I looked up the WASM Qt target and it renders to a canvas, which hampers accessibility. The docs even call out that this approach barely works for screen readers [0], and that it provides partial support by creating hidden DOM elements. This creates a branch of differing behavior between your desktop and browser app that doesn't have to exist at all with Electron.

It should go without saying that the requirements of the LGPL license are less attractive than the MIT one Electron has, fairness doesn't really come into it. Beyond the licensing hurdles that Qt devotes multiple pages of its website to explaining, they also gate commercial features such as "3D and graphs capabilities" [1] behind the paid license price, which are more use cases that are thoroughly covered by more permissively licensed web projects that already work everywhere.

On your last point I'm completely lost; it's late here so it might be me but I'm not sure what distinction you're making. I guess I interpreted dmix' comment generally to be about the process of producing software with either approach given that my comment above was asking for details on alternatives from the perspective of a developer and not a user. I don't have any personal beef with using apps that are written with Qt.

[0] https://doc.qt.io/qt-6/wasm.html#accessibility-and-screen-re...

[1] https://www.qt.io/development/qt-framework/commercial-qt