Call me an idiot, but I still gladly take Swing and javafx over JS and monstrosities like react. The state of Qt is also very good. Web won because the distribution model is easier on the user, and because managers thought UX designers would be making whole apps now, saving on rates. Not because it's technically superior.
You're not an idiot for liking the Swing/javafx/QT way of doing things. Or even for thinking they are technically superior.
The bigger issue isn't the tech, it's the ecosystem. While you might like swing, you simply are never going to find the swing version of Material UI or D3.js. That's more the problem that you'll run into.
For some of our apps because we need charting, we are using GraalJS just to run the JS charting library to export to an image that we ultimately put on some of our downloadable reports. It's a huge pain but really the only way to do that.
> you simply are never going to find the swing version of Material UI or D3.js. That's more the problem that you'll run into.
I remember a time when having your application look "out of place" was undesired, and the ultimate goal was to be "as native as possible". If you are running a website selling something, I agree that you want a brand-identity and a unique look. But productive software shouldn't require users to adapt to new UX paradigms (guessing whether the cancel button comes on the left or on the right, dealing with slightly do different input method and entry shortcuts…).
Anyhow, I think things could be worse, since, as you say, we can embed a webview into any JavaFX/Qt/… app and get the best of both worlds.
