I understand why scrappy startups like Electron, but it's astounding that companies as large Spotify and Slack won't shell out for a couple of Windows/MacOS native developers.
I can forgive a free and open app running on Electron (hello, Signal), but never a commercial one, full stop.
There's zero technical and human reason for allowing that to continue. The visible-on-the-screen messages are cached and you can, you know, just get on with it by painting the whole thing on the screen right away.
It's "fine", he says. "Fine"...
[grumbles under his nose, annoyed, and ventures into the far distance]
What "can" be done is kind of irrelevant. What's much more important is what metrics would the default (or lazy as you called it) way of doing things with framework X or Y net. If the defaults are a slow and laggy app then that's what 95% or more of the using apps will be.
Not to mention that desktop UI development is just unpleasant. I say this as someone who would really prefer that not to be true, it's just that in my search I've been disappointed. You choose between a number of imperfect "cross-platform" frameworks (and deal with their licensing), or maintain native code for several platforms. Creating custom "widgets" often requires you to start at the drawing API level and have a deep understanding of the framework.
I am keeping an eye on Avalonia, though. The tooling wasn't quite there yet when I tried it.
:(
Edit: Just to clarify "need" is in the context of working in a big company on a complex product. These products are a lot bigger than they appear.
They absolutely can allocate even 100 in total.
Spotify the company only moved to a electron remake later, I can only guess because it was hard to find more quality devs.
People might not remember this, but µTorrent used to be amazingly snappy too before it got bought and shovelwared.