native vs hybrid apps
Native vs Hybrid Apps: Which to Choose and When
mm
Thao Tran
Posted on: August 04, 2017
Mobile
Tags: hybrid app mobile app development native app
Tags: hybrid app mobile app development native app

Mobile apps are an inescapable part of how today’s consumers interact with their favorite brands. 90% of phone time is spent within apps, and that time is financially productive. Smartphone conversion rates are up 64% compared with desktop conversion rates, with tablets maintaining the highest add-to-cart ratios on e-commerce websites.

Numbers like this are driven by the superior customer experience mobile apps provide over mobile websites. They’re more intuitive to use, give a higher sense of security, and boost repeat business. Essentially, having a mobile app is a no-brainer- but companies also need to decide what type of app will suit their needs, and that’s where it can get complicated.

The Challenge of Building an App

First, building “an” app is a deceptive term. There’s no single format for downloadable mobile apps that works on every device. Unless the app is intended for a specific group who will all be using the same equipment (like employees on company iPads), developers need to account for the variety of platforms used by their customer base. Building an app involves either building separate native Android and iOS apps or building a hybrid app with a platform specific wrapper.

Native Vs Hybrid Apps

Which is better? As is often the case in software development, the answer depends on the specific project.

The Benefits of Native Apps

A native app is written for a specific platform, like iOS or Android. Because it’s made for that platform alone, it can utilize traditional features of that platform to create a more intuitive interface. Seemingly minor features like drop down menus or button orientations provide a familiar interface and a better user experience.

Being built on a specific platform takes worry over vendor library support out of the picture. Apple will continue to support Swift, for example, so developers won’t have to worry about longevity or code becoming obsolete.

  • More data storage  Native apps can store more data offline than hybrid or web apps. They have a lot of functionality even when the user isn’t connected to the internet, syncing when service becomes available again.
  • Better functioning – Most apps incorporate at least one device function, whether it’s taking pictures for social media posts or using the accelerometer or gyroscope for games. Native apps have a much easier time accessing these functions. Swipe navigation and push notifications are simpler to include, too.
  • Better user experience – UX is so much better with a native app that it’s easy to argue that native is better when budget and time allow- but there’s the catch.

The Challenges of Native Apps

Native apps are more labor-intensive and expensive than hybrid apps to develop. Companies have to build and maintain a separate codebase for each platform. They’ll also need a larger development team, since programmers tend to specialize in platforms.

Building on different platforms slows down the development cycle as well. Developers can sometimes get around this by releasing an app on one platform with the other to follow as it’s done, but that method runs the risk of alienating users of the platform they release later.

Read this post for more info on building native apps.

The Benefits of Hybrid Apps

Hybrid apps were created to combine the performance of native apps with the faster development cycle of a web app. Essentially, developers create a web app with custom wrappers for each device. This method is multi-platform friendly; scaling it to another platform is as simple as creating a new wrapper.

  • Faster development – A faster development cycle means a lower initial investment before an MVP can get to market There’s a shorter turnaround for upgrades or fixes when user feedback reveals a problem. The app won’t need to be resubmitted to mobile marketplaces when it’s updated, either.
  • More flexibility – While web apps have been criticized for difficulty in accessing device functions, hybrid apps have more flexibility. Third party tools allow developers to enrich hybrid apps with a healthy proportion of device features.
  • Budget-friendly – Hybrid can be a good choice for companies without complex needs. Cost is king, and hybrid apps are unarguably more budget-friendly in the hands of a good developer. Being able to get an app to market and respond to feedback quickly is a huge advantage.
  • Competitive  – More importantly, they’re fast enough to provide a good experience for simple UI-based applications. Hybrid frameworks are maturing to the point where they can almost match a native app for the majority of common functions. Throw in a few device functions for added utility and the average user won’t be able to tell it’s a hybrid.

The Challenges of Hybrid Apps

Hybrid apps come close to the performance of native apps, but it’s true that they can’t quite match it. While they’re fast enough that users won’t notice much difference in average apps, it will be obvious the more complex an app becomes. Hybrid apps generally have lower storage limits and don’t perform as well offline.

UX takes a hit from platform-specific wrappers. The webview is platform agnostic, meaning users won’t have the familiar “feel” they’re used to and can’t navigate the app in an intuitive way. Wrappers can cause problems during development, too, driving up development times to near native levels.

Want to go under the hood? Check out the post: The Technology Behind the Best Hybrid Apps.

Hybrid App Example: Evernote

A good example is Evernote, a freemium hybrid app used for productivity and organization. It’s cross-platform in a major way, supporting most popular platforms (macOS, iOS, Chrome OS, Android, Microsoft Windows, webOS, etc). Evernote is praised for its intuitive design and responsiveness. It’s a good case study of playing to the strengths of hybrid apps to create a native experience at a hybrid cost.

There are times when a native app is the only sensible path. If UX is a key requirement, any app that leans heavily on device features needs to be native. Trying to skate by with a hybrid app will only frustrate users. That’s dangerous in a world where 52% of consumers decrease brand engagement after a bad mobile experience.

Native App Example: Pokémon GO

One well-known example is the popular mobile game Pokémon GO. The game uses the accelerometer, gyroscope, and compass to power in-app features like catching virtual Pokémon and hatching eggs. Swiping is used for play and navigation. The game needs to be fast enough to keep play smooth enough to satisfy players in all coverage conditions. There’s no feasible way to meet those requirements with a hybrid app.

Conclusion

The choice between hybrid and native can make or break an app. Creating an experience that doesn’t meet consumers’ needs is worse than not having an app at all. On the other hand, there’s no point in blowing through the development budget for a native app when a hybrid app would work. Being frank about your project’s needs when meeting with the developer will position your app for success.

Need another option? Check out what the difference is between mobile web, native, and hybrid apps.

Wondering if a hybrid app could save your company money? Or is optimal performance from a native app a non-negotiable? A free consultation with Concepta will help you decide what kind of app you need!
Request a Consultation

mm

Thao Tran

Thao Tran is the Director of Marketing at Concepta. She received a Bachelor of Arts degree at the University of South Florida. When she graduated, she started as an SEO intern at a small internet marketing agency. Now with over 10 years of experience, she has led and executed successful campaigns in Organic Search, Paid Search, Social Media, PR, Content Marketing, Video Marketing, and Email Marketing.