> some of the biggest (Slack, Zoom, Skype, Discord)
If everyone is jumping off a cliff, would you too?
Slack: downloads 500+ megabytes of trash and stores it on your computer. It also is dogshit slow to load conversations. It used to have a bunch of really neat integrations, and then they did the rug-pull for chat history, APIs, and other costs. It's going on momentum now but most businesses and gamers have moved off of it. Its calling feature simply refuses work on Firefox on Linux for no technical reason whatsoever.
Zoom: barely works in a browser tab, and the app receives updates daily, and still has broken user experiences. Chat is barely functional, and screen sharing breaks often. Little or no useful API or integrations. Terrible user experience. But the configuration is probably the best of the apps you cite.
Skype: Microsoft killed this a decade ago, I don't know why you'd bring it up.
Discord: well at least they have best-in-class user experience for gaming voice comms. Up until you have too many people, at which point... good luck getting your whole gaming group together. There's a huge cult for bots and integrations, but I fear its messages will go the way of Slack -- pay for (or otherwise encumber) old/large message histories. It's terribly organized, and doesn't like running more than one client or window at a time, so it's a really terrible user experience for power users -- and it's very hostile to running a third party client to improve that. It's pretty bloated for the capabilities it has (better than Slack though), but it is packaged fairly well (very easy to install or update the Electron app) and integrates into things like Slack used to.
> most performant (Figma)
Figma is performant? Figma is dog slow compared to what functionality it provides. Apps ran faster on Mac OS 9 with a 275MHz PPC processor 30 years ago that do pretty much the same thing that Figma does today.
> Only way I'd have a take like yours is if I was a native dev, and my job security relied on companies hiring 3 people to lead 3 teams for 3 codebases (Web, Android, iOS native) - rather than 1 team and 1 codebase for all 3. I'd dishonestly dismiss the notion of cross-platform programming only out of self-preservation, and not any semblance of pragmatism.
That's a typical thought for someone who's acting on the defensive and hates computer science. Maybe you should change careers into middle management or executives, you seem the type. Or maybe you might want to cut back on personal attacks because there's plenty of pragmatism in wanting native applications if you'd look past your own short-sighted career-driven opinion.
If you don't want to handle the unique benefits that each platforms give then you don't need 3 teams.
Writing for web and Android and iOS native isn't what I'm arguing for, and you're moving the goalpost by trying to change it to that. Native apps have way better performance than web apps there, but they're still put into user-hostile walled gardens. You want pragmatism? Focus on why I want native apps on my desktop platform, discussed in the sibling fork of this comment thread.
I don't know how to answer this. Bloatware is being fixed by cross platform frameworks, but hardware is also being upgraded accordingly to facilitate it. I've heard the theories; and I know 3 codebases for 3 platforms is sooner becoming a relic of a time gone-by than gaining ANY momentum in both the job market AND modern stack statistics. As is one codebase team for native desktop applications - especially when there are technologies now that allow you to reach more market share and accessibility for having the same codebase reach several platforms and device types.
>Zoom: barely works in a browser tab, and the app receives updates daily, and still has broken user experiences. Chat is barely functional, and screen sharing breaks often. Little or no useful API or integrations. Terrible user experience. But the configuration is probably the best of the apps you cite.
You probably don't use Zoom often. It works great in-browser, user experience is rigid, just because YOU don't use the API or integrations doesn't mean it's not useful - there's an entire Zoom Marketplace where you can build apps with scopes that tailor to your needs, I have more than a dozen setup; and my single-most used integration between ALL my stack is a simple Zoom General App that checks attendance for past meetings, and starts a routine based on whether the invitee's email is in that list of past meeting participants or not. But YMMV on both ends of this position.
>"Figma is dog slow compared to what functionality it provides"
Again, not sure where you're coming from. It's very performant.
>"Maybe you should change careers into middle management or executives, you seem the type."
Luckily, Team programmer -> Senior Management -> Executive was my path.
>"Or maybe you might want to cut back on personal attacks because there's plenty of pragmatism in wanting native applications if you'd look past your own short-sighted career-driven opinion."
Sure! But that's the thing; you have to look at PAST and HISTORICAL trends to see its validity.
>"You want pragmatism? Focus on why I want native apps on my desktop platform, discussed in the sibling fork of this comment thread."
Sibling fork shows you're a minority, more and more people are looking up "(function) online" to accomplish something without leaving their browsers; trust in installing exe's, msi's and pkg's are at an all-time low and, in many user experience studies, are seen as hostile.
If everyone is jumping off a cliff, would you too?
Slack: downloads 500+ megabytes of trash and stores it on your computer. It also is dogshit slow to load conversations. It used to have a bunch of really neat integrations, and then they did the rug-pull for chat history, APIs, and other costs. It's going on momentum now but most businesses and gamers have moved off of it. Its calling feature simply refuses work on Firefox on Linux for no technical reason whatsoever.
Zoom: barely works in a browser tab, and the app receives updates daily, and still has broken user experiences. Chat is barely functional, and screen sharing breaks often. Little or no useful API or integrations. Terrible user experience. But the configuration is probably the best of the apps you cite.
Skype: Microsoft killed this a decade ago, I don't know why you'd bring it up.
Discord: well at least they have best-in-class user experience for gaming voice comms. Up until you have too many people, at which point... good luck getting your whole gaming group together. There's a huge cult for bots and integrations, but I fear its messages will go the way of Slack -- pay for (or otherwise encumber) old/large message histories. It's terribly organized, and doesn't like running more than one client or window at a time, so it's a really terrible user experience for power users -- and it's very hostile to running a third party client to improve that. It's pretty bloated for the capabilities it has (better than Slack though), but it is packaged fairly well (very easy to install or update the Electron app) and integrates into things like Slack used to.
> most performant (Figma)
Figma is performant? Figma is dog slow compared to what functionality it provides. Apps ran faster on Mac OS 9 with a 275MHz PPC processor 30 years ago that do pretty much the same thing that Figma does today.
> Only way I'd have a take like yours is if I was a native dev, and my job security relied on companies hiring 3 people to lead 3 teams for 3 codebases (Web, Android, iOS native) - rather than 1 team and 1 codebase for all 3. I'd dishonestly dismiss the notion of cross-platform programming only out of self-preservation, and not any semblance of pragmatism.
That's a typical thought for someone who's acting on the defensive and hates computer science. Maybe you should change careers into middle management or executives, you seem the type. Or maybe you might want to cut back on personal attacks because there's plenty of pragmatism in wanting native applications if you'd look past your own short-sighted career-driven opinion.
If you don't want to handle the unique benefits that each platforms give then you don't need 3 teams.
Writing for web and Android and iOS native isn't what I'm arguing for, and you're moving the goalpost by trying to change it to that. Native apps have way better performance than web apps there, but they're still put into user-hostile walled gardens. You want pragmatism? Focus on why I want native apps on my desktop platform, discussed in the sibling fork of this comment thread.