fwiw, this is how the original Slack Mac app worked and it sucked. We had to tell users to upgrade their OS so that their app worked, because NSWebView (and WKWebView) are tied to the OS release. If their computer was too old, telling a customer to Buy a new Mac is a pretty terrible experience.
It is worth noting that the official Slack app has gotten massively more memory efficient about a 1.5y ago, its bad reputation comes from the time before that (when it easily used more than 1GB of RAM). (I think it still has other performance issues, but they aren't as big anymore, it is doing quite well IMO)
Having said that I'm working on improving memory consumption in Shrugs.app - it is a tentpole feature planned for v1.1 (it'll take some time until this will be ready though).
Any performance differences between the two approaches should essentially boil down to the Chrome vs Safari differences.
I'll keep an eye on it. I have no problems buying after it gets good enough. Thanks for your work.
Yes not sure where they got the 1.2x ratio in their favor, although if we're only rounding to the nearest unit the official slack uses 220MB, not 200.
TBF the machine has plenty of memory available, so trading some memory for less CPU time, less GPU time, better idling and faster startup seems… a pretty good tradeoff.
The one thing I'm doubtful of is whether the official slack application really does nothing but wrap the webapp with no additional functions?
On my MacBookAir with 4GB of RAM, Gmail+GCalendar+Slack+GChat+Trello+Docs is enough to put memory pressure on the system. Gmail+Calendar alone end up taking up 1.5-2GB after a while. No respect for memory.