Webviews are built on weakly, dynamically typed languages, which naturally have development speed advantage over statically typed languages in the happy path. On top of that you have multitude of frameworks even more optimized for the happy path. It is much faster to create an MVP of a GUI with web technologies.
Also the same GUI code translates (kind of) to more platforms easier than writing it all from scratch. Web, desktop, mobile. Almost one codebase can be used for all three.
Could you do the same with say, Java (and maybe soon with .NET)? Maybe. But web has a lower barrier for entry and faster speed of development cycle. Not to mention larger pool of developers available.
All of this translates to two pretty much essential features for any startup: speedy entry to market (MVP) and low cost. And once you get going, it is really hard to pivot your technology stack to something else.
> Also the same GUI code translates (kind of) to more platforms easier than writing it all from scratch.
With an exception of web there are very solid GUI cross-platform (linux, windows, mac) frameworks out there. Qt is even pretty good at targeting native look.
> All of this translates to two pretty much essential features for any startup: speedy entry to market (MVP) and low cost.
Yes, web technologies let you build MVPs faster, that's literally in my original comment. However, in order to provide quick MVPs these technologies inherently sacrifice long term maintainability.
QT is just gonna be untenable for most people. Learning C++ is hard enough, but learning QT is basically a different dialect of C++, and I can't even say it's worth the investment.
