Why are most UI frameworks single threaded?

Question

What made the framework designers chose one thread model over the other?

From the horse's mouth:

AWT was initially exposed as a normal multi-threaded Java library. But as the Java team looked at the experience with AWT and with the deadlocks and races that people had encountered, we began to realize that we were making a promise we couldn't keep.

This analysis culminated in one of the design reviews for Swing in 1997, when we reviewed the state of play in AWT, and the overall industry experience, and we accepted the Swing team's recommendation that Swing should support only very limited multi-threading.

(Read the whole article, it explains the decision in great detail and states that the exact same problems and eventual move to a single-threaded model had even occured earlier at Xerox PARC - the place where almost everything we consider bleeding edge modern in CS was invented 30 years ago)

Wouldn't multiple threaded UI model potentially give you more performance albeit at the cost of more complexity?

Absolutely not, because drawing the GUI and processing user actions (which is everything the UI thread needs to do) is not going to be the bottleneck in any sane 2D application.

Wouldn't multiple threaded UI model potentially give you more performance albeit at the cost of more complexity?

Not in most cases, and that added complexity would do more harm than good the vast majority of the time. You also have to realize that the UI framework must deal with the underlying OS model as well. Sure, it could work around the model and abstract that away from the programmer, but it's simply not worth it in this case.

The amount of bugs caused by multiple threads updating the UI ad hoc would far outweigh what would be for the most part meaningless performance gains (if there were even gains, threading comes with an associated overhead of its own due to locking and synchronization, you may actually just be making the performance worse a lot of the time).

In this case it's better to use multiple threads explicitly and only when needed. Most of the time in a UI you want everything on one thread and you don't gain much if anything by using multiple threads. UI interactions are almost never a bottleneck.

No, probably not. At least not when you try to run the threads on the CPU. On the GPU there is already a lot of parallel processing in various forms. Not as much for the simple GUI work, but for fancy 3D (shading, reflections etc.)

I think it's all about deadlock prevention.

Swing's components are not considered thread-safe, and they don't have to be because of this Event Dispatcher Thread. If the UI was multi-threaded, the whole app would have to rely on every component behaving itself in a thread-safe manner, and if any didn't, then deadlocks could arise in obscure situations.

So, it's just safer.

Not only that, but the same design has been chosen by Windows Forms (& .Net), GTK, Motif, and various others. I wonder if Java would have been forced into this decision by the underlying OS APIs which they interact with. Certainly SWT is forced into this situation by Windows Forms.

For more info, "EDT" is a good place to start http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Event_dispatching_thread

For .NET, the equivalent of SwingWorker is known as BackgroundWorker.