PC and instead switched to their phone for their personal computing, just because that experience turned out more coherently for them.

Heck, even the normal user with a decent laptop probably would take better performance if given the option, but when have they ever been given that option? The current state just isn't unperformant enough that it crosses the threshold to the point where it's at the front of mind for people. If anything, that threshold is probably beyond the threshold of 'eh, I'll just use my phone for this' for any task that doesn't need a keyboard.

[–] senordevnyc 8 hours ago

But you’re running it, aren’t you? So from the business perspective, you don’t care enough for it to matter.

[–] codazoda 15 hours ago

One possible reasons is that all of those are compiled languages vs interpreted. It doesn’t sound like much but compiling your code for three plus platforms and distributing binaries adds just enough complexity and friction to make it feel a lot more difficult.

[–] bluGill 4 hours ago

Modern CI systems have no problem building for 15 or 20 different platforms is what you need. There's a little bit of hassle of distributing binaries but again it's not a big deal for anyone who actually puts their mind to it.

[–] sitzkrieg 3 hours ago

definitely dont mention setting up apple certificates/ code signing.

[–] spapas82 15 hours ago

I agree with that yes but consider how many people would benefit. And how easy it should be for them to do the change (and compile). It's just tokens.

[–] 72deluxe 14 hours ago

But "friction" is the job, and "complexity" is the job. That's why we're developers.

[–] sparkling 9 hours ago

Because the (wall clock) execution speed / performance oft the harness is tiny compared to waiting for the LLM response.

[–] CodesInChaos 5 hours ago

What I don't get is why most background electron/CEF applications don't unload the web engine when it's minimized to tray for some time. Chrome starts in about a second, the the webview shouldn't take more than that to re-initialize.

[–] NetMageSCW 5 hours ago

Probably because they have stuff to do in the background and so have to keep the javascript running.

[–] kaelwd 3 hours ago

You don't need the whole browser frontend for that though, Electron also includes Node.js which is much less memory hungry.

[–] jcelerier 4 hours ago

> Chrome starts in about a second,

on which machine ? go check the first three PCs here: https://www.amazon.ca/Best-Sellers-Laptop-Computers/zgbs/ele... ; do you think they open chrome in a second ?

[–] jrmg 15 hours ago

I don’t doubt that this will be faster and smaller than the current app, but it’s slightly annoying to me that the new app is getting so much coverage with specific claims about speed and memory usage when it’s not actually feature-complete or released yet.

[–] mrichman 4 hours ago

Would love to see VS Code ditch Electron

[–] ChicagoDave 6 hours ago

I’ve been building an app with Avalonia and it seems pretty snappy. Wonder why it’s not in the comparison.

[–] Neywiny 16 hours ago

They keep talking about 2 accounts logged in so that's why it's still high. But they've done nothing to defend that claim.

Also, pro tip, you can still just use it in browser. I hope that doesn't go away.

[–] azuanrb 15 hours ago

Electron has always been about shipping cross-platform apps quickly, at the cost of higher memory usage and potentially worse performance. With or without LLMs, its core value proposition remains the same. LLMs simply amplify the framework’s existing strengths.

Raycast, originally a native macOS launcher, recently released v2 using a hybrid architecture. It’s not Electron, but it follows a similar approach to Spotify’s desktop app, using web technologies inside a native shell.

The memory usage is still pretty significant. It’s using around 350–450 MB at idle and can sometimes reach 1–2 GB depending on the workload. The upside is that they can now share most of their code across macOS and Windows and evolve beyond being just an app launcher.

It’s always been about trade-offs, and LLMs don’t fundamentally change that.

[–] scosman 15 hours ago

LLMs do change the tradeoff if you can now ship cross platform apps quickly, without electron.

GPUI is one example: some of the downsides of electron (UI is not native), but it solves memory and performance side, and shared codebase.

Just writing native apps because LLMs makes it cheaper is the other option. Shopify did this after years of react native.

[–] azuanrb 14 hours ago

> you can now ship cross platform apps quickly, without electron.

The opposite is also true. My argument is that you can also ship Electron apps with more features more quickly with LLMs.

You still have a finite token budget. With native apps, you have to split those tokens across multiple platforms, whereas with Electron, you can reuse most of the code.

Big companies have been going back and forth between native and cross-platform approaches even before LLMs. They generally have the resources (humans, tokens, compute) that small and medium-sized companies don’t have. So I’d take their rationale with a grain of salt.

[–] scosman 13 hours ago

Why assume finite token budgets? Scaling 2x tokens isn’t a major jump if it brings quality.

Also the GPUI approach is still finite tokens, just better stack.

[–] azuanrb 12 hours ago

Because any kind of budget, resources are always finite? 2x the tokens roughly translates to 2x the cost. That’s a pretty big ask. Quality alone, unfortunately, isn’t always enough to justify it. There has to be business value too.

[–] thunderfork 2 hours ago

2x a finite value is still a finite value

[–] deepsun 5 hours ago

I also noticed that the "smoothness", when everything feels quicker, is immediately noticeable on desktop (vs laptop), all apps, several laptops (Mac, Thinkpad, Framework).

[–] orbital-decay 6 hours ago

If you ever wondered about the reasons people started using Telegram, this is a big part of why.

[–] ezst 12 hours ago

Is that a whole UI re-write in a native/non-web framework? Because in case that's not, this is still running in a browser, i.e. it stands at 80% or so of the bloat factor of electron, and what makes it faster is possibly (mainly?) that they haven't gotten yet to adding as much stuff as seen on the regular client.

Discord is a server-side protocol (the client isn't doing much besides displaying the server-prescribed state), there's very little logic/computation going on on there that should explain a world of difference.

[–] gkcnlr 14 hours ago

I think the reason why web technologies that are essentially being ported to desktop is not only because they provide cross-platform compatibility (still lacking a standardization on Linux), but they tremendously helped the hustle culture built around the motto of "ship it fast" by providing the fastest iterations and benefiting from already existing cheap pool of web developers, especially via outsourcing/offshoring.

Nowadays, AI (LLMs, genAI, call it what you will) has become so cheap to handle more than one codebase, they no longer feel the need for web only approaches.

[–] baist0 1 hour ago

we should kill web-monkeys.

[–] jayd16 7 hours ago

Has this released yet? We're just going from self reported improvement right now?

[–] tonymet 4 hours ago

I hope it's a tremendous success that inspires every app to rebuild native. We've been in the dark ages of desktop apps with 200ms click response times and 15hz rendering, 30 second load times despite having a super computer worth of hardware on every desktop.

Anyone who ran Windows 2k , or OS 9 remembers when apps opened instantly and were always responsive, because IO was dog slow (both disk & network access) -- no one dared to block the UI on an IO call.

Give us back our hardware!

[–] JustinELRoberts 15 hours ago

The barrier to entry for GPUI might be a bit high for some, but is there really any argument to be made against migrating to Tauri?

[–] hxorr 8 hours ago

With Tauri you have to support multiple web engines. It uses webkitgtk on linux - which has its own set of issues, including being somewhat behind chromium/firefox in terms of stability/security/performance/features...

[–] the__alchemist 15 hours ago

Tauri's value prop over EGUI and GPUI is that its syntax is familiar to web devs.

[–] 0gs 15 hours ago

was wondering the same thing; my hunch-memory is that Tauri is not as performant on Windows. but that has not been my experience, Tauri seems great

[–] sick_of_slop 13 hours ago

The argument against Tauri is that it uses system web view so you get platform incompatibilities.

[–] ChrisArchitect 10 hours ago

Discord is ditching Electron and its new app uses less RAM

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50378625

[–] sbseitz 7 hours ago

Agreed, Electron is garbage.

[–] kryptonomist 16 hours ago

Let’s hope we see a new wave of desktop apps rewritten natively, thanks to LLMs. Whether they use Rust with GPUI, C++ with Dear ImGui, or something else entirely, that would be great. Personally, I’m so fed up with bloated UIs. Windows is full of them, and it’s a pity considering how powerful our CPUs are.

[–] r_lee 16 hours ago

> C++ with Dear ImGui

it would be absolutely awful

compared to chromium, it's really limited, like it's just always a compromise with these

we should instead figure out a way to do electron but better and make it easier to do the things you can do with e.g. React with native languages and frameworks

[–] debazel 16 hours ago

The limitations are a large reason for why they're so resource efficient in the first place.

If you just reimplement Electron in a native language then you get... Chrome, which is already written in C++. The majority of RAM usage in Electron applications is from the native parts of Chrome itself and a decent ~40 MiB chunk for the Node.js runtime.

[–] ogoffart 14 hours ago

That’s what we’re trying to do with Slint (I work on it): a declarative, reactive UI like React, with the logic in Rust, C++, JS or Python. It needs no browser engine, so it uses a fraction of Electron’s memory.

[–] amelius 16 hours ago

QtQuick is quite good.

[–] the__alchemist 15 hours ago

Are you a web dev?

[–] r_lee 15 hours ago

I use ImGui regularly, if you believe that it is on the same level as what you can do with React/HTML/CSS/etc. then I don't know what to tell you

[–] the__alchemist 15 hours ago

I have seen this assumption in recent GUI threads here (More so your upper post): Building a PC application is not equivalent to building a web browser. A web browser is a type of PC application built for a specific (But very broad!) use. I didn't think I would need to write this statement/distinction, but I have here. Web languages, culture, and syntax have not been a value add to PC application development. Electron is the clearest example why. My model is that is the value add of Electron: Appealing to web devs through language and culture.

Regarding "not doing what you can do with HTML/CSS/JS". Doubt. I varied and complex stuff and have never felt I needed to overload document rendering langs for this.

I will go a step further: I don't think Electron is a symptom of HTML/CSS/JS: I suspect it's more from the Node + Framework culture.

[–] r_lee 14 hours ago

it's not just about "appealing to web devs"

you simply just would stumble if you tried to do development like you can in React, constant "uhh... can't do that." while it just works in React.

I don't think anyone likes the look of Qt more than what you can achieve with webapps in terms of UI (style/etc. wise)

problem is the performance, I don't think many would be complaining if the performance was proper and the memory usage wasn't as terrible as it is now

you're talking about web browsers, I don't care what it runs on, if we have a way to run this in a lightweight way, would your complaints go away?

even Gnome uses JS etc.

you can do complex stuff in native UI, of course you can

what I'm talking about is the same kind of DX as with React. I really don't have faith in that, e.g. the new thing Discord is about to use, the css it tries to imitate just seems absolutely terrible.

the web technologies aren't perfect, in fact, far from it. however, when I see React vs whatever C/C++ alternative, I'd always go for React if it's about making the UI nice.

I've also shat on Electron before, but there's a reason as to why it's so popular. the tooling/UI capabilities are just much more powerful.

[–] Telaneo 8 hours ago

> I don't think anyone likes the look of Qt more than what you can achieve with webapps in terms of UI (style/etc. wise)

I don't want web app UIs. They all look different for no good reason. I want native UIs. I like qt. Please just give me a stable UI that I learn and stick with for the next 20 years.

[–] bigstrat2003 9 hours ago

> I don't think anyone likes the look of Qt more than what you can achieve with webapps in terms of UI

You are incorrect. In fact, us users hate that fact that UI designers keep making apps that look nothing like the rest of our system. Give me a nice native-looking app any day of the week.

[–] caspper69 15 hours ago

I have had excellent results running a back-end Rust process that communicates with a C# Avalonia front-end via protobufs over named pipes on Windows and Domain Sockets on Linux and MacOS. With C# AOT I’ve been able to create self-contained apps that run incredibly fast despite the ipc between the front end and the rust core. I’m getting full 6 platform coverage too (Win/Linux/macOS on both x64 and arm64).

edit: Avalonia is quite mature, with accessibility to boot.

[–] airstrike 16 hours ago

or Rust with things other than GPUI

[–] cpursley 16 hours ago

Crux, lets you use native UI but Rust for business layer: https://github.com/redbadger/crux

[–] cykros 15 hours ago

I literally just run another browser Window with discord on the web rather than the native app.

Discord is probably my least favorite thing to happen to chatting online, but for some reason it's what everyone wants to fucking use.

[–] Aozora7 15 hours ago

Discord is my favorite thing to happen to chatting online. It combined everything useful from IRC, Skype and TeamSpeak, in one application and with modern UI, and things we now take for granted like attachments and link embeds. And even 10 years later, there are still no alternatives that aren't just discord but worse.

[–] abhinavk 14 hours ago

Discord tab also uses 500-600MB of RAM. This is private resident bytes of the tab excluding browser and its helper processes.

[–] petterroea 16 hours ago

It's hard to say "Discord just showed why" before the product is in production and sees actual use. Promising initial statistics, but the transition is based on a lot of assumptions that won't really be proven until mass adoption and the software has seen long-term maintenance.

[–] flohofwoe 16 hours ago

...exactly, and at some point you want to show inline animations or videos and all sorts of other media, show webpage previews, play audio snippets and all the other things things a webpage can do, and then you're back to either integrating a browser engine or attempt to write one from scratch (the browser engine can of course be provided by the system webview, e.g. what Tauri does).

[–] goalieca 15 hours ago

I’ve programmed inline video players for 25 years. Same with audio and everything else. We had “accelerated” graphics back with winxp and gdi+ and of course OpenGL over ssh with x11. Browser preview pages in most apps are usually snippets of text and maybe an icon or pic. Not rendering a full page.

In a way, applications regressed a lot with react native and electron. I get it’s easier to develop but the apps are very bloated and underperforming even on computers with 10-100x more power.

[–] bulder 5 hours ago

When it comes to content you control it's very possible to handle everything with platform-native acceleration, but how would you approach embedding a, let's say, YouTube or a Twitter video in a native desktop client?

[–] goalieca 2 hours ago

There’s still native ways to do this with libs. Browsers themselves use these. Plus, we used to embed explorer or WebKit or html or whatever without dragging in a whole giant thing where need be.

[–] anthk 4 hours ago

JSON and API's/libraries.

[–] ryandrake 13 hours ago

If LLMs are truly driving the cost of "writing code" down to zero, then we shouldn't need Electron anymore. The whining from developers about how it's soooooo hard to write and maintain N separate native applications is no longer valid. Point an LLM at your existing Electron code base and have it fork off a bunch of native ports of it. LLMs are surprisingly good at matching the functionality of existing software. Keep and maintain the Electron app as an internal reference design (your developers probably only know JavaScript anyway) and "build" all your actual production releases from that.

[–] opengrass 16 hours ago

Signal is still dragging Electron, can't have a working FreeBSD port due to dependency hell. Also VSCode.

[–] fg137 16 hours ago

Meanwhile Zed isn't really usable on machines without a GPU e.g. VDIs

https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/discussions/17212

I don't know if we have a winner here.

[–] anthk 7 hours ago

Lapce works, so does the ArtCraft suite even on Aros. No Vulkan there, just MESA 26 with OpenGL 4.6+ and that's it.

Altough I use evcode myself. But there are tons of GUI IDE's/editors for Rust out there.

Also, this curb-stoms VS Code:

https://github.com/Sidenai/sidex

[–] lichenwarp 5 hours ago

that's crazy didn't even know sidex existed, I'm gonna try it later

[–] giancarlostoro 8 hours ago

One thing Electron has over Tauri for Discords case is WebRTC. I tried making an open source alternative using Tauri and got plenty far, then I learned that WebRTC on Linux is not OOTB since its still experimental. Webkit on Linux requires WebkitGTK, so everything under the sun out there that had “webviews” cross-platform cannot do WebRTC ootb.

At least now Discord will consume your GPU vram while you game.

[–] Sean-Der 8 hours ago

This is so close to being fixed!

I am guessing this is just capture/playback code issue? You have a portable WebRTC stack in rust https://github.com/webrtc-rs/webrtc

I haven't used Tauri myself but this sounds like a fun thing to go fix. Silly this is a blocking issue.

[–] giancarlostoro 2 hours ago

I think I wound up hacking something in Rust which is less than ideal felt hackish, at that point I was better off just remaking the UI in an actual native UI stack.

Still too many Rust UI stacks are GPU driven.

[–] codedokode 8 hours ago

For me the ugliest part of Electron is that it uses client-server model inside a program and includes both a browser and Node.JS. This is so stupid. If you love microservices so much why don't you put every React component in a separate process?

Also, browsers contain too much bloat, why do you need support for elements like "hr" or attributes like "cellpadding" in a modern app? Throw away all legacy garbage.

Also, immediate mode UIs (like Rust's egui) are even worse garbage than a browser. "Immediate mode" means that on every mouse move a function is run that re-draws whole window from scratch. I tried running PhotoCraft (uses egui) in a VM with no GPU and it felt like playing a game at 3 fps. The CPU is simply unable to redraw whole GUI with acceptable speed. It will be especially bad on 4K and 8K screens.

[–] bl4kers 10 hours ago

Just use the website. It's going to be a better experience than the vibecoded Rust approximation for the foreseeable future

[–] MrDOS 5 hours ago

Yeah, native clients are pretty great. Why did you think people kept risking getting banned in order to use them?

[–] revolvingthrow 9 hours ago

Hot take, but: love electron. Write once, runs anywhere. The majority of bugs aren't platform specific. Easy to get nice visuals that stay consistent across different OS. Yes, it's not native. I don't care. It's not a painting to be admired. The focus on looks and visuals versus usability and ux is a plague.

Yeah, it takes some extra ram. Fork my stuff and rewrite it in rust if you care. I don't. The few hot spots can be fixed by using a lower level language. Is vs code not zippy enough? I certainly haven't noticed the slowness. People keep complaining about unnecessary load as if hardware hasn't progressed since 2004. It's hugely important for things like your OS. A few apps you run twice a month? Who cares.

But what about software used by billions, asks a person angry about my electron project used by thousands? How many ages were taken up by the five second startup time when you multiply that by however many users (all this time would be spent curing cancer of course)? Sure, improve performance when needed. For the vast majority of projects it's not needed. The average computer isn't pi zero.

[–] bigstrat2003 9 hours ago

> Yeah, it takes some extra ram. Fork my stuff and rewrite it in rust if you care. I don't.

And that, right there, is why people hate apps which use Electron. You are spending my system resources so that you can be lazy and not have to program as much. That's not really acceptable development practice.

[–] CamperBob2 7 hours ago

If it's FOSS, what's your beef? You want a native version, point a clanker at the repo and tell it to party on.

[–] xlayn 6 hours ago

OR you can use Lazarus pascal and ship a 5mb application that uses 13Mb of RAM and runs everywhere instead of a 150MB installer that installs the nth multigb copy of the same application with different hat that leaves free 13Mb of RAM. https://github.com/alainnothere/mailBoy

Electron apps are a disease.

BUT BUT THEY LOOK GREAT, LOOKING GREAT SHOULD COST 1000$ OF RAM BUGA BUGA...

[–] zerr 9 hours ago

So, it has always been a skill issue.

[–] drnick1 6 hours ago

So Discord rediscovered that native apps are faster? Until fairly recently, every proper desktop "app" was written in C/C++. In other news, water is wet.

[–] itopaloglu83 16 hours ago

On another note, Microsoft Teams and new Outlook use very little amount of memory on paper, because their main windows show up under the Edge name. It’s a Microsoft way of solving the high ram usage problem.

[–] goda90 16 hours ago

WebView2. Other applications can also use it but it seems like there's less out-of-the-box functionality than Electron

[–] senorrib 16 hours ago

That’s also how Tauri claims to use so little ram.

[–] jasonvorhe 16 hours ago

By being dishonest and misleading?

[–] snarfy 15 hours ago

When they can all share the same Electron implementation instead of individual copies it reduces memory quite a bit. I'm not trying to defend Electron way of development but I can see why they pushed WebView2.

[–] lunar_rover 15 hours ago

By reusing the system webview? It's what web frameworks should've done.

[–] Scharkenberg 6 hours ago

What an insane take. Also, the parent comment is incorrect, because the WebView2 memory is clearly attributed for both Teams and new Outlook in Task Manager.

[–] pwg 16 hours ago

When has Microsoft not been dishonest and misleading? Being dishonest and misleading has been Microsoft's entire game plan since all the way back into the Bill Gates era.

[–] jdw64 7 hours ago

Many people dislike Electron, but there's a reason it's still widely chosen. It runs on Linux, macOS, and Windows. With C++ or C#, you have to build differently each time, and cross-platform support is difficult. And fundamentally, it brings over web syntax as-is more than other frameworks, making front-end styling convenient.

I'm well aware that Electron has a large RAM footprint and installation size, but doing a polyglot architecture instead puts more cognitive load on you. Projects that mix multiple languages are a pain just to manage. I'd rather hope Electron gets better optimized.

[–] npongratz 3 hours ago

> I'm well aware that Electron has a large RAM footprint and installation size, but doing a polyglot architecture instead puts more cognitive load on you. Projects that mix multiple languages are a pain just to manage.

I'm not directing this at you, but to all developers using Electron and its ilk:

Show some empathy for your users and shoulder that cognitive load so that your users can have their hardware back. That's just courtesy, and a responsibility a good engineer takes on. There are so many more users than there are of you, their aggregate gain from your efficient software far outweighs whatever extra work is necessary to do the decent thing.

[–] Rohansi 6 hours ago

> I'd rather hope Electron gets better optimized.

Everyone always blames the browser. Why don't we blame [insert native app framework] for apps being slow too?

Everyone builds web apps using bloated frameworks and don't spend time optimizing any of their code. I wonder how much more efficient they could've made the Discord client without getting rid of Electron, just for a more meaningful comparison.

[–] Surac 15 hours ago

Rust to death i told them

[–] mococa 15 hours ago

On my mac I’ve banned Electron apps, only native ones - Slack on Safari.

[–] tapper 15 hours ago

Could they of used servo?

[–] tapper 15 hours ago

I hope they can do some work on a11y because it's bed. Not as bad as it was but still slow and clunky to use with a screen reader.

[–] cpursley 16 hours ago

Great option for this that lets you use Rust along with real native UI for cross platform: https://github.com/redbadger/crux

[–] bscphil 15 hours ago

"cross platform" I just spent 10 minutes trying to figure out what it uses for native on Linux, and whether it supports both Qt and GTK. Turns out the docs don't even mention Windows? "Cross platform" is now just MacOS + iOS + Android + Web? I guess the thought is supposed to be that crux helps you port your app to Windows if you want to... but even the example applications only run on those four platforms.

[–] LoganDark 16 hours ago

I would not add alternative accounts to the account switcher, they've used these to coordinate bans ever since the account switcher's inception.

[–] fnord77 8 hours ago

interesting, I would have guess Tauri. til GPUI

[–] cedws 9 hours ago

I’m disappointed to see the continued proliferation of JavaScript and TypeScript. I cannot fathom why people are using these garbage languages still when we have so much better options and code is essentially free now.

[–] hyperhello 9 hours ago

These languages were developed for hypertext. Discord is hypertext. The question is why Rust or C++ or anything would be so suitable for developing chat rooms; it’s not even clear why JavaScript would necessarily be slower after being statically compiled.

[–] samiv 14 hours ago

Don't worry I'm sure they'll find a way to make the rust based client crawl too soon enough.

Slapping a few million lines of AI generated slop code ought to do it for instance.

[–] VCFundedGenYer 14 hours ago

I've not seen the performance deficits demonstrated in this article. The article also does not discuss the specs.

Not to mention Windows is a very heavy slow inefficient and poorly made OS.

You don't see these issues generally on Linux or macOS.

[–] mpalmer 14 hours ago

    Discord’s new Rust client had its friends list loaded before the current Electron app could get past its loading screen, in a 15-second clip that we found on the X account of Discord co-founder and CTO Stanislav Vishnevskiy. The video had 2.3 million views at the time of writing, and Discord employees have confirmed that both apps were launched from a cold start.

Crazy what passes for journalism these days.