Understand the benefits of native applications

by Josh Biggs in Software on 27th May 2019

Everyone knows that people like their smartphones. And the main reason for this affection is the application that runs on them. For this reason, we should invest in quality in developing mobile applications. Between original or hybrid development, we chose to develop applications only in the original. You will understand why.

For starters, let’s give a brief explanation of these two types of applications.

The original application is a program designed for a particular platform (for example, an application made specifically to run on an iPhone, with an iOS operating system, or an application designed to run on smartphones with the Android operating system, or Windows Phone). That is, the original application was made to run perfectly on that particular operating system, by utilizing its full potential.

The hybrid application was developed in a mixed way, a little in the language of one operating system, a little in other languages. In general, under your application shell, a hybrid application attracts web content (for example, from a company website that has an application).

Developing hybrid applications can be more economical. But the indigenous quality is still superior.

There are strong supporters from one and the other, with good side-by-side arguments. But on the original side, there is one argument that is second to none for your choice. The best argument that can exist in any market.

What is this argument?

This is user experience.

That’s a fact: people like smartphones, as we have said. They develop personal relationships with them. (You know someone who lost his cellphone and shrugged, “No problem, tomorrow I will buy another?”). This love does not arise from the equipment itself, but from what is in it. In other words – not difficult to repeat – because of the application.

That is, the application must give the user a great user experience. For example, mSpy gave me a great experience for letting me know what my children did when I was studying abroad. Because there are many of them on the market, bad experiences make consumers quickly abandon applications that are not functioning properly. For example, only 16% of users, according to surveys, try to install applications that tap installations more than once.

The experience of using native applications is undoubtedly superior. Hybrid applications have faster and cheaper development. But always remember users who will use the application. He hopes that the application has no bugs and is fast to use (often hybrid applications, must load web content, unlike the original application, whose data plan is full when downloaded, slower to use). That is, the expectation of users is that the application has outstanding performance.

And here lies the problem of a hybrid application. The style and logic of the iPhone and Android are very different from each other. When creating original applications for each, this difference is taken into account. No matter how skilled a hybrid application developer is, trying to bridge the two styles will not be able to get close to the original application user experience.

Second technical argument: You have developed a hybrid application that relies on loading web data. This means that users cannot use the application while offline (when there is no Wi-Fi nearby, or 3G or 4G signals are bad or nonexistent). Not to mention the general conflicts that hybrid applications have with smartphone hardware such as cameras and GPS. This frustrates the user.

This is a demanding market, and anything under goodwill, sooner or later, will stop at the cellphone. The reaction of 92% of customers who have negative experiences with applications is usually one of two choices: 1) Never use it again; 2) Download competitor applications.

This is the old saying: cheap is expensive.


Categories: Software