What an utterly awful move. What were they thinking?

pgadmin3-1.22.1.zip: 12.7MB

pgadmin4-1.0-x86.exe: 82.5MB

First impressions:

Much, much slower to load than pgAdmin3.

>The software has the look and feel of a desktop application

No it doesn't. I don't think the person who wrote this even knows what "the
look and feel of a desktop application" means. I can tell within a second of it
starting that it's not a native application, which basically by definition
means it doesn't have "the look and feel of a desktop application". In fact, I
have no idea what they are talking about when they say "the look and feel of
a desktop application." I can't detect a single thing which seems to imply any
effort in this regard. I would be genuinely interested to know what on earth
they think in pgAdmin4 has "the look and feel of a desktop application".

I open the preferences window. The preferences "window" is not a window. It's
an overlay in the main window, which cannot be moved. Context "menus" are
similar, and thus cannot exceed the bounds of the main window, which is not how they are supposed to work. Not even the
windows, beside the main window, are real. "The look and feel of a desktop
application"?

What the UI does scream is not "a desktop application", but Bootstrap.

I try to connect to a server. The tree view "+" icon for expanding a level in
the hierarchy has a loading spinner superimposed over it, which is not a
convention I recall ever seeing before. The loading spinner doesn't end. It
never becomes possible to do anything with the server. I have to restart the
programme and try again. This time it works.

When I expand the items in the tree view for the first time, the icons for the
tree view items are initially absent and flash into place, as the images are
loaded.

Compared to pgAdmin3, it's horrible and borderline unusable. It's also slower.

>...and vastly improves on pgAdmin III with updated user interface elements,
>multi-user/web deployment options, dashboards and a more modern design.

It's slower to respond. It's slower to start. It uses more resources. It's a
godforsaken web application. It is infinitely less like "a desktop application"
than pgAdmin3 because pgAdmin3, unlike pgAdmin4, was a desktop application.

There are also stupid animations, such as fade effects, which constitute
completely unnecessary delays to what should be a functional interface.

For some reason context menus sometimes open a substantial distance from the
mouse cursor.

Even for a web application, there are parts which are quite poorly styled.

If they wanted to develop a web application, fine, but why call it pgAdmin?
This is not in any meaningful sense a "pgAdmin 4". It's a completely new,
different, IMO inferior product that someone has decided to call "pgAdmin 4" in
an attempt to terminate pgAdmin3. So I reject the premise that "pgAdmin 4" can be
considered a legitimate
successor to "pgAdmin 3", because it isn't. It's something completely
different, falsely purporting to be pgAdmin. If they decided they wanted to
make a web-based PostgreSQL administration tool, then do that. If they don't
want to maintain a native application anymore, they could at least state as
much and not release this product-killing copout absurdly spun as some sort of
improvement or natural successorship.

Even the authors seem to implicitly admit it's a different product, what with
the default install directory: "C:\Program Files (x86)\pgAdmin 4\v1". v1 of v4.