Electron and Tauri stand out among cross-platform frameworks for their ease in building GUI-rich applications across devices. Both allow developers to use web technologies, HTML, CSS, and JavaScript, to create and style user interfaces. Electron, a JavaScript-based framework, has been widely used due to its simplicity and vast ecosystem, while Tauri, built with Rust, is gaining attention for its focus on efficiency and resource-light applications.
The core tech that powers Electron and Tauri is:
- Electron: Relying on JavaScript, Electron is ideal for web developers familiar with HTML, CSS, and JavaScript. When bundling a complete Chromium browser, Electron applications mimic a web page, giving developers the flexibility of web-based interfaces.
- Tauri: Using Rust, Tauri integrates with the operating system’s native webview component, eliminating the need for a full browser. This results in apps that use less memory and storage while still delivering a responsive, GUI-rich experience.
Under the hood of Electron
Electron builds on a portable Chromium package, incorporating Node.js for backend operations and V8 for executing JavaScript code. This combination means Electron apps offer the full range of web browser functionality, with added system access that a typical web app can’t reach.
Electron’s architecture itself includes a self-contained Chromium instance, which renders the app like a web page in a browser. Each app functions as a standalone browser process, complete with access to local system resources, a setup that can quickly expand memory and disk usage. This design grants powerful capabilities but demands significant hardware resources.
Microsoft Teams is known for its Electron-based design, often drawing criticism for heavy memory usage. Nonetheless, improvements in recent versions have optimized Teams’ performance.
Exploring Tauri’s lighter, leaner approach to cross-platform apps
Tauri sidesteps Electron’s browser-heavy setup by using the system’s native webview component rather than a full Chromium package. Tauri relies on WRY to interface with the native webview and tao to manage window functions and system-level features. This architecture reduces resource usage while maintaining high responsiveness.
Tauri’s efficient resource usage stands out, as applications built with Tauri require significantly less storage and memory. For example, the Payload file transfer app runs with only 4MB of memory on Windows, in contrast to Electron apps, which can demand hundreds of megabytes.
Developers must learn Rust to fully use Tauri’s backend capabilities; relying solely on JavaScript limits functionality. Since Tauri and Rust are relatively new technologies, there are fewer resources, examples, and community support than are available for Electron, making initial development somewhat more challenging.
Electron vs. Tauri showdown: Which one wins for you?
The pros and cons of Electron for real-world development
- Electron’s best features for cross-platform success: Electron’s JavaScript-centric design makes it an excellent option for developers well-versed in web technologies. The extensive community support and established ecosystem simplify problem-solving and accelerate development.
- Why Electron’s resource needs could be a deal-breaker: The inclusion of a complete Chromium browser for each app makes Electron resource-intensive, which can challenge scalability on limited devices and lead to high memory and storage demands.
Tauri’s advantages and challenges every dev should know
- Tauri is perfect for resource-conscious projects: Tauri’s reliance on native webviews and its compact design minimize memory and storage use, making it ideal for projects where resource efficiency is a priority.
- The learning curve and limitations of using Tauri: Tauri’s backend, written in Rust, requires Rust knowledge, potentially limiting accessibility for JavaScript-only developers. Additionally, with a newer ecosystem, Tauri lacks the extensive resources found in more established frameworks like Electron.
Making the right choice
Tauri excels for projects where minimizing memory and disk usage is key. For developers already proficient in Rust or open to learning, Tauri offers a lightweight, resource-conscious framework ideal for creating efficient applications.
Electron, on the other hand, suits JavaScript developers who prioritize quick development with a familiar toolkit. For those who have prior experience with Electron or are less concerned with high memory and disk demands, Electron remains a solid option for powerful cross-platform apps.
Key takeaways
When choosing between Electron and Tauri, the decision ultimately hinges on your project’s resource requirements, your team’s technical expertise, and your long-term maintenance priorities.
Electron offers a familiar ecosystem for JavaScript developers and a smoother path for those needing rapid, versatile app deployment, though it can be demanding on device resources.
Tauri, on the other hand, is a leaner, Rust-based option for those looking to optimize memory and storage use while crafting efficient, native-like applications.
When aligning the framework with your app’s performance goals and team skills, you can get the strengths of each platform to deliver an impactful cross-platform experience.
