Teams come to us mid-project more often than we'd like, usually after one of these mistakes:

Treating Tauri as "just Electron but smaller." The architecture is fundamentally different. Tauri's Rust core isn't optional complexity — it's the foundation. Teams who try to keep everything in JavaScript and treat Rust as a black box end up fighting the framework instead of benefiting from it. They get the worst of both worlds: Electron-style development patterns without Electron's mature ecosystem, and Rust's learning curve without Rust's performance benefits.

Underestimating cross-platform differences. Tauri abstracts a lot, but not everything. File paths, permissions models, notarization requirements, auto-update mechanisms — these differ across Windows, macOS, and Linux in ways that surface late and cost a lot to fix. Teams who test only on their development machines until the week before launch tend to have a bad time.

Choosing Tauri for the wrong reasons. Sometimes the appeal is purely "not Electron" — a reaction to bundle sizes or resource usage without a clear picture of what Tauri actually offers instead. If your application is fundamentally a web app that happens to run on desktop, and you don't need deep OS integration or particularly care about binary size, Electron's maturity and ecosystem might serve you better. We've talked clients out of Tauri when it wasn't the right fit.

We're not here to judge how teams got into these situations. We're here to get them out — and to help new projects avoid them entirely.