[discussion] Could you compare rust-webui vs tauri?

[felixf4xu]

Hi,

tauri: backend language is rust?
rust-webui: backend language is rust, but exported as C function ?

There should be more differences, I guess.

[AlbertShown]

As far as I can tell, Tauri is written in Rust, and can only use Rust (Backend). And Tauri use WebView and can only be run if WebView runtime is installed and available.

WebUI is written in C, and the APIs are exposed to other languages, that's mean you can use the backend language you want (C++, Python, TS, JS, Rust, Go, V, Nim, Swift...). WebUI is using web browser as GUI, means at runtime it needs just a web browser which is installed everywhere. And recently webui start to support webview as well as an extra.

[distinctjuggle]

Old issue, I know, but:

I'd see the bigger difference in that Tauri offers mobile platform compatibility as well, while WebUI seems mostly desktop focused. This necessitates other design changes from WebUI, which has greater implications.

I haven't looked into WebUI much yet, but I would assume it offers traditional means of web communication between the backend and frontend, which would lend to a more standard/idiomatic approach when compared to Tauri. Tauri offers three methods of data communication, all of which are specific to Tauri and somewhat limited in current implementation.

As previously mentioned, Tauri being limited to the OS's WebKit implementation is also not changing anytime soon, whereas WebUI has basically full browser compatibility by comparison. This especially matters on Linux, because WebKitGTK is awful. However, I would presume that this would also mean (please correct me if I'm wrong) WebUI lacks the, "desktop feel and look" which Tauri has, as WebUI would always just be another tab in the browser versus Tauri's reliance on WebView/WebKit.

So for that reason, I would imagine that if rust-WebUI ever becomes feature complete with WebUI that it would be more suitable for programs which are desktop only, while Tauri may have the edge on mobile developments. Both are somewhat immature projects still. I know Tauri is definitely lacking in documentation, and from a glance I personally find the WebUI docs to be extremely lacking as well, even worse than Tauri (though I haven't spent much time with them yet).

I'd personally like to see WebUI become more mature as I think the reliance on WebView/WebKit with Tauri is a big limiting factor, and I think using standard frontend <-> backend communications is far more idiomatic/useful than reinventing the wheel.

[hassandraga]

I use Qt, Tauri, WinUI, and similar GUI frameworks for professional desktop applications that ship as installer packages. I use WebUI for other professional tools where we deliver a single portable executable for low-level hardware tasks, and also on Linux embedded devices that users can access only over a LAN.

WebUI is extremely useful in specific cases, such as a C/C++ backend running inside an Linux embedded device with no video output. However, if you’re building a traditional desktop app in Rust, I recommend Tauri and similar GUI frameworks.

[distinctjuggle]

Tauri still triggers virus false positives on Windows, and it's portrayed as something the devs are incapable of fixing currently. That's a big limitation for a lot of application ideas, in addition to what I've already mentioned above.

I'd be interested in hearing why you think Tauri is better for Rust desktop apps over WebUI, and how both would compare to simply running a lightweight local webserver in a respective language. I was under the impression that WebUI was more or less trying to be that lightweight local webserver with better final packaging, but perhaps you have information otherwise?