Tauri's approach of using the system Webview just doesn't scale to millions of users. You will end up having to tell your customers, "In order to fix the bugs in our app, you need to install a new version of your OS", or in the case of Apple, sometimes even saying, "You need to buy a new computer to use our app". It's not a great conversation to have.

Philosophically, it also optimizes something that doesn't really matter much in 2025, download and disk space - despite the perceptions, the system Webview usually uses the same order of magnitude memory as Electron; maybe a little less, but not a Lot less. We can see the WhatsApp rewrite on Windows to use WebView2 as evidence of that.

The one time that Tauri is legitimately better though, is if you've got a lot of Rust code that you want to integrate - GitButler for example uses Tauri and it works for them because they have a lot of Git systems code and it's all in Rust.

We (GitButler) however keep running into packaging issues that make all but a very small handful of linux distros "usable". There are also numerous papercuts that we keep getting due to Tauri being comparably less mature.

We've been making steps towards moving away from Tauri. We now already have the capability to run our rust backend as a web-server and use the frontend in a regular browser. One of the next steps is to package the frontend into an electron app, and run the web-server as a sidecar process.

While there may be size downsides to packaging an entire browser - size isn't really a big issue compared to the program simply not working on a large user demographic.

Why can Mac developers absolutely never resist making dated Win9x / Windows XP / BSOD references every time they make a port of their software to Windows? Zed did the same thing recently and it was just as overplayed.

Developers please, when you do this, you are telling your audience, the people you want to pay you money for your work, "Yeah, we think you suck, but here's some thing we finally got around to porting over" - why would you do that?

I agree this is in poor taste. It feels a little insulting -- and I get why they didn't think that, but, I can read that into it, a 'you're still using Windows, never getting yourself out of that rut' sort of vibe.

I think people who do this think that people who use Windows perceive that the Mac experience is smoother, and may have some sort of Mac envy.

The end of the video gives this away: it's the Think Different font. It's a direct callback to the _idea_ of Apple vs Microsoft, not the reality today of Apple vs Microsoft.

I know many devs who use Windows exclusively, but they are in two camps:

a) Super old-school: still maintaining Windows desktop apps; that's what their career has been and there's no need for anything else.

b) WSL-based, VSCode-using devs who are one step away from just using Linux. These are the folk who fifteen years ago would have been using what was then still OSX. But these folk don't use Windows as Windows: they use it as a semi-Unix.

>I think people who do this think that people who use Windows perceive that the Mac experience is smoother, and may have some sort of Mac envy.

There's an irony in this due to this:

>b) WSL-based, VSCode-using devs who are one step away from just using Linux. These are the folk who fifteen years ago would have been using what was then still OSX. But these folk don't use Windows as Windows: they use it as a semi-Unix.

The people still doing the "hurr durr wind0ze suxx" routine are the ones stuck 15 years in the past. Modern Windows is an entirely different and vastly more capable beast and it still runs huge swathes of the enterprise world.

The best technologists I know don't really care all that much which desktop platform you stick them on anymore since most of what they really need is either available everywhere or running on a backend that isn't their desktop anyway.

> Modern Windows is an entirely different and vastly more capable beast and it still runs huge swathes of the enterprise world.

Okay, but what does it actually do that Linux doesn't? What's the selling point, why should I make the switch from Linux to Windows?

For one, it can run Raycast. There are launchers on Linux that implement a small fraction of Raycast's functionality, but entire categories of abilities are only possible in Raycast, like CRUD operations on Jira tickets, using AI to interact with your Notion workspace without having to pay Notion 20 USD per month, and directly interacting with other remote APIs with just a few keystrokes.

Okay, but why would I want that?

I don't want any AI at all, and I have turned down incredibly well-paid jobs because it would involve using Jira.

I play World of Warcraft on my M1 Mac, and my wife plays it on her M4. It's native on Apple Silicon and runs like a dream. So, much like Linux, gaming on a Mac is totally possible depending on which games you want to play. We only play World of Warcraft and were able to dump our Windows machines completely.

That's great that you play a game that has a Mac port! I play at least TerraTech Worlds, Volcanoids, Space Engineers, Stationeers, BeamNG.drive, Avorion, Deep Rock Galactic, Dishonored, Cogmind, Pacific Drive, Risk of Rain 2, Just Cause 3/4, Scrap Mechanic ... all of which don't/won't have Mac ports and many of which won't run in CrossOver. Recently I've been getting into ARC Raiders too which definitely won't ever have a Mac port. But it's great that you don't have that problem.

I also played Baldur's Gate 3!

I have my fair share of games that run on Mac too, for example I was really happy to learn about No Man's Sky on Mac because I was really into that for a while. It's just not very common, so I simply can't play most games without keeping a Windows desktop around.

The selection of games for macOS is tiny compared to Windows, and even Linux now due to proton. For example Paradox games used to have decent support with macOS, but now Europa Universalis V is Windows only (but works with proton) so I can't currently play it.

I still think, no matter how strategically advantageous, it was a very sad day when Valve discontinued Proton for macOS.

c) Those of us who've been using Linux for a decade, but are forced to use Windows in our day job because of MS Office/Proprietary VPN client that only runs on Windows/other program that doesn't run well on Linux.

> Proprietary VPN client that only runs on Windows

Out of curiosity, which one? I haven’t encountered a single-platform VPN client in years. Even Microsoft’s built in VPN client is just standards-compliant and interoperable IKEv2.

Forgot the name but at my last job the Linux client was something like "use this exact in-house patched .deb of $software in version X on Ubuntu Y/Z" - and that's all that worked, nothing else.

Kinda indistinguishable from "only runs on windows"

Watchguard with SAML login. I've read that one can use OpenVPN when logging with username and password, but it doesn't work with SAML.

I think you're being oversensitive, especially in the context Raycast adding support for Windows.

The whole purpose of Raycast is to improve productivity and UX, be that under macOS or Windows. It'd be a pretty shitty launch announcement if the blog post didn't mention the problem that they're trying to solve.

Edit: I'm not sure if the post was edited after my reply, but ATM there's no mention of BSODs - the closest I can see to a dig at Windows is:

> You know the feeling. Search that can't find your files. Apps buried in menus. Simple tasks that take too many clicks. Your computer should be faster than this. It should feel like everything is at your fingertips. That’s why we built Raycast.

That's certainly what the app itself does (I'm even using it myself!), but I just don't understand why they couldn't resist putting in these overused digs.

Fair and point taken. If you want to know a bit more about the video, we shared a bit more here: https://x.com/peduarte/status/1991510075505070260

On some level I understand. These products are solutions, implying that there exist problems that they're thus solving. How they go about presenting these is a matter of taste, and apparently this is just the taste these people tend to have.

Windows had a good run from Windows 2000/XP-ish [1] to Windows 7, maybe 8.1. Any tech person who lived through the 90ies knows that 95/98/ME was a tire fire. With Windows 10 and 11 the enshittification started in a big way and it became a vehicle for analytics, pushing ads and Microsoft stuff, and now forcing their on AI on users.

All the ridicule is well-deserved IMO. There is an alternate universe where Microsoft would have continued Windows in the 2000/XP/7 tradition and it would be a solid operating system, serving the user, underpinned by a very good foundation (after all, the original NT people were stellar engineers that worked on VMS before).

[1] Earlier NT versions were also quite good, but most consumers didn't encounter it.

Exactly, at least dunk on something relevant in 2025, otherwise you come over as someone out of touch.

Yeah. This is generally the type of thing that turns me off to working in the Linux/MacOS world. It's just a near constant "We're living in the 90s" attitude towards everything Microsoft does or has done. It's just absolutely insufferable.

I know more about both Windows AND Linux than most Linux Systems Administrators that I encounter. I know more about how making them work together in an enterprise than any Linux Administrator. I understand more about literally every underlying protocol AND how to manage those items on Linux and Windows, from DHCP, DNS, Networking, etc.

For all intents, I could be a pretty bad ass "Linux guru"--and for the most part, I hold my own quite well. I know how to manage SSSD, understand integrating Linux and Windows environments into harmony with each other. But my peers often see something in Windows they dislike, or a single thing that Microsoft hasn't really bothered to improve, and holy fuck in their minds the sky is falling and it's the absolutely worse thing they've ever had to do with a computer.

So I keep one foot outside of that world because these people are just fucking insufferable to work with and around.

It's "we think windows sucks"

And they are right.

The enshittification of windows is by far the most egregious example in modern software.

Windows is disgusting. The start menu is disgusting. The bloat, slowness, lack of design cohesion and flakiness has real consequences.

Its not "you suck" it's "windows used to be better" and to me it seems objectively true that it used to be better

Windows used to require a reboot to change an IP address.

Windows used to BSOD when the graphics stack crashed.

Used to come without a built-in firewall exposing all sorts of vulnerabilities to the public Internet.

Used to not isolate critical kernel components to 3rd party software.

(And Windows has always had a hodge-poge of UI designs dating back to NT4/Win95 which contained Win3.x design elements)

The list can go on about how it most certainly, objectively, was not "better".

The Windows kernel has certainly improved—BSODs are now rare—but the userspace has only gotten worse. The end result is a decline in usability and dozens of new ways for your OS to enter a permanently unusable state without a BSOD.

There are gains and losses in UX, I agree. I avoid the ads stuff via Pro (though not completely the telemetry, that said it's for games and a separate Enterprise device for Windows-only PoSh). I think the big spot for 'Recent' on the start menu, which I disable recent, is a waste of space.

But I don't use the start menu in the way of Windows' past; it's always Win+type what I want.

We did gain with things like tabbed Explorer or a right-click menu not infested by COM extensions taking ages to load.

I'm not aware of any of these 'dozens of new ways' to make Windows unusable in the way I use it, then again Windows doesn't really force any one happy path, there are often five different ways to do one thing.

That’s just your opinion, man.

Like, what do you mean by “permanently unusable state?”

This is all just vague nonsense.

Windows bad because Microsoft, or something.

I’m gonna guess you’ll come back and say something dated or exaggerated like “OneDrive nags you all the time” (nope, it can be fully uninstalled in windows 11 just like any app).

> That’s just your opinion, man. > Like, what do you mean by “permanently unusable state?”

I mean ways for the OS to lock up in ways that require a reboot. This is an objective criteria.

Sounds like you don’t know what the word “permanent” means. If you can reboot and everything works again that doesn’t sound all that permanent.

I use all three major OSes regularly and none of them lock up in ways that require a reboot with any level of regularity, never mind entering a “permanently unusable state.”

In my experience I find that at present in 2025, rebooting Apple systems seems to fix occasional little wonky problems [1], my Linux laptop needs reboots or hard restarts for occasional sleep issues, and my Windows 11 desktop’s most frequent problem tends to be graphics driver crashes while playing games (and that’s partially my fault for choosing AMD instead of Nvidia). That is the kind of problem that used to cause full system lock-ups but Windows 11 actually manages that failure relatively gracefully.

But the point is that the only operating system I interact with that never has any issues on the OS level are my Linux servers, but that’s really an entirely different use case with much less complexity and risk than a desktop workstation. And even then it’s common practice to manage Linux servers as cattle rather than pets and just destroy/replace them when there’s an issue.

[1] Out of all the desktop operating systems, I think Apple has the highest quantity of hastily added features that ship with rarely-fixed minor bugs, while the Windows team doesn’t even attempt to add features at anything close to Apple’s pace. macOS has this struggle to keep feature parity with iOS and the iPhone which itself has a economic mandate to iterate quickly. For example, since iOS 26 I’ve been having random issues with Guided Access and the screenshot tool on iOS that only resolve when I restart the phone. I’ve also needed to cycle Bluetooth since iOS 26 on occasion to get my AirPods to connect successfully.

The task bar not being movable is a huge (and also completely silly) example of stuff going worse.

I have some things that simply don't work anymore that kinda didn't bother me with easy workarounds on Win 10.

I would have to physically alter my desk setup for certain things with this new anti-feature. Not even sure how this could be argued as a win. (FWIW, I have 3 monitors and the bar used to be on the right one on top - so if I have a laptop half in front of it (no space next to the monitorr) I could do everything. open programs, look at the damn clock, etc.pp - now it's at the bottom and because of this annoying constraint called gravity I can't affix my laptop to be out of the way on top of the screen)

I would disagree with feature additions; Windows brings new features often every month as detailed in their patch Tuesday relnotes. Some aren't enabled right away, they do staged rollouts now, but they're much faster than Apple's (generally) once-per-year feature update release.

Try telling these reasons to your aging father who no longer understands how to print a file the government sent him because windows has changed windows explorer so much that he doesn't even understand that it's part of the OS anymore.

The disaster that is the ever shifting UX of windows is having serious harm on our senior citizens.

I've fielded several issues like this from many different seniors I know.

We've left these people behind and it's a shame that is having serious consequences.

Yes, things are better under the hood. But the surface, the UX, is a mark of shame on our entire industry.

This is a strange take. Should we never ever change UI because grandpa can’t learn the updates?

This is reductive black and white thinking that simply refuses to deal with the real problem that I clearly illustrated.

Microsoft windows is a critical tool that society continues to build dependence on. The poorly executed redesigns of key windows features has consequences unlike the vast majority of software systems.

With Microsofts great power, comes great responsibility.

I feel the same way about macOS, I used it for several years for various jobs and now will literally not accept a job offer if they force another Macbook on me.

Point is, if you're selling something to Windows users, don't say their choice of OS sucks.

Same tbh. macOS is my last resort, I find so much of it incredibly frustrating, from the literal constant permission nannying, the unrepentant "We broke your shit, deal with it" that comes with many many updates, the horrendous UI of Tahoe, it's the worst. Apple might have great (though boring) laptop hardware, but jeez louise does macOS ruin the whole thing.

I had so many issues with it, but the one that annoyed me the most is app icons in the menu bar being hidden behind the physical notch, meaning I couldn't see them unless I was connected to a second screen. It showed me the whole "Apple is amazing at design" stereotype was just that.

Oh, and the Music app would launch whenever I hit the play key, even with Spotify open in a tab. Not once did I ever want to open Music.

I used to be a diehard Mac guy but now I insist on having a Linux workstation. My preference is Suse but I’d settle for Ubuntu if it means I don’t have to use MacOS.

Raycast is built using Rust. So the rust toxicity has to be there in their community

Non-sequitur

Ironically, because of East Germany, cameras like this are now extremely illegal here. Any camera that can see public or even semi-public property (i.e. a camera that can see out into your building's courtyard or hallway) are disallowed. Even ones that strictly are inside your own home are subject to rules around audio recording and a sign must be posted at all entrances.

Yes, LTSC is literally missing parts that are standard on a Windows install - it's an operating system designed for ATMs and kiosks that run exactly one tested application, it is not a general-purpose operating system.

If you happen to not need those pieces, and you don't care about running super out-of-date software? Sure it might work. But it's not a Good Idea in general.

That's not a fair take. The only things I noticed that were missing out of the box are the MS Store and some Dolby codecs. Both of those can be installed easily.

I estimate that 95% of people would be fine with Windows 10 21H2 LTSC. The 5% might miss some 3rd party software that requires version 22H2 to run (just because it's the latest, not for any technical reasons).

Not everything can be installed easily, or at all. WMR is one example which cannot be installed.

> it is not a general-purpose operating system

Name a single missing part that destroys the "generalpurposeness" of the OS?

If you learn anything from the last 30 years, it's this - propaganda works. If you own the media and you're coordinated enough, you effectively can't lose; you completely own the framing of every debate.

If you extend that to 40 years you have the collapse of the Soviet Union in spite of the propaganda.

A year or 3 ago, it was a conspiracy theory to acknowledge this.

Thankfully I think the attitude is changing quite a bit and people are coming to realise that it's not good if all of our communications are controlled by a group of people with the same beliefs

Despite Microsoft making a bunch of different versions of pens, they mostly all just work. This post is trying to be exhaustive but the vast majority of people who aren't extremely Deep into the Photoshop game will not need or care about any of this.

Basically, "If the pen fits in the keyboard slot, it just works". I'm currently using a pen from a Surface Pro 7 on my new Surface Pro 12" and it was trivial to connect it and it works great

Doesn't even need to fit in the slot either. One of my Surface Pens is an older one that uses a AAAA battery and doesn't fit in the keyboard slot. It works just fine on my SP11 and older SPX. It just has less features and isn't as good as the newer Slim Pen 2.

Some non-Surfaces too. I’m using a Microsoft Surface Pen “Model 1776” a.k.a. “Ver.4” a.k.a “Surface Pen with no clip” with my Framework Laptop 12 folded all the way around into tablet mode.

> Maybe I'm missing the takeaway from the driving decisions.

I think the point is that for autistic people, a lot of things in their day-to-day life that randomly happen and can't be controlled for, can be the equivalent of just, random people walking by and punching you in the arm all day.

Each individual punch might not hurt, and describing the incident to a neurotypical person is probably met with "Eh, that doesn't sound that bad". An entire day's worth leaves you with a pretty sore arm though.

It's actually also already built into Windows if you have a Copilot+ PC, hit Windows-Q to activate it

ChatGPT does the same thing :-/ This is why Claude Desktop explicitly uses Ctrl-Alt-Space on Windows as its default shortcut rather than Alt-Space

Of course, the goal of the example is to teach using an example that makes sense logically. Templates can be arbitrarily large and obviously as the template gets bigger, the difference between it and manual `document.createElement` calls gets much larger.

The difference in what? TBH I don't get the purpose either. You have to use javascript either way, and it's trivial to do make a shorthand for `document.createElement` that sets properties and adds children... maybe 10 lines per project.

I thought it was an optimization, but benchmarking `document.createElement` was significantly faster (firefox).

And then having `template` in your html means that changes to the template/use are less local.

I feel like this is an improvement that only makes sense if you're neck deep in the react world.

The React world is still deep in `document.createElement` and doesn't seem to be investing in the template tag any time soon.

I don't know what your benchmarks were exactly, but my benchmarking (also primarily in firefox) shows cloning templates is much faster than `document.createElement` for many tree shapes I was encountering. (Not micro-benchmarks of one element or so at a time, but the tree contents of entire components and "pages" at a time.) That's before learning of a performance tweak I'd missed from reading this thread today (`document.importNode` for template contents cloning to avoid multiple tree walking passes to attach the clone to the document).