HCL Domino vs. NativeScript vs. Node.js

If you're looking for a high-security environment, then Domino is great. The built-in cybersecurity features are seamless, unlike those in the Microsoft or Google environments. Large databases are easily managed, and Domino enables us to automate many of our business workflows. It's easier to use than Microsoft PowerApps, for example. It doesn't integrate easily with other systems, which can be problematic at times. And because of the long-term lack of support from when IBM owned it, the user community has dwindled somewhat, making it hard to reach out for help.

Incentivized

I gotta be honest, after a PoC period, we choose to rewrite the whole application in a different cross-platform app. Our developers had to invest a lot of time and effort to debug a lot of plugin-related issues, which we needed to utilize the android mobile phone capabilities. QR reader, special visualizations, and fine-tuning were really hard and often resulted in writing native Android code instead of using the shared Angular code. In the end, we think that writing a standalone Android app and an Angular app would have been a better alternative, as the shared code base was so unreliable that it did not save us any time.

Incentivized

1. Node.js is useful for building one page, fast, light-weight, scalable applications. 2. It is not suitable for building computationally extensive applications, it may lead to bad performance.

Incentivized

• Security
• Total Cost of Ownership
• Compatibility (20+ year old applications continue to run with no issues)
• Upgrades - these are 30 minute tasks.

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

• Robust
• Fast
• Modern
• Easy to learn
• Allows using JS or TypeScript everywhere
• Supported and maintained actively by the open source community
• Pleasurable to work with
• Reliable
• Simple to learn
• Simple to setup

Incentivized

• I am not a fan of the Domino ID for authentication purposes. Some Admins appreciate this feature, but ID aging, updating and management issues are burdensome.
• Integrations with current available software applications as a result of lower Domino adoption rates.
• Administration tools are somewhat dated and clunky. Even with updates and patches, the Domino administrator console hasn't changed in years.

Incentivized

• The need to know the native Android and iOS APIs to access device hardware and other platform-specific functionality
• Not all user interface components are available for free
• NativeScript has no HTML and DOM, which requires some deep knowledge of different UI tools to be implemented instead

Incentivized

• It reduce performance while dealing with heavy computational task.
• Node.js invites a lot of change in code, due to an unstable api.
• Lack of library support.

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

The UI is somewhat dated, and the email experience is not at all like Outlook, but we love the versatility and functionality of Domino. I would absolutely hate to give it up for anything else. We've tried to replicate some of Domino's functionality in SharePoint and found that Domino is considerably better.

Incentivized

The community support is excellent.
They have a slack community as well as a discourse forum
forum.nativescript.org
Both of these offer community driven support.
The forum is more for a threaded discussion. The slack community is more for a quick talk.

Incentivized

Node.js is easy and good to use, their support team is also good they always tend to help you, and solve your problem, even we know that Node is free to use and opensource but then also we get support from them but for getting much better results we need to purchase standard or enterprises support provided by them.

Incentivized

We use SharePoint, SQL and Teams but only for the things that they excel in. For example, we use teams for small team interactions (including external participants). We use teams for meetings too. We've discovered that Teams collaboration is not as full-functional as Domino and more importantly, that our members (financial services) do not trust the Open Office365 cloud. SharePoint and Team collaborative features are often blocked in our member organizations. Domino is much easier to identify and unblock at the firewall level. It's much easier to restrict collaboration to approved options in Domino.

Incentivized

Ionic Ionic is an excellent Angular-based framework for mobile, and it does give a lot of access to the native device api's. However, the technology is based on Cordova, which means the apps being built are just webviews, with html, css and JS all running on the UI thread, and potentially creating very slow experiences for users. NativeScript is a truly native solution, and so provides a faster user experience. ReactNative We evaluate ReactNative, and found it much the same as NativeScript. The main difference is that your JS is all written with React, while NativeScript lets you choose between normal JS, Angular, and Vue. For our team, Angular was the most appropriate choice.

Incentivized

There is a smooth and seamless performance for multiple requests as the feedback received from users. and uses one platform to maintain UI and backend.

• Domino powered applications has positively impacted our company.

Incentivized

• The poor quality of NativeScript documentation has the potential to weigh heavily on development timelines, budgets, and QA resources in a NEGATIVE manner.
• The poor interoperability of NativeScript plugins can significantly increase development time.
• The need to seek out professional instruction to learn how to use NativeScript effectively may become a burden on your budget.
• The number of breaking changes between versions of NativeScript, may cause your development efforts to lag further behind the most recent releases of NativeScript and your other chosen environments than you are accustomed to.
• NativeScript still does not support the latest major version of Angular. Any significant changes to the other environment components of your systems may hold you back even further while NativeScript plays catch-up.

• It helps our business to expand our standard offer with new solutions based on Node.js such as conversation bots.
• It brings avarege 2-3 new clients projects per year, that we couldn't do without it.

Incentivized