Talk:Electron (software framework)

Controversy around the so-called creator

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/nwjs-general/LIrC7zHtQdo/6Gd5MXVsCAAJ http://cheng.guru/blog/2017/11/20/statement-on-the-statement-on-the-history-of-node-webkit.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.167.187.86 (talk • contribs) 22:47, 13 Sept 2018 (UTC)

Other noteable Electron apps

Franz https://blog.meetfranz.com/ N1 https://nylas.com/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by ShalokShalom (talk • contribs) 18:02, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

Criticism on memory footprint, efficiency, etc.

Since Electron is essentially a web server and a web browser wrapped around the actual application code (I'm probably over-simplifying to get the point across), there legitimate concerns that Electron might support software bloat more than necessary. (e.g. this rant, or observations like Slack consuming hundreds of megabytes of RAM, etc.) Is there any way to properly formulate that in the article? --Wormbo 15:48, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello

I have included in the article independently (I just found out your request). Can you check if you agree with my edition?--Jakeukalane (talk) 10:37, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

No support from PortableApps.com

PortableApps.com (which has their own article on Wikipedia) does not seem to support any application that uses the Electron framework. The problem is that Electron requires Microsoft Visual Studio (of which Visual Studio Code is also an electron app) for the Windows toolchain. PortableApps likes using the GNU toolchain, nevermind that a lot of Linux developers have joined Mac developers in using the Clang toolchain, which uses a BSD-like license. Here in lies the problem. While the Free Software Foundation is in the right to avoid using Visual Studio, it is a disservice to software developers who want to have a "No Strings Attached" development platform where things like the registry or some other software dependent feature denies the programmer the freedom to just plug in the flashdrive into a USB port and run the software from the flashdrive. Basically, Electron needs to rethink their build instructions for Windows to provide an alternative set of build instructions for folks who do not wish to use the Visual Studio software. The Linux instructions do not require Visual Studio.--Bushido Hacks (talk) 16:20, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Concerning Revision as of 00:19, 10 October 2020, criticism section

Although the reference provided is frequently updated, I believe citing a GitHub repository with Version Control providers' dynamic nature isn't appropriate, this applies generally to repositories. The repository isn't widely seen looking at the issue count and the number of stars, and the criticism inside it links to other sources, which creates layers of citations. I will be looking for more credible and reputable sources for the phrase this citation concerns, and some of the criticism inside it could be incorporated into the criticism section here. 1 --ByrdSC (talk) 18:11, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

AFAIK it is not maintained by github

it is just developed on github Eteled286 (talk) 20:07, 26 October 2022 (UTC)

I have updated the intro paragraph to reflect that Electron is maintained by OpenJS Foundation and not GitHub. Lbbzman (talk) 01:02, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

AFAICT it isn't written in Python

that is just some build scripts Eteled286 (talk) 20:09, 26 October 2022 (UTC)

The "history" section is nonsensical

The history section talks about release histories. The Blurb on the right indicates that it originated in github, and was a project of the OpenJS foundation. What is the history of electron? 2620:10D:C090:500:0:0:4:54A3 (talk) 19:01, 9 June 2023 (UTC)

Some nonsensical statements

"As a result, Michael Larabel has referred to the framework as 'notorious among most Linux desktop users for being resource heavy, not integrating well with most desktops, and generally being despised.'"

I doubt very much that Larabel has evidence to back up this assertion. Perhaps he means those Linux desktop users who participate in Linux forums and arguments. Rochkind (talk) 18:51, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

"Those who are concerned that Electron is not always based on the newest version of Chromium have recommended progressive web applications as an alternative."

Progressive web applications don't use Chromium, so that's hardly an improvement for "those who are [so] concerned". A PWA uses whatever the user has installed, which may or may not (probably not) be the latest version of Chrome. It may not even be Chrome! It seems to me better to ensure that the Electron app runs on the version of Chromium that it was tested with. Rochkind (talk) 18:51, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

"Researchers have shown that Electron's large feature set can be hijacked by bad actors with write access to the source JavaScript files." Delete the qualifying phrase "source JavaScript" and you have a situation that applies to all files on all computers. If a bad actor can tamper with your files, then all bets are off. (I wonder how hard this "research" was.) Rochkind (talk) 18:51, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

"...although other technologies such as front-end frameworks and WebAssembly are possible) that are rendered using a version of the Chromium browser engine and a back end using the Node.js runtime environment."

I have no idea what this is supposed to mean. The first part of this should end after the ")" and have some additional text to explain what "possible" means (what's possible with these things).

"that are rendered using a version of the Chromium browser engine and a back end using the Node.js runtime environment." Should be re-written as 2 sentences: one about how the browser engine fits in with Electron (explain where the rendered material goes), and one about how Node relates to Electron.

Desktop?

I think it would be more useful to state which desktops eg: Windows, macOS, x86, PowerPC... FreeFlow99 (talk) 12:16, 22 May 2024 (UTC)