I don't know anyone that has ever liked bloated, slow, and non-native feeling Electron apps. It's a shame you dumped all the work you did in the QT based Logic 1 for Electron. I'd cut my losses and go back to version 1.
Well taken Karl. When we decided to switch to Electron, we knew that performance and memory overhead would be by default worse than a QT UI implementation.
However, I'm confident we can get the responsiveness & performance where we need it to be on Electron. The application didn't just perform well on QT out of the box either; for example our rendering system needed significant optimization before we could display 16 channels of analog on screen at once with a reasonable framerate.
The same is true of Electron - we need to continue optimizing our application to improve performance to get it to where we want it. Right now, protocol bubbles are probably the worst offender in Logic 2, followed by digital channels. Our analog channels in Logic 2 are actually dramatically higher performance than the Logic 1 implementation.
We have a lot of work in front of us, and we've spent a lot of time already working on making these improvements.
We appreciate all the feedback we can get on the Logic 2 software. It's often easy to blame specific performance issues on Electron, when in fact many of the performance issues (like issues with multi-hour captures, and the protocol table memory/disk usage) are completely unrelated to Electron, and are the fault of our own bugs, which we're constantly working on.
For Logic 2, we've started with a much more aggressive framework for performance validation. We've automated performance tests, so that we can track the framerate of every nightly build, to catch issues we might introduce, while also allowing us to set performance targets. We also have automated tests to verify that the software is able to keep up in real time with specific input settings on specific target hardware. We still need to tackle long term recordings, managing protocol results (which is largely unrelated to electron) and some digital rendering problems.
We've struggled with splitting our focus between core performance and processing, versus the large feature set that Logic 2 needed before it could be a viable replacement for Logic 1.
Overall, I'm quite excited about what Logic 2 with Electron has allowed us to do, and I'm quite glad to that we left QT behind. However, I know we have our work cut out for ourselves to make sure we meet both our own standards, and the standards of our users.
I know that at the moment, Logic 2 does not satisfy the requirements of all of our Logic 1.x users. We welcome all feedback on Logic 2 shortcomings, so we can improve it to the point where it's obviously miles ahead of the 1.x software, in every relevent way.