I don't think I agree with you; but I will accept that a cross platform toolkit is necessary because you cannot write three tools of the quality of one Jetbrains. But I think you could do the same in Qt with ~manual memory management and it would be significantly more efficient. Qt, I think, is less like Java and rather more akin to an alternative native toolkit (in much the same way that you can choose on X, "oh, I will use Gtk; I will use motif; I will use Qt", you can say the same on Windows "oh, I will use winapi; I will use WPF; I will use UWP; I will use Qt" or MacOS "oh, I will use Cocoa; I will use Qt"). It just happens to be provided by a third party so there's no OS lockin.
I have no problem getting more ram for a Jetbrains product, because they are cheap at the cost of a new laptop. But it would nice to find a 16 GiB laptop would be able to cope with my codebase, my web browser and my vm.
I have no problem getting more ram for a Jetbrains product, because they are cheap at the cost of a new laptop. But it would nice to find a 16 GiB laptop would be able to cope with my codebase, my web browser and my vm.