> I’m very critical when a company like Slack cannot find the time and resources to make native clients.
It's not a matter of finding resources, it's a matter of finding that to be the best use of resources. Obviously they could have native apps for major desktop platforms with the energy put into the Electron app, and performance would probably be better, but would they have feature parity? And if you increase the resources, would the best use of that increase be into maintaining native apps for each platform of Electron?
I believe feature parity is less important than the basic HCU of a responsive interface for the most basic features. Some of the most recent features they've added, like the "WYSIWYG"ification of the input box were arguably more disruptive to my use of Slack than any benefit it offered. If a good baseline performance for basic features like chat, image sharing and calls are achieved, then later into the lives of these clients the kinds of features that would lose out on parity ought to be more niche. Things like the presence of huddles (arguably just a different kind of call), bot command interface tooltips, and the ability to draw on shared screen.
Maintenance is a real challenge, but one that delivers the value of good HCU and performance on dev machines; a worthwhile operating cost to provide a product that is harder to unseat. Better performing programs also save memory for the rest of the user's programs like containers and IDEs, which can get pretty resource-hungry.
I think with the recent chip shortage, supply chain issues and potential catastrophes in the future with Taiwan, there's a pinch that will force us to be more resource efficient on a per-machine basis at least for a while. And we may find out that there are miraculous things we can do on the individual machines we have, with what felt like very little processing power, once we're forced to adapt away from overvirtualized, shallow quick-to-market apps.
EDIT: on further consideration, I'm wondering if it's not possible within things like electron, to have some kind of "just in time" style hybrid infrastructure where the most basic features are augmented to run native code quickly for the most heavily used parts on the most common platforms? I don't know enough to say.
I agree Electron is a great way to serve tons of end users. But lets not exaggerate, there are 4 main systems to target: iOS, Android, Windows and Mac. Its not that insane to have 4 well optimized applications, instead of 1 mediocre-fits-all approach.
The problem is more recruitment and internal mobility I guess. If you have 4 teams, experts in their domains, you will have 4 teams 'fighting' each other over the UI, working in their silo's, harder to maintain feature parity... But thats organisational.
It's not a matter of finding resources, it's a matter of finding that to be the best use of resources. Obviously they could have native apps for major desktop platforms with the energy put into the Electron app, and performance would probably be better, but would they have feature parity? And if you increase the resources, would the best use of that increase be into maintaining native apps for each platform of Electron?