From the apps listed in the blog (as @pcjmfranken
pointed out) you can see quite a few big names. Even though electron does come with a couple of cons its still the de facto standard till now.
TBH - the whole idea of Electron is flawed - you are essentially shipping almost an entire web browser with every single app. You end up with a whole bunch of web browsers all running at once, hogging memory and resources. This would be fine if all the apps were sharing an instance of a central webpage renderer - but AFAIK, they aren't.
The overall result is a bunch of massively bloated, resource hungry apps that, in reality could be way, way, way more efficient. Not to mention the fact that they'll all likely be running different versions of the web renderer, with all the associated security and update issues that that brings.
This is quite typical of the way a lot of development is done today - little or no consideration being given to whether or not the tools are appropriate to what is being built (using React for ridiculously simple portfolio sites etc.) - people just want to use whatever they know, or is the current 'cool' thing.
The priority always seems to be making it 'easier' for the developer with no regard to efficiency, resource use etc.
Please don't. There are enough bloated, slow electron based apps around already
It would be helpful to name a few, for reference and bad practices to avoid.
The author has already included a convenient list of some of the most bloated and worst performing ones right in in the article:
From the apps listed in the blog (as @pcjmfranken pointed out) you can see quite a few big names. Even though
electrondoes come with a couple of cons its still the de facto standard till now.TBH - the whole idea of Electron is flawed - you are essentially shipping almost an entire web browser with every single app. You end up with a whole bunch of web browsers all running at once, hogging memory and resources. This would be fine if all the apps were sharing an instance of a central webpage renderer - but AFAIK, they aren't.
The overall result is a bunch of massively bloated, resource hungry apps that, in reality could be way, way, way more efficient. Not to mention the fact that they'll all likely be running different versions of the web renderer, with all the associated security and update issues that that brings.
This is quite typical of the way a lot of development is done today - little or no consideration being given to whether or not the tools are appropriate to what is being built (using React for ridiculously simple portfolio sites etc.) - people just want to use whatever they know, or is the current 'cool' thing.
The priority always seems to be making it 'easier' for the developer with no regard to efficiency, resource use etc.
Thank you, this is absolutely the insights that I would love to see.