on bad necrocomputing takes
Sometimes I see takes like "computers used to be able to do the same job using way less resources, software is shit nowadays"
And I can only wonder whether they've ever developed software back when real-time compositing was unaffordably expensive, and so was proper process isolation, and a million other 'modern conveniences' that make software, y'know, not suck
on bad necrocomputing takes
@joepie91 this is true to some extent, but at the same time not literally every piece of software needs to be a web browser please
re: on bad necrocomputing takes
@radostin04 To provide a bit more detail, here are some of the common arguments raised to support those complaints:
- "People are shipping entire copies of Chrome with every application"
- "You can't even share a runtime between Electron apps"
- "Electron apps need so much RAM"
- "Electron is so bloated"
- "UI frameworks are much simpler"
- "Electron is popular because people are lazy"
Every single one of these is false, but widespread. Every. Single One.
Electron uses CEF, not Chrome; not the same thing. It absolutely *can* share a runtime. The baseline RAM use is like what, 60MB? There's a reason that every major standalone UI framework nowadays has adopted *some* form of CSS. And so on, and so forth.
All of these claims are so ill-informed and so obviously based on assumptions rather than actual knowledge of the technology, that I have long ago stopped taking these complaints seriously.
If people want developers to stop using Electron, they need to ask the hard questions about why it is being used to begin with, without resorting to handwavy excuses like "lazy developers". And then work to actually build something better that ticks those boxes. Because the currently available alternatives don't.