[p1necone]

Sure, slightly inaccurate title, but the point they're making is valid, this comment isn't really a substantive critique.

I could be wrong but I feel like when most HN commenters say that something "uses React" and also imply that that's a bad thing, what they really mean is "it loads a full web rendering engine and consumes ~200mb of unnecessary ram". Neither of those things are true here.

[madeofpalk]

> That is built with React Native for Windows. No, that is not a full JavaScript framework in your start menu.

This is incorrect. It is a full JavaScript framework in your start menu.

I don't see your read that it's about ram-hungry web views either. To me, "Start menu uses React" is a dig that Microsoft is so uncommitted to it's native development platform that they (partially) don't use it in one of the most 'core' parts of the operating system.

[p_ing]

Shouldn't devs be allowed to select what they feel is the "best" choice for a given component? While I wouldn't expect to see a SwiftUI in Windows from Microsoft, Microsoft hasn't been adverse to various NIH web frameworks for quite some time now.

If it fits and meets the goals of the project, why not?

[madeofpalk]

If Microsoft developers' "best" choice for a tiny UI component like this is not it's flagship native UI framework, then that's a problem for Microsoft. That is the criticism.

[p_ing]

You have inside knowledge of why React Native was chosen?

[scottlamb]

> Shouldn't devs be allowed to select what they feel is the "best" choice for a given component?

To some extent, yes. But if they choose React Native, something's probably wrong, because (despite what the article says) that requires throwing in a Javascript engine, significantly bloating a core Windows component. If they only use it for a small section ("that can be disabled", or in other words is on by default), it seems like an even poorer trade-off, as most users suffer the pain but the devs are making minimal advantage of whatever benefits it provides.

If the developers are correct that this is the best choice, that reflects poorly on the quality of Microsoft's core native development platforms, as madeofpalk said.

If the developers of a core Windows component are incorrect about the best choice, that reflects poorly on this team, and I might be inclined to say no, someone more senior should be making the choice.

[layer8]

The critique is exactly that they apparently felt that React Native was the best choice for such a component.

[p_ing]

And if it was the best choice, the critique isn't valid.

If you know why it was chosen and if it was a bad choice compared to other frameworks, please do tell.

[layer8]

There are two possibilities: Either it’s really the best choice among the available frameworks (very questionable), or they picked it regardless. Both reflect badly on Microsoft, given what React Native is, and given how central the Start menu is to the Windows experience.

[madeofpalk]

What are some of the possible hypothetical reasons that would make introducing React Native to the core OS start menu like this the best choice?

[scottlamb]

Here's one: Microsoft management heavily incentivizes their developers to use LLMs for virtually everything (to the "do it or you're fired" level) and the LLM (due to its training data or whatever) is far more able to pump out code with React Native than their own frameworks. This makes it the right choice for them. Not for the user, but you can't have everything.

I don't have any inside information; I'm running with the hypothetical.

[protocolture]

OP article amplifies it with:

>No, Windows Start isn’t built on React. No part of the start menu actually uses React.

But then

>This is the Windows 11 start menu. See that Recommended section at the bottom of it? That is built with React Native for Windows.

Its not just the headline its the content of the article.

What it should have done is focused on this claim:

>Microsoft is also vowing to use its native Windows UI framework, WinUI, in more areas of the system

Because like they said, React Native is calling WinUI.

But trying to split the React/Native hair is honestly just tiring. Its like saying you dont drink Coke, and then downing a full glass of Coke zero. "Oh but what I meant is that it doesn't call any sugar dependencies at all" is just weird. Just say you don't drink Sugar.

[p_ing]

Exactly this. And it is on a portion of the Start menu that can be fully disabled. Heck, my start menu looks like the Windows 10 start menu (yes, this is OOTB) as I wasn't fond of the "new" look of the Windows 11 start menu.

But we'll always hear "it's React!". Like most things, the masses must feed on the Internet outrage without critical thought.

[MattGaiser]

> And it is on a portion of the Start menu that can be fully disabled.

I mean, with tons of effort and config Windows can be turned into a usable OS. Needing to do all that is a huge part of the problem.

[p_ing]

If you deem a couple of clicks "tons of effort", don't touch macOS!

[franktankbank]

Exactly, use linux instead. Windows sucks donkey dicks, its hilarious how hard you defend it.