We had the same app later rebuilt with Electron which was fully written in JavaScript/Node and it felt like 50 times faster.
If you think electron was faster, you can't imagine the performance of tauri, or webview.
I have worked on Java desktop app. They can be really fast if you compile it for production, which uses compiler optimization flags. Yes startup time can be slow in some cases, but JVM has been improving a lot in past few years. Memory footprint of J9 is also in league of its own.
It also depends on framework used, In my experience, If animations are avoided, Fx is really fast, compared to swing. That said, Swing is really performant library. Eclipes IDE uses SWT which is built upon on swing.
@ivanjeremic
If you think electron was faster, you can't imagine the performance of tauri, or webview.
I have worked on Java desktop app. They can be really fast if you compile it for production, which uses compiler optimization flags. Yes startup time can be slow in some cases, but JVM has been improving a lot in past few years. Memory footprint of J9 is also in league of its own.
It also depends on framework used, In my experience, If animations are avoided, Fx is really fast, compared to swing. That said, Swing is really performant library. Eclipes IDE uses SWT which is built upon on swing.
Good to hear a bit of a different view, the huge amount of bashing that Java gets (often not based on actual knowledge) can be tiresome ...