Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the problem with tauri and wails that they are still dependent on the client's native OS webview? I know Tauri uses WRY which essentially takes in your request, finds the webview present in the client and calls a corresponding function. The differences between these webviews are vast and you end up with different UIs or cobbled together adjustments for each OS to split the differences. Fully embedding a browser is extremely storage inefficient but it does guarantee apps look identical regardless of platform.
> The differences between these webviews are vast and you end up with different UIs or cobbled together adjustments for each OS to split the differences.
Like frontend developers do all the time? Why would this be an issue for apps but not on web? Reminds me of the old ”our website works best in Internet Explorer” banners.
The webviews on windows, Linux (gtk) macOS, iOS, Android all support modern CSS and are basically identical. Speaking from experience.
Depends on what you care more about: the package size or that sort of consistency in exactly how things look. For example, when I was using Wails to quickly throw together a UI for managing some other client software, small package sizes were great and since whatever I do inside of a WebView/browser will always be different than the native OS GUI solutions, slight differences were inconsequential. Someone else might have vastly different requirements.
