Comparing Desktop Application Development Frameworks: Electron, Flutter, Tauri, React Native, and Qt

7 min readSep 13, 2023

In today’s rapidly evolving software landscape, the demand for cross-platform desktop applications is on the rise. Developers are faced with the challenge of choosing the right framework to efficiently build applications that can run seamlessly on Windows, macOS, and Linux. In this article, we will compare five popular desktop application development frameworks: Electron, Flutter, Tauri, React Native, and Qt, to help you make an informed decision based on your project’s requirements.

Overview of Frameworks

1. Electron

Background: Electron, developed by GitHub, has gained widespread popularity for its ability to build cross-platform desktop apps using web technologies like HTML, CSS, and JavaScript.
Key Features: Electron provides easy access to native APIs through its Node.js integration, enabling developers to create feature-rich applications. It also supports native plugins written in C++, though building these can be more complex and error-prone.

2. Flutter

Background: Flutter, created by Google, is renowned for its use in mobile app development but can also be used for desktop applications.
Key Features: Flutter offers a rich set of customizable UI widgets, and its Dart code is compiled into native machine code, resulting in fast execution and reduced overhead. It employs a unique “widget-based” architecture, providing a rich set of customizable UI widgets.

3. Tauri

Background: Tauri is a newer framework designed for creating secure and lightweight desktop applications. It aims to bridge the gap between Rust and web technologies.
Key Features: Tauri offers support for building native plugins using Rust or C, enabling access to native APIs and functionalities that are not available in the web platform.

4. React Native

Background: React Native, also from Facebook, is primarily known for mobile app development but has extensions for desktop application development.
Key Features: React Native provides a way to access native APIs and features, but it may require more effort compared to other frameworks. It supports the integration of third-party libraries seamlessly.

5. Qt

Background: Qt is a C++ framework with bindings for various languages, including Python and JavaScript. It’s a long-standing framework with a rich history.
Key Features: Qt offers excellent native integration capabilities, allowing developers to access native APIs and functionalities. It provides a comprehensive set of tools for building cross-platform desktop applications and emphasizes a native look and feel.

Cross-Platform Capabilities

When it comes to cross-platform capabilities, Electron, Flutter, Tauri, and Qt are well-equipped to run applications on multiple operating systems. They provide extensive support for Windows, macOS, and Linux, making them suitable choices for projects that require broad compatibility.

React Native, while primarily designed for mobile, can be extended to create desktop applications. However, its cross-platform support may not be as seamless as the other frameworks, and it may require additional effort to achieve consistent performance and UI across all platforms.

Performance

Performance is a crucial factor in desktop application development. Here’s how these frameworks stack up:

Electron: Known for its higher resource usage, Electron applications can be heavier on memory and CPU, affecting performance on older or less powerful machines.
Flutter: Flutter’s performance is commendable, thanks to its compiled code and GPU acceleration. It offers fast startup times and smooth animations.
Tauri: Tauri stands out for its lightweight nature and low resource consumption. It’s a great choice for building fast and responsive desktop apps.
React Native: React Native desktop apps can be resource-efficient, but optimizing performance across platforms may require additional work.
Qt: Qt’s performance is excellent, offering native-like speed and responsiveness. It’s a top choice for resource-intensive applications.

User Interface

Creating a rich and responsive user interface is a critical aspect of desktop application development. Here’s how these frameworks compare in terms of UI capabilities:

Electron: Electron provides a plethora of pre-built UI components and extensive theming options. Developers can create visually appealing applications with ease.
Flutter: Flutter’s widget-based approach allows for highly customizable and visually appealing user interfaces. It provides a broad range of widgets out of the box.
Tauri: Tauri doesn’t provide as many UI components as some other frameworks but allows for tight control over the user interface, which can be beneficial for creating unique designs.
React Native: With React Native, developers can use third-party libraries and components for UI design. It may require additional work to achieve a fully customized look.
Qt: Qt excels in providing native-like UI elements that seamlessly integrate with the target platform. It’s the go-to choice for applications requiring a polished native appearance.

Development Experience

A smooth development workflow is essential for productivity. Here’s how these frameworks compare in terms of development experience:

Electron: Electron offers an extensive set of development tools and an active community. Debugging and hot-reloading are well-supported.
Flutter: Flutter’s development experience is streamlined, thanks to its widget-based architecture and robust documentation. Hot-reloading is a standout feature.
Tauri: Tauri is still relatively new but offers a simplified development process with Rust and JavaScript. It emphasizes rapid development.
React Native: React Native provides a familiar development experience for web and mobile developers. However, transitioning to desktop may involve a learning curve.
Qt: Qt provides a mature development environment with a wide range of IDEs and tools. It’s known for its stability and comprehensive documentation.

Native Integration

Accessing native platform features and APIs is crucial for many desktop applications. Let’s see how these frameworks handle native integration:

Electron: Electron provides easy access to native APIs through its Node.js integration. It also supports native plugins written in C++, though building these can be more complex and error-prone.
Flutter: Flutter’s Dart code is compiled into native machine code, resulting in fast execution and reduced overhead. It employs a unique approach called “widget-based” architecture, which provides a rich set of customizable UI widgets.
Tauri: Tauri offers support for building native plugins using Rust or C, which can be used to access native APIs and functionalities that are not available in the web platform.
React Native: React Native provides a way to access native APIs and features, but may require more effort compared to other frameworks. It supports the integration of third-party libraries seamlessly.
Qt: Qt offers excellent native integration capabilities. It’s a C++ framework with bindings for various languages, including Python and JavaScript, which can be used to access native APIs and functionalities.

Community and Ecosystem

The size and activity of the developer community can significantly impact a framework’s success and the availability of third-party libraries. Here’s how these frameworks fare:

Electron: Electron boasts a large and active community with a wealth of plugins and extensions readily available.
Flutter: Flutter has a growing community and an increasing number of packages, primarily focused on mobile development, but with desktop extensions.
Tauri: Tauri is still growing, but its community is passionate and dedicated to its development. Its ecosystem is steadily expanding.
React Native: React Native has a well-established community, mainly focused on mobile development. The desktop extension community is smaller but growing.
Qt: Qt has a long history and a robust ecosystem with a vast library of tools, widgets, and extensions.

Use Cases and Examples

Let’s explore some real-world use cases and examples of applications built with these frameworks to better understand their strengths and weaknesses in different scenarios:

Electron: Widely used for building cross-platform desktop apps, including code editors (VSCode), communication tools (Slack), and entertainment apps (Spotify).
Flutter: Emerging as a choice for media-rich applications, Flutter has been used for apps like Google Ads, Alibaba, and Reflectly.
Tauri: Tauri is gaining traction for lightweight, secure applications, including password managers (LosePass) and communication tools (Mailspring).
React Native: Although primarily a mobile framework, React Native has been extended for desktop use in apps like Discord and Microsoft Teams.
Qt: Qt is a versatile choice used in a wide range of applications, from industrial software to gaming and automotive infotainment systems.

Development Challenges

While each framework has its strengths, it’s essential to be aware of potential challenges and limitations:

Electron: Electron apps can be resource-intensive, potentially leading to performance issues on older hardware.
Flutter: Developing for desktop with Flutter may involve a learning curve if you’re primarily a mobile developer.
Tauri: As a relatively new framework, Tauri may have a smaller community and fewer third-party libraries compared to more established options.
React Native: Transitioning React Native to desktop may require additional effort, and some platform-specific features may be harder to access
Qt: Qt’s learning curve, particularly for developers new to C++, may be a challenge.

Conclusion

Choosing the right framework for your desktop application development largely depends on your project’s specific requirements, such as the target platforms, performance expectations, UI needs, and desired development experience.

If you’re looking for a framework that allows you to leverage web technologies, Electron and React Native are strong choices. Electron has a large community and a wide range of pre-built components, while React Native offers a robust component system and allows for code reuse between mobile and desktop platforms.
If performance and small bundle sizes are a priority, consider Flutter or Tauri. Flutter provides fast startup times and smooth animations, while Tauri is known for its lightweight nature and low resource consumption.
If you need a framework with excellent native integration and a native look and feel, Qt is a reliable option.
If you’re developing a complex application that requires a rich, customizable user interface, Flutter may be the best choice due to its widget-based approach.

Remember to consider the learning curve associated with each framework, especially if you or your team are not already familiar with the technologies involved. For instance, Tauri requires knowledge of Rust or C, while Flutter uses Dart.