Top
Best
New

Posted by thunderbong 10 hours ago

Every Windows 11 app should kill Electron, and Discord just showed why(www.windowslatest.com)
150 points | 157 commentspage 2
spapas82 8 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 8 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 7 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 10 minutes ago||
Chatgpt isn't a harness. OpenAI's harness is codex.
orwin 7 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 7 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.
codazoda 8 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.
spapas82 7 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 7 hours ago|||
But "friction" is the job, and "complexity" is the job. That's why we're developers.
davidmurdoch 8 hours ago|||
Because it used to cost extraordinarily more money to build for a performance increases almost no one cares about.
spapas82 8 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 7 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 7 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 1 hour 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 1 hour ago|||
But you’re running it, aren’t you? So from the business perspective, you don’t care enough for it to matter.
sparkling 2 hours ago||
Because the (wall clock) execution speed / performance oft the harness is tiny compared to waiting for the LLM response.
azuanrb 8 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 8 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 7 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 6 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 5 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.
jrmg 8 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.
Neywiny 9 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.

ezst 4 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 7 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.

jdw64 46 minutes 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.

ChrisArchitect 3 hours ago||
Related:

Discord is ditching Electron and its new app uses less RAM

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

JustinELRoberts 8 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 1 hour 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 8 hours ago|||
Tauri's value prop over EGUI and GPUI is that its syntax is familiar to web devs.
0gs 8 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 6 hours ago||
The argument against Tauri is that it uses system web view so you get platform incompatibilities.
mococa 8 hours ago|
On my mac I’ve banned Electron apps, only native ones - Slack on Safari.
More comments...