In the recent "Electron is like Flash" thread it was claimed by many people that desktop apps are much easier to create and have better tooling than for the browser.<p>Is it a good idea to use desktop technologies for Intranet apps at least (with only API endpoints on the server)? Which stack would you recommend? How hard will it be to auto update the software?<p>Thanks.
If your application needs to do some heavy lifting on the client machines, then yes desktop technologies will be better. Web browsers are sand boxed for security and can be too limited for some purposes.<p>Desktop applications can avoid security problems inherent in web apps that are run through a general purpose browser.<p>The commonly cited tradeoff with desktop apps is they are harder to deploy and update. I don't believe this is necessarily true. You can tell a desktop application to periodically check for updates and notify the user to restart before allowing further writes to any central data stores. If fact many already do this. Problems arise when the OS prevents updates from being applied by non-admin users and you are deploying within a locked down corporate environment.<p>Java SE/Swing is a good platform for writing cross platform desktop applications. I work on an engineering simulation tool with a complex UI written in Swing. With Nimbus Look and Feel it looks and works the same across Windows, Linux and OS X without changes. Some people (devs) complain that is doesn't look native - none of my users care though.<p>The few times I have ventured into web development I have been horrified by the amount of work required to get web apps to look and work the same across different browsers. JQuery and Bootstrap deal with a lot of the pain but web dev still feels very hacked-together compared to desktop development to me.
My rule nowadays is to go with a web application unless you have a good reason not to. The difference between the work done for deployment is enormous, and it's enough to justify avoiding desktop applications 90% of the time.
I don't think so anymore, though I would have said yes even a few years ago.<p>I see most of the companies I work with moving towards AWS or Azure with all the scaling support and APIs that really make web apps easier to work with.<p>Instead of dealing with dozens of IT rules as to what can be installed on the various corporate images (which now include Macs), it's easier to just point users at a URL and make sure whatever single sign on they've got is integrated.<p>Another point: desktop apps are just as complicated as web apps these days, especially when dealing with Mac, Unix, Windows compatibility along with mobile. It seems like nobody has really done a good job of replacing VB6, Delphi, etc, and I haven't touched (as a Java developer) Swing or JavaFX in years.
Web apps are great for most intranet apps. Especially if you already have a single sign on solution. Deployment and maintenance are easier, as is replacing the thing when it becomes obsolete. With a desktop app, once it's out there, it's out there with all the headaches that brings. Otherwise, hard to make a recommendation without any specifics.
It's a good idea to use desktop technologies if the app is complex, for most corporate intranets a few web pages is probably good enough.<p>As for the stack, c# and winforms is a good bet, particularly if you need to target older versions of windows. If you need a bit more performance or cross platform support then c++ and qt would be better. You could go c++ and win32, but MS dropped the ball on creating a nice api.<p>Deployments are another area MS dropped the ball, click once is sort of ok if you are using visual studio, but either way chocolatey is better. You may want something better for release management, in which case look into octopus deploy. These suggestions apply to electron apps as well.<p>Basically, had windows XP come with a better programming APIs (more like qt/gtk) and a better deployment model then web apps would have never been a thing. OSS has made windows a viable desktop.