Mobile apps are now an integral part of companies’ digital strategies and a way to reach their users. Here, we compare and recommend some frameworks based on our experiences from various projects – from smaller apps for startups, through applications integrating with hardware, to large-scale warehouse management systems. Native mobile development Native mobile app frameworks allow you to create native applications for Android, iOS and UWP (Windows) at the same time. Both languages and mobile ecosystems are quite complex, which allows you to customize the application exactly according to the customer’s requirements – from functionality and appearance to the integration of various APIs (augmented reality, payment gateways, specialized hardware, etc.). Thanks to the optimization of the code directly for the given platform, it is possible to create and run large-scale applications with large amounts of data and support for offline mode, which have high demands on performance and memory.
Advantages
- Performance optimization and direct access to hardware – whatever the platform provides and presents can be used.
- Best user experiences – the controls and graphics of the given platform are used. That is, what users are used to, and this improves the “user experience”.
- Full access to all functions and capabilities of the device – from sensors (GPS, gyroscope), to Bluetooth, to augmented reality (AR, VR capabilities and libraries).
- Sustainability and expandability into the future.
- Widespread knowledge among developers and a strong developer community – there are a large number of libraries, plugins, tutorials, and other materials.
- This approach will not “die.” Which can happen to some multiplatform frameworks or hybrid solutions.
Disadvantages - Higher costs and time-consuming development.
- Need to test both applications.
- Also, maintaining and expanding the application is more time-consuming and financially demanding (there are two source codes). Multiplatform solution With this approach, development of an application for Android and iOS both can be carried out simultaneously. The degree of code sharing and platformspecific modifications depends on the chosen technology. For the part of the code that is developed specifically for each platform, specialists in the given programming language are involved – similar to native development, but to a smaller extent.
We use this solution for smaller projects. Currently, we use Flutter technology the most – from Google. For some types of applications, this is an ideal compromise between development speed/price and application performance. With this approach, one shared code is created for both operating systems. The Kotlin Multiplatform technology looks very interesting in the future. When
is it possible to take advantage of shared code (it is possible to have shared code for UI as well or it is possible to have native UI for Android and iOS – this is not possible with Flutter, for example) for multiple platforms, but at the same time not to lose the speed of a native application. It is possible to publish an application for Android, iOS, as well as desktop and web. Thanks to this approach, it will be possible to save up to 30% of costs compared to native development, but not to lose the benefits of native development. If Kotlin Multiplatform were to end, at least the code for Android would remain, which will continue to work with modifications.
Then there is the popular React Native technology from Meta (Facebook). JavaScript and React were used to code the applications. As many developers are familiar and using JavaScript, so this technology is an ideal choice for them.
Finally, we should mention Microsoft’s Xamarin technology. Xamarin uses C# (and the .NET framework). So, if developers have experience with this language, this technology can also be an interesting choice (there is also a fairly large community and support from Microsoft).
Advantages - Most of the code is shared for both platforms.
- Reducing costs and development time.
- Uniform application appearance and functionalities for both platforms.
- Easier maintenance.
Disadvantages - Possible hardware access restrictions.
- Less optimized performance compared to native development (this does not apply to Kotlin Multiplatform at all).
- There is not as strong a developer community here – these frameworks do not yet have as much history as native development. (React Native currently has the largest community and support, followed by Flutter, which has a rapidly growing community. Kotlin Multiplatform is currently
gradually gaining ground.) - This adds another potential opportunity for errors in the layer above the native code. Hybrid development Hybrid development creates an application built on web technologies (HTML,
CSS, JavaScript), wrapped in a “native” wrapper. A web application loaded in a WebView component can communicate with code written in the native technology of the given platform on a mobile device.
This allows specialized parts of the application to be written natively and the page in the browser to be updated based on their results. Paid features within the app can be a problem. Google Play and the App Store require a share of app revenue, so these parts will likely need to be implemented natively. Otherwise, you may run into problems getting your app approved.
A disadvantage may be limited offlinesupport, although there are ways to address this challenge – for example, by leveraging PWA (Progressive Web Apps) technology. Hybrid development is useful when an application has a large user interface that would otherwise have to be created separately for each platform. Another advantage is the ability to make the application available to users directly in a web browser.
We recommend hybrid development for projects that target both mobile and web and need to be developed quickly, and where the application is not built on specific integrations and features of the given platform.
How to choose the right approach for your business application?
Native development is suitable for mobile applications with high performance requirements and platform-specific features, where full offline support can be key.
A multiplatform/hybrid solution on the other hand is ideal for common applications where a lower budget and fast time to market are important.
