Electron vs XQuartz
Side-by-side comparison for macOS
Electron
7.5Build desktop apps with JavaScript, HTML, and CSS
XQuartz
7.0Open-source version of the X.Org X Window System
| Metric | Electron | XQuartz |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Developer Tools | Developer Tools |
| AI Score | 7.5 | 7.0 |
| 30-day Installs | 138 | 6.9K |
| 90-day Installs | 425 | 21.8K |
| 365-day Installs | 1.7K | 97.8K |
| Version | 42.0.0 | 2.8.5 |
| Auto-updates | No | Yes |
| Deprecated | Yes | No |
| GitHub Stars | 120.4K | 996 |
| GitHub Forks | 17.0K | 69 |
| Open Issues | 827 | 83 |
| License | MIT | — |
| Language | C++ | Shell |
| Last GitHub Commit | 1mo ago | 2y ago |
| First Seen | Apr 18, 2015 | Aug 9, 2023 |
Reviews
Electron
Electron enables developers to build cross-platform desktop applications using web technologies like JavaScript, HTML, and CSS. Its widespread adoption and extensive community support make it a popular choice for developers seeking to leverage web skills for desktop app development.
Electron allows developers to create desktop applications using JavaScript, HTML, and CSS.
Pros
- + Cross-platform support for Windows, macOS, and Linux
- + Leverages familiar web technologies (JavaScript, HTML, CSS)
- + Large and active developer community with extensive resources
Cons
- - High resource usage compared to native applications
- - No auto-update feature for the application
XQuartz
XQuartz provides essential X11 support for macOS, enabling developers to use Unix-based tools. While it supports Apple Silicon and is actively maintained, it faces some performance and compatibility issues.
XQuartz acts as an X11 server and client libraries for macOS, facilitating the use of Unix graphical applications.
Pros
- + Supports Apple Silicon
- + Actively maintained
- + Widely used by developers
Cons
- - Performance issues with macOS
- - Unresolved bugs