Mobile App Development Services

In spite of having so many solutions why to go for a mobile app?

  • We are spending more time online than with any other media
  • We are spending much of that digital time in mobile devices
  • Most of that mobile time is spent in apps

Therefore, apps are becoming the dominant form of digital interaction.And these are, how exactly this trend is going to help you.

1. Customer engagement.

The best thing about the mobile channel is that it gives companies the potential to engage with their customers in real-time, by location and complete with profile information.

2. Customer service and support.

Making it simpler and more efficient for your customers to get in touch with your company and offering them tools to make their life easier while using your products or services can be a great reason to develop a mobile app.

3. Promotion.

One of the most popular means to monetize is offering coupons. And mobile adds an interesting layer of location-based push notifications to the coupon economy.

Technologies involved :

Typically there are three technologies on which mobile apps can be built. Again the question is “ WHAT & WHICH? “ Let’s try to find that

Option 1:
Go completely cross-platform (sometimes called a ‘mobile website’)

The Pros

There are several advantages to developing a mobile app in the same way you develop a website. The most notable advantage is probably the amount of code shared between the different platforms: the Javascript library that you’ll write to download and parse the content of your app will be reused; the HTML template for a widget view will be reused; the model to organize and store your data will be reused.

The Cons

But with this great big tick, there are some big cons too. While developing an app, it’s important to keep in mind what your users are expecting and are used to. Accommodating platform-specific user experiences is probably the hardest part of developing a completely cross-platform app.
Also, remember that your Javascript code will run sandboxed in a web-view, which is known to be one of the slowest and heaviest components to use in mobile development. You have to be really careful about everything requiring high performance, such as big images manipulation or graphics and 3D renders.

Option 2:
Cross-platform core, interacting with native views (Hybrid)

Nowadays, JS is being used to write pretty much everything. Why shouldn’t we use it to write our shared business logic?
The business logic for an e-commerce app could be something like performing a user’s authentication. Since we need the code to handle this kind of features in all the platforms we want to support, the idea is to write it in JS and create a well-defined interface to reuse the code, accessing the information on different platforms.

The Pros

The advantage of this approach is clear: you get the best of both worlds. There’s a good portion of JS that can be reused, and at the same time, you get a slick native UX and UI. Both iOS and Android support running JS code without a web-view, which is great and makes this option even more appealing.

The Cons

The disadvantages may not be that obvious, but there are many. Both the JavascriptCore (on iOS) V8 Context (on Android) are largely undocumented frameworks, and the interaction between native and JS can be tricky and very cumbersome. Finally, it’s important to keep that in mind because this approach hasn’t been widely used, so it could definitely represent the high risk to a project.

Option 3:
Native core, with native navigation and feature-specific cross-platform views

Having a platform-aware UX is very important, probably the most important part of the cross-platform development and potentially the biggest challenge for UX designers.
In this third approach, the transitions between different sections and views within the app are performed with native components, to keep the UX close to the platform (as we did in the second option, too). The difference with this approach is that the core business logic is native as well, to make sure it plays nicely in the platform’s ecosystems and to make the model-view interactions seamless.

The Pros

The main advantage of this approach is its flexibility. If you have a particular view that requires complex and fast animations, then think about using native technologies. Or, perhaps you’ve another view that’s mainly static but has a complex and non-standard layout? What about taking advantage of HTML and responsive CSS? This architecture guarantees that you always have the right tool for the job.

The Cons

So, what’s the downside? The biggest downside is that it could potentially be the most expensive option, as code reusability is limited to the number of cross-platform views. Obviously, the more web views you use, the more code will be reused.
Another disadvantage is that you cannot avoid the native JS interaction, and in some cases, the effort required to get it working on different platforms seems to be more than actually writing everything natively. But that’s a topic for a follow-up post…

Still, theThird approach ( Complete native) is preferable for the following reasons.

  • Code runs faster
  • New features are integrated more quickly and easily
  • Hardware-related things like gestures, multitouch events, and geo-location tracking are much easier to implement with native technologies
  • When things go wrong in the app development, Android or iOS will likely get you a tool to solve your issue
  • Designing an app for iPhone is different than designing one for Android. The UI and UX conventions are different, the look and feel are different, and finally, the user tastes are different as well.

Some Magical Numbers About Us

4 - + Years & Continue
200 - + Projects
150 - + Clients

Our Clients

"Some of our precious client around the world..."