Apache Cordova vs. NativeScript

If you want to teach your team or students how to program and learn programming languages, you would not want to utilize Phone Gap software. The Phone Gap software creates an easy fix to avoid learning every programming language for mobile devices. This creates a learning curve for some programmers because they no longer need to learn every language to be successful. However, for personal growth, this could pose an issue if programmers need to change jobs and are only capable of programming in web languages and then translate them using Phone Gap. Adobe Phone Gap works wonderfully for what our company uses it for. We use it because we have app launch deadlines and our programmers are invested in the company; therefore, they are aware that output is our goal, not actually learning the various languages, but more making sure the client is happy

Incentivized

NativeScript allows to easily integrate with native APIs by threading models. Moreover, the framework itself can be integrated with Angular, VueJS and JavaScript due to the fact that it was built on based on these frameworks. It allows you to easily maintain if you projects are based on these frameworks. Therefore, for the development of cross-platform applications it can be very handy!

Incentivized

• Business Application like payment collection, application for salesperson etc.
• Used for developing the mobile application that needs to be developed faster with the same User Experience on both iOS and Android.

Incentivized

• True native app. The app uses native components and that is quite noticeable in the overall performance of the app. NativeScript is also awesome in the way we can access the native APIs, so we are never really constrained by the framework. If we need, we can just dive into the native APIs without leaving our environment and language (JS).
• Cross-platform. Builds for Android and iOS. It deals with the platforms differences very well.
• Support for Vue.js. Even though it is just a community effort, the NativeScript-Vue plugin is the best alternative to build native Apps with Vue.js. That was a major factor to go with NativeScript.

Incentivized

• Sometimes it's hard to configure VS Code applications with another IDE like WebStrom etc.
• Emulators are slow performing.
• Sometimes there are version conflicts with the newer codebase.

Incentivized

• Nativescript runs everything on a single thread. i.e., the UI thread. If you want to offload some processing, you have to use web workers. This experience can be improved in the future releases.
• Currently NativeScript only have hot reload when you change the UI file or Css file. There is no hot reload when you change Js/Ts file, unlike Google's Flutter. This is also something which NativeScript will get in the future releases.
• In current version of NativeScript, there is no livesync when building with webpack. This feature will be added with NativeScript 4.x. (an RC version for 4.x is already available)

Incentivized

The hybrid is ok but native is better for performance and the right use case I want to go for is the performance without dealing with too many development tools.

Incentivized

My focus has been, and must remain, with obtaining support from web resources over that of paid support programs. Many companies, including those of government agencies, do not have a budget sufficient for paying large sums of money to other organizations to answer questions. Even in cases where an organization did purchase support programs, developers often found that the delays in obtaining responses to development issues was excessive. I give NativeScript the lowest possible rating, due to the fact that their website content is severely outdated and of little use to a developer in a crunch. The NativeScript environment may be far better than I have been able to report, but held back from excelling due to poor support content. Being that I am often asked to push the boundaries in various areas, improper documentation is highly detrimental to a development team, and thuss a review. I would be more than happy to improve this review as the content of the support documentation provided by the NativeScript team makes its way to their website in the form of real-world examples which are applicable to all versions, or at least the most recent versions, of their product.

We selected Cordova since it provides ease of doing business and ease of use. The best thing about Cordova is that you can code once and run it on multiple platforms. Cordova provides add-ons that connect your code with native features of various mobile platforms. And you do not need to learn anything new since you can use your javascript skills

Incentivized

NativeScript was indeed a better experience at first than Ionic. But the real game-changer in 2022 for cross-platform applications is Flutter now. We changed to it shorty after NativeScript, as it is much more stable, more widely supported, has a ton of extra features, and does not rely on JavaScript and Android knowledge as much as NativeScript.

Incentivized

• Development timeline for making Cordova apps targeting multiple platform is lower than developing individual native apps for each platform.
• Its easy to learn and set up. Coming from a native app development background, the learning curve for me was fairly small to get started with my hybrid app.

Incentivized

• We had built this particular app once already, during a 6 month time frame, using Ionic. When we hit the wall, we chose NativeScript, and built the whole app from scratch. We estimated another 6 months, but completed the work in 4 months due to the ease of use.
• We have found collaboration with our client much easier because of the simplicity of releases and speed of development.
• Having a tool like NativeScript has allowed us to make competitive quotes for mobile app development contracts, where previously that would have been closed to us due to our lack of native development experience. Being able to build iOS apps without a Swift-code expert has opened those doors for us.

Incentivized