In my experience, "front-end" these days generally means "web client development", e.g. the opposite of "back-end" (server application).
You're talking about client development in general.
I suppose web clients stole their own term because of the idiosyncrasies with web browsers, like how the server can ship declarative HTML to the browser for a fully-working UI which is a unique phenomenon.
There are issues with this weird distinction though. For example, people will complain how hard "front-end development" is, thinking it's something unique to the web, without knowing that all client development is hard.
In my previous job i was working on game tools with wxWidgets, in my current job i am working on game tools with Qt. In between i got an offer (which i rejected since i am interested in games) for a Qt tool to be used for (IIRC) DNA research (or something like that, i'd just be doing the UI not the actual logic).
Except Android/iOS, everything you listed is dead or dying.
No sane person would pick anything but Electron for a desktop app today, unless you are in a particularly high performance domain (CAD/Graphics/Video/...)
> No sane person would pick anything but Electron for a desktop app today, unless you are in a particularly high performance domain (CAD/Graphics/Video/...)
People who don't hate their users or who don't hate the environment might.
Electron apps use lots of CPU, lots of RAM and lots of energy. I get that they're easy for web devs to make and I've made them before but I'd fight tooth and nail against launching one at scale (like Slack did, for example).
Well, if you make the energy argument, theres a lot more to cut then.
How about high resolution displays? And bit depths? We can perfectly work on a 1024x768x256 colors screen. Imagine how much CPU/GPU cycles that would save.
Are you kidding me? There are many reasons to pick a non-electron platform without the need for particularly high performance. Android/iOS are good examples of the reasons why. There's just so much to be had by integrating with the OS and the environment that the user uses your tool in. Electron is great for a prototype or as a way to get your feet wet in improving the desktop experience. The best user experiences will always be founded on the native technologies of the target platform.
Only if by users you mean people living in the terminal. Yeah, those people hate GUIs, compositing desktops and anything more than monospaced text. Just whisper "Emoji" in their ear and witness the Wrath of Khan unleashed.
I would say exactly the opposite, not using web-tech for GUIs is disrespecting the users, because the end result is an ugly app with a lot of missing features (gif/image/emoji support for example).
Users seem to love their VS Code/Discord apps written in Electron. I wonder why.
I don't want gif/image/emoji support in 100% of the apps I use, so this point is silly. I dislike Electron apps because they tend to break with the OS UI and force whatever the developer thinks I want on me. I don't. Stop it.
You're talking about client development in general.
I suppose web clients stole their own term because of the idiosyncrasies with web browsers, like how the server can ship declarative HTML to the browser for a fully-working UI which is a unique phenomenon.
There are issues with this weird distinction though. For example, people will complain how hard "front-end development" is, thinking it's something unique to the web, without knowing that all client development is hard.