Native vs Cross-Platform App Development
Date : 30 June 2025
Any mobile app is a compilation of innumerable lines of code, and deciphering that is not the purpose of this blog. The purpose is actually guiding you into the type of platform you would require to build your app in, while cleverly utilizing all the resources at your disposal.
App Development Environments
Apps, both mobile and web, are developed and launched on app development environments. These so-called environments essentially comprise a toolkit that enables developers to build, test, and deploy the apps they create. There are multiple such ‘environments’, each with quirks of their own. Today, we will be diving into the subject of Native and Cross-Platform app development through the discussion of the latter’s pros and cons in order to assist you with your decision of choosing either for your mobile application development.
Native and Cross-Platform: What Are They?
Before Now, if you ask any developer out there about what sort of platform they would opt for, no conditions attached, their answer will most likely be Cross-platform by default. But what exactly is Native and Cross-platform?
Native applications are those that are developed specifically for a single operating system or platform, such as Android, iOS, or Windows. They’re built using the official programming languages and development tools recommended by that platform, like Swift for iOS or Kotlin for Android.
On the other hand, cross-platform applications are designed to run on multiple platforms using just one codebase. This means that instead of writing separate code for Android and iOS, for example, developers can write it once and deploy it across both. These apps are built using frameworks like Flutter, React Native, or Xamarin, which help bridge the gap between different operating systems.
Cons of Cross-Platform: A comparison between Cross-platform and Native
You must be wondering why, especially if it is a default go-to for developers, we are starting off with the cons of cross-platform development. Well, the fact that it is easier to explain how both Native and Cross-platform development work by comparing their pros and cons is one of the reasons. The other is that you need to know why these cons do not necessarily equate user-friendliness under all circumstances in the same magnitude. Let us learn how:
1. Cross-platform apps have limited access to hardware features. These apps can’t always interact with a device’s built-in functions (like the camera, GPS, fingerprint sensor, Bluetooth, or motion sensors) as easily or as deeply as native apps can. Native apps are built specifically for one platform (like Android or iOS), so they have full and direct access to all the device’s hardware and APIs (Application Programming Interfaces). That means they can use features like push notifications, face recognition, advanced camera settings, or background processing without much limitation.
2. Because cross-platform frameworks act as a bridge between your code and each platform, things can sometimes get lost in translation, resulting in UI issues, inconsistent functionality, or compatibility problems that need extra debugging across devices. In contrast, native apps are built specifically for one system, so they’re usually more stable and predictable within that environment. Additionally, cross-platforms usually employ a lesser number of coders than native and therefore the possibility of making mistakes without having anybody to point them out increases as compared to native.
3. Cross-platform apps may run slower or feel less responsive, especially for graphics-heavy or real-time tasks. This happens because cross-platform apps use an extra layer (the framework) to translate code for different platforms, which can slow down processing, animations, or load times. Native apps, on the other hand, are built to directly interact with the device’s OS and hardware, so they’re typically faster and more optimized. So for every layer of code in cross-platform, there is a hit in the performance. However, depending on the type of app being created, its effect can be negligible. A site, for example, may take 1/100th of a second to load when developed in cross-platform as compared to the 1/1000th of a second when developed native. And therefore, unless it serves urgency, like a game, this delay does not affect users most of the time.
4. You are forced to be dependent on the framework of the cross-platform you use. Suppose a phone released its new model with a completely new button or feature. Before you change elements of your app to get accustomed to this new feature or button, you will have to wait for the platform developers to change their framework first so that it allows you to make those desired changes in your app. Sometimes, being dependent on the framework also backfires when the platform is abandoned or is not supported by the main community or creator anymore (such as Microsoft ending support for Xamarin).
Why cross-platform?
It is the cost effectiveness and effort. Any cross-platform development requires the utilization of only one code - and therefore a specific skillset. One code base also means less number of developers working on it. It is also way less complex than having to code Native, because that means you have to work with two code bases - one for android and the other for iOS. An example would be - Flutter (cross-platform) uses Dart programming language no matter the type of app you build; while Swift (iOS) and Kotlin (android) requires you to use two different kinds of programming languages for you to launch the same app on two different systems. Cross-platform, in theory, mitigates these quirks. You can therefore cut costs on the skill sets required along with the number of developers you would employ on cross-platform development.
How do you choose?
You are advised to go for cross-platforms when you need to check the following boxes -
- Need to launch on multiple platforms (Android, iOS, etc.) at once.
- Have tight deadlines or budget constraints.
- Require quick iteration and frequent updates.
However, if you are still unsure, you are advised to understand whether your app is early stage, MVP focused or later-stage development focused. MVP stands for Minimum Viable Product. It’s the most basic, functional version of an app (or product) that includes just enough core features to solve the main problem and let early users test it. The goal of an MVP is to launch quickly, get real feedback, and improve based on what users actually need, rather than building a full-featured product from the start. It is like a prototype you take to market to validate your idea, without spending too much time or money upfront
When it is time to finally upgrade your product to native therefore, you have a supply of a good amount of user data in order to fix your bugs and make changes effectively.