#Flutter and .NET MAUI | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

hats-off-solutions · 4 months ago

Text

Native App vs. Hybrid App: Which One Should You Choose ?

Difference Between Native App and Hybrid App

In the world of mobile application development, one of the first decisions developers and businesses face is whether to create a Native app or a Hybrid app. Both have their own unique characteristics, benefits, and drawbacks. Below, we explore the differences, complete with examples.

What is a Native App?

A native app is built specifically for a single platform (iOS, Android, etc.) using the platform’s native programming languages and development tools. For example:

iOS apps: Developed using Swift or Objective-C with Xcode.

Android apps: Developed using Kotlin or Java with Android Studio.

Looking to dive deeper into the Android topic ? Click here for more information.

Native apps have direct access to the device’s features and APIs, allowing for superior performance and user experience.

Examples of Native Apps:

WhatsApp: Developed natively for both iOS and Android, it offers seamless performance and device-specific features.

2. Spotify: A music streaming app optimized for smooth functionality and offline playback.

Advantages of Native Apps:

High performance and speed.

Better integration with device features (camera, GPS, notifications, etc.).

Consistent user experience aligned with platform-specific design guidelines.

Disadvantages of Native Apps:

Higher development cost due to the need for separate codebases for each platform.

Longer development time.

Explore detailed case studies on Microsoft .Net MAUI. Click Here to Read More.

What is a Hybrid App?

A hybrid app combines elements of both native and web applications. It is essentially a web app embedded within a native shell, allowing it to run across multiple platforms. Hybrid apps are developed using technologies like HTML5, CSS, and JavaScript, with frameworks such as Ionic, Flutter, or React Native.

The native shell communicates with the device’s features through plugins or bridges, enabling some level of native functionality.

Examples of Hybrid Apps:

Instagram: A social networking app leveraging hybrid technology to deliver features consistently across platforms.

2. Uber: Utilizes a hybrid approach to ensure fast updates and consistent user experience globally.

Advantages of Hybrid Apps:

Cost-effective: A single codebase works for multiple platforms.

Faster development and deployment.

Easier maintenance due to shared codebase.

Disadvantages of Hybrid Apps:

Performance may not match native apps, especially for complex applications.

Limited access to advanced device features.

Dependency on third-party frameworks and plugins.

For a comprehensive guide, on flutter. Click Here to Access More Details.

Key Differences: Native vs. Hybrid Apps

FeatureNative AppsHybrid AppsPerformanceHigh (optimized for specific platform)Moderate to GoodDevelopment CostHigh (separate codebases)Low (shared codebase)Development SpeedSlowerFasterUser Experience (UX)SuperiorConsistent across platformsAccess to Device FeaturesFull accessLimited, requires pluginsMaintenanceComplex (multiple codebases)Simple (single codebase)

How to Choose Between Native and Hybrid Apps?

The choice depends on your specific project requirements:

Choose Native App if:

Performance and speed are critical.

You need advanced access to device features.

Your budget allows for platform-specific development.

2. Choose Hybrid App if:

You’re on a tight budget.

You need a faster time-to-market.

Your app requires frequent updates or focuses on content rather than heavy functionality.

Conclusion

Both native and hybrid apps have their own strengths and are suitable for different scenarios. Native apps are ideal for delivering high-performance and platform-specific experiences, while hybrid apps offer cost-efficiency and quicker development cycles. By understanding your project’s goals, target audience, and resource constraints, you can make an informed choice that best aligns with your needs.

#hybrid app development #native app development

0 notes

csharp-official · 6 months ago

Text

My thoughts on languages are pretty similar.

I prefer strong and static typing, so Python and a bunch of other dynamic languages never truly appealed to me.

Go is a joke (also honestly I hate Google even more than I hate Microsoft)

No one would use Dart if it wasn't for Flutter

I tried Java before and it made me angry

I used C++ for years, but I realized it's unsalvageable, which made me seek out alternatives in the first place.

Haskell and others are cool but too obscure

Kotlin is a significant improvement over Java as a language but I'm not a fan of JVM and the Java standard library. That being said if I am forced to deal with JVM, I will definitely pick Kotlin.

Same applies to TypeScript, which means dealing with JavaScript nonsense, so if I'm forced to deal with JavaScript nonsense, I will be using TypeScript.

Rust was lacking in tooling support last time I checked, but this sounded like something fixable. Holding my thumbs that JetBrains RustRover is good!

And all of this resulted with me settling on C#.

I think C# is better off not having checked exceptions, the way Java implemented them was a mistake, Kotlin straight up doesn't check for these either. My code usually uses an equivalent of Result<T, E> for stuff where user is expected to check for the result instead, and I wish that more code adopts this convention instead of "DoX vs TryDoX".

Regarding debuggers, Samsung made an MIT licensed one way back. Does it work? Not sure, haven't tried it. But the fact it exists is reassuring.

As for GUI - indeed, GUI is the biggest weakness of cross-platform C# because Microsoft simply does not care for it. There is huge money in providing cloud services and huge opportunities for vendor lock-in through Azure stuff, so naturally Microsoft puts in a lot of effort into making sure that ASP.NET Core works on Linux. But cross-platform GUIs? This would mean providing a route for people to escape Windows, and that's not good for profits.

Even their latest GUI toolkit, MAUI has Linux support "delegated to the community". Last time I checked Avalonia in 2021, it had teething problems due to having its controls drawn by themselves (rule of thumb: if you're not delegating widgets to someone else, you're likely missing from 20% to 80% of the existing functionality). Apparently "user can't type Japanese text in a textbox" which blocked me specifically was solved in 2023 if I were to believe the status of the GitHub issue I was tracking, so there is still hope! Everything else I tried seemed even worse.

Eventually I ended up embracing the Dark Side of using Electron-likes. But using Electron directly in .NET means the fact you have three runtimes running at the same time: the .NET one, the Node one, and the Chromium one. This is at least one runtime too many, and partially explains huge RAM usage.

Electron also has the problem of "we're shipping the web browser, a program with so much attack surface that bugs have to be frequently patched, and our update channel is very likely way worse than the browser's update channel".

My current approach to these is using a library that provides a Webview delegated to each respective platform's Webview control, which means we don't have to ship anything: WebView2 (Chromium Edge) on Windows and libwebkit2gtk on Linux and macOS. My memory usage for a program I was writing increased from 200MB (WPF on Windows) to 250MB (Webview2 on Windows), which I found acceptable.

There's also the "do we really have to use a web browser for GUI", but as far as I can see, in my experience, GUI programs tend to grow bigger and bigger until they either eventually end up needing functionality of a web browser (say, Markdown preview in whatever is your favourite IDE, OAuth authentication to your email provider in your desktop email client, payment gateways in Steam), so as a result they either bundle a Webview control or they reinvent a web browser badly.

The funniest thing is that it's probably the closest way to Microsoft providing a cross-platform GUI too: Blazor exists, so that Webview could very likely end up displaying a GUI made in C#.

Rambling About C# Being Alright

I think C# is an alright language. This is one of the highest distinctions I can give to a language.

Warning: This post is verbose and rambly and probably only good at telling you why someone might like C# and not much else.

~~~

There's something I hate about every other language. Worst, there's things I hate about other languages that I know will never get better. Even worse, some of those things ALSO feel like unforced errors.

With C# there's a few things I dislike or that are missing. C#'s feature set does not obviously excel at anything, but it avoids making any huge misstep in things I care about. Nothing in C# makes me feel like the language designer has personally harmed me.

C# is a very tolerable language.

C# is multi-paradigm.

C# is the Full Middle Malcomist language.

C# will try to not hurt you.

A good way to describe C# is "what if Java sucked less". This, of course, already sounds unappealing to many, but that's alright. I'm not trying to gas it up too much here.

C# has sins, but let's try to put them into some context here and perhaps the reason why I'm posting will become more obvious:

C# didn't try to avoid generics and then implement them in a way that is very limiting (cough Go).

C# doesn't hamstring your ability to have statement lambdas because the language designer dislikes them and also because the language designer decided to have semantic whitespace making statement lambdas harder to deal with (cough Python).

C# doesn't require you to explicitly wrap value types into reference types so you can put value types into collections (cough Java).

C# doesn't ruin your ability to interact with memory efficiently because it forbids you from creating custom value types, ergo everything goes to the heap (cough cough Java, Minecraft).

C# doesn't have insane implicit type coercions that have become the subject of language design comedy (cough JavaScript).

C# doesn't keep privacy accessors as a suggestion and has the developers pinkie swear about it instead of actually enforcing it (cough cough Python).

Plainly put, a lot of the time I find C# to be alright by process of elimination. I'm not trying to shit on your favorite language. Everyone has different things they find tolerable. I have the Buddha nature so I wish for all things to find their tolerable language.

I do also think that C# is notable for being a mainstream language (aka not Haskell) that has a smaller amount of egregious mistakes, quirks and Faustian bargains.

The Typerrrrr

C# is statically typed, but the typing is largely effortless to navigate unlike something like Rust, and the GC gives a greater degree of safety than something like C++.

Of course, the typing being easy to work it also makes it less safe than Rust. But this is an appropriate trade-off for certain kinds of applications, especially considering that C# is memory safe by virtue of running on a VM. Don't come at me, I'm a Rust respecter!!

You know how some people talk about Python being amazing for prototyping? That's how I feel about C#. No matter how much time I would dedicate to Python, C# would still be a more productive language for me. The type system would genuinely make me faster for the vast majority of cases. Of course Python has gradual typing now, so any comparison gets more difficult when you consider that. But what I'm trying to say is that I never understood the idea that doing away entirely with static typing is good for fast iteration.

Also yes, C# can be used as a repl. Leave me alone with your repls. Also, while the debugger is active you can also evaluate arbitrary code within the current scope.

I think that going full dynamic typing is a mistake in almost every situation. The fact that C# doesn't do that already puts it above other languages for me. This stance on typing is controversial, but it's my opinion that is really shouldn't be. And the wind has constantly been blowing towards adding gradual typing to dynamic languages.

The modest typing capabilities C# coupled with OOP and inheritance lets you create pretty awful OOP slop. But that's whatever. At work we use inheritance in very few places where it results in neat code reuse, and then it's just mostly interfaces getting implemented.

C#'s typing and generic system is powerful enough to offer you a plethora of super-ergonomic collection transformation methods via the LINQ library. There's a lot of functional-style programming you can do with that. You know, map, filter, reduce, that stuff?

Even if you make a completely new collection type, if it implements IEnumerable<T> it will benefit from LINQ automatically. Every language these days has something like this, but it's so ridiculously easy to use in C#. Coupled with how C# lets you (1) easily define immutable data types, (2) explicitly control access to struct or class members, (3) do pattern matching, you can end up with code that flows really well.

A Friendly Kitchen Sink

Some people have described C#'s feature set as bloated. It is getting some syntactic diversity which makes it a bit harder to read someone else's code. But it doesn't make C# harder to learn, since it takes roughly the same amount of effort to get to a point where you can be effective in it.

Most of the more specific features can be effortlessly ignored. The ones that can't be effortlessly ignored tend to bring something genuinely useful to the language -- such as tuples and destructuring. Tuples have their own syntax, the syntax is pretty intuitive, but the first time you run into it, you will have to do a bit of learning.

C# has an immense amount of small features meant to make the language more ergonomic. They're too numerous to mention and they just keep getting added.

I'd like to draw attention to some features not because they're the most important but rather because it feels like they communicate the "personality" of C#. Not sure what level of detail was appropriate, so feel free to skim.

Stricter Null Handling. If you think not having to explicitly deal with null is the billion dollar mistake, then C# tries to fix a bit of the problem by allowing you to enable a strict context where you have to explicitly tell it that something can be null, otherwise it will assume that the possibility of a reference type being null is an error. It's a bit more complicated than that, but it definitely helps with safety around nullability.

Default Interface Implementation. A problem in C# which drives usage of inheritance is that with just interfaces there is no way to reuse code outside of passing function pointers. A lot of people don't get this and think that inheritance is just used because other people are stupid or something. If you have a couple of methods that would be implemented exactly the same for classes 1 through 99, but somewhat differently for classes 100 through 110, then without inheritance you're fucked. A much better way would be Rust's trait system, but for that to work you need really powerful generics, so it's too different of a path for C# to trod it. Instead what C# did was make it so that you can write an implementation for methods declared in an interface, as long as that implementation only uses members defined in the interface (this makes sense, why would it have access to anything else?). So now you can have a default implementation for the 1 through 99 case and save some of your sanity. Of course, it's not a panacea, if the implementation of the method requires access to the internal state of the 1 through 99 case, default interface implementation won't save you. But it can still make it easier via some techniques I won't get into. The important part is that default interface implementation allows code reuse and reduces reasons to use inheritance.

Performance Optimization. C# has a plethora of features regarding that. Most of which will never be encountered by the average programmer. Examples: (1) stackalloc - forcibly allocate reference types to the stack if you know they won't outlive the current scope. (2) Specialized APIs for avoiding memory allocations in happy paths. (3) Lazy initialization APIs. (4) APIs for dealing with memory more directly that allow high performance when interoping with C/C++ while still keeping a degree of safety.

Fine Control Over Async Runtime. C# lets you write your own... async builder and scheduler? It's a bit esoteric and hard to describe. But basically all the functionality of async/await that does magic under the hood? You can override that magic to do some very specific things that you'll rarely need. Unity3D takes advantage of this in order to allow async/await to work on WASM even though it is a single-threaded environment. It implements a cooperative scheduler so the program doesn't immediately freeze the moment you do await in a single-threaded environment. Most people don't know this capability exists and it doesn't affect them.

Tremendous Amount Of Synchronization Primitives and API. This ones does actually make multithreaded code harder to deal with, but basically C# erred a lot in favor of having many different ways to do multithreading because they wanted to suit different usecases. Most people just deal with idiomatic async/await code, but a very small minority of C# coders deal with locks, atomics, semaphores, mutex, monitors, interlocked, spin waiting etc. They knew they couldn't make this shit safe, so they tried to at least let you have ready-made options for your specific use case, even if it causes some balkanization.

Shortly Begging For Tagged Unions

What I miss from C# is more powerful generic bounds/constraints and tagged unions (or sum types or discriminated unions or type unions or any of the other 5 names this concept has).

The generic constraints you can use in C# are anemic and combined with the lack of tagged unions this is rather painful at times.

I remember seeing Microsoft devs saying they don't see enough of a usecase for tagged unions. I've at times wanted to strangle certain people. These two facts are related to one another.

My stance is that if you think your language doesn't need or benefit from tagged unions, either your language is very weird, or, more likely you're out of your goddamn mind. You are making me do really stupid things every time I need to represent a structure that can EITHER have a value of type A or a value of type B.

But I think C# will eventually get tagged unions. There's a proposal for it here. I would be overjoyed if it got implemented. It seems like it's been getting traction.

Also there was an entire section on unchecked exceptions that I removed because it wasn't interesting enough. Yes, C# could probably have checked exceptions and it didn't and it's a mistake. But ultimately it doesn't seem to have caused any make-or-break in a comparison with Java, which has them. They'd all be better off with returning an Error<T>. Short story is that the consequences of unchecked exceptions have been highly tolerable in practice.

Ecosystem State & FOSSness

C# is better than ever and the tooling ecosystem is better than ever. This is true of almost every language, but I think C# receives a rather high amount of improvements per version. Additionally the FOSS story is at its peak.

Roslyn, the bedrock of the toolchain, the compiler and analysis provider, is under MIT license. The fact that it does analysis as well is important, because this means you can use the wealth of Roslyn analyzers to do linting.

If your FOSS tooling lets you compile but you don't get any checking as you type, then your development experience is wildly substandard.

A lot of stupid crap with cross-platform compilation that used to be confusing or difficult is now rather easy to deal with. It's basically as easy as (1) use NET Core, (2) tell dotnet to build for Linux. These steps take no extra effort and the first step is the default way to write C# these days.

Dotnet is part of the SDK and contains functionality to create NET Core projects and to use other tools to build said projects. Dotnet is published under MIT, because the whole SDK and runtime are published under MIT.

Yes, the debugger situation is still bad -- there's no FOSS option for it, but this is more because nobody cares enough to go and solve it. Jetbrains proved anyone can do it if they have enough development time, since they wrote a debugger from scratch for their proprietary C# IDE Rider.

Where C# falls flat on its face is the "userspace" ecosystem. Plainly put, because C# is a Microsoft product, people with FOSS inclinations have steered clear of it to such a degree that the packages you have available are not even 10% of what packages a Python user has available, for example. People with FOSS inclinations are generally the people who write packages for your language!!

I guess if you really really hate leftpad, you might think this is a small bonus though.

Where-in I talk about Cross-Platform

The biggest thing the ecosystem has been lacking for me is a package, preferably FOSS, for developing cross-platform applications. Even if it's just cross-platform desktop applications.

Like yes, you can build C# to many platforms, no sweat. The same way you can build Rust to many platforms, some sweat. But if you can't show a good GUI on Linux, then it's not practically-speaking cross-platform for that purpose.

Microsoft has repeatedly done GUI stuff that, predictably, only works on Windows. And yes, Linux desktop is like 4%, but that 4% contains >50% of the people who create packages for your language's ecosystem, almost the exact point I made earlier. If a developer runs Linux and they can't have their app run on Linux, they are not going to touch your language with a ten foot pole for that purpose. I think this largely explains why C#'s ecosystem feels stunted.

The thing is, I'm not actually sure how bad or good the situation is, since most people just don't even try using C# for this usecase. There's a general... ecosystem malaise where few care to use the language for this, chiefly because of the tone that Microsoft set a decade ago. It's sad.

HOWEVER.

Avalonia, A New Hope?

Today we have Avalonia. Avalonia is an open-source framework that lets you build cross-platform applications in C#. It's MIT licensed. It will work on Windows, macOS, Linux, iOS, Android and also somehow in the browser. It seems to this by actually drawing pixels via SkiaSharp (or optionally Direct2D on Windows).

They make money by offering migration services from WPF app to Avalonia. Plus general support.

I can't say how good Avalonia is yet. I've researched a bit and it's not obviously bad, which is distinct from being good. But if it's actually good, this would be a holy grail for the ecosystem:

You could use a statically typed language that is productive for this type of software development to create cross-platform applications that have higher performance than the Electron slop. That's valuable!

This possibility warrants a much higher level of enthusiasm than I've seen, especially within the ecosystem itself. This is an ecosystem that was, for a while, entirely landlocked, only able to make Windows desktop applications.

I cannot overstate how important it is for a language's ecosystem to have a package like this and have it be good. Rust is still missing a good option. Gnome is unpleasant to use and buggy. Falling back to using Electron while writing Rust just seems like a bad joke. A lot of the Rust crates that are neither Electron nor Gnome tend to be really really undercooked.

And now I've actually talked myself into checking out Avalonia... I mean after writing all of that I feel like a charlatan for not having investigated it already.

#csharp

69 notes · View notes