CC BY
0
- TexHuuecKue HayKU -
PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS OF FLUTTER APPLICATIONS VS. NATIVE IOS AND
ANDROID APPS
Evgenii Mozharovskii, bachelor's degree Lomonosov Moscow State University (Russia, Moscow)
DOI:10.24412/2500-1000-2024-8-2-150-155
Abstract. This article analyzes the features of mobile application development using Flutter and native programming languages for iOS and Android platforms. Special attention is given to performance, usability, and development efficiency. The advantages and disadvantages of each approach are considered. A comparative analysis of the performance of applications created with Flutter versus native applications is conducted. Aspects such as startup speed, interface responsiveness, memory consumption, and energy efficiency are examined. The integration of Flutter with existing native libraries and components, as well as the potential for cross-platform development, is also discussed. The article concludes with insights on which approach is best suited for specific tasks and projects, considering performance requirements, usability, and development efficiency.
Keywords: Flutter, native development, mobile applications, performance, user experience, cross-platform development, iOS, Android.
In the world of mobile application development, choosing the right framework for software creation is a crucial aspect that can determine the success or failure of a product. Over the years, developers have faced the dilemma between native and cross-platform approaches.
Native applications, written specifically for a certain platform, such as Swift for iOS and Kotlin for Android, offer high performance and deep integration with the operating system. However, developing and maintaining two separate codebases often leads to increased time and costs. On the other hand, cross-platform frameworks such as React Native, Xamarin, and Flutter offer the possibility of creating a single codebase that can be used across various platforms. Among these frameworks, Flutter, developed by Google, stands out due to its unique capabilities and approach to user interface development. The goal of this research is to compare the per-
formance of Flutter applications with native applications for iOS and Android.
Flutter as a universal framework for mobile development
Cross-platform applications are mobile applications developed using a single codebases that can run on different operating systems, such as iOS and Android. They allow developers to write code once and run it on multiple platforms, significantly simplifying the development process and reducing costs. Using modern frameworks and tools such as Flutter enables the creation of applications with a high level of performance and a quality user interface that rivals native solutions [1].
Flutter is an open-source software development kit. In 2023, more than 2 million developers were noted to be using Flutter. The number of applications using Flutter is growing annually and is employed by companies across platforms such as iOS, Android, Google Fuchsia, Windows, Linux, Mac, and the web, all from a single codebase (Fig. 1).
Figure 1. Number of published applications based on Flutter [2]
Flutter is designed to create highperformance, natively compiled applications for mobile, web, and desktop platforms from a single codebase. The foundation of Flutter is the Dart programming language, also developed by Google. Flutter offers a rich set of pre-designed widgets, making it easy to create
visually appealing and responsive apps. With features like hot reloading, it enables rapid iterations, allowing developers to see changes in real time. The structure of a Flutter application usually consists of several key elements that are organized hierarchically to manage various aspects of the application (Fig. 2).
Figure 2. Key components of Flutter application structure
Main.dart is the main file where the execution of the application begins. It usually defines the entry point and primary configuration of the application. Screens represent the main visible components of the application, each typically implemented as a Stateless Widget or Stateful Widget. Screens can be placed in separate files for better code organization.
Widgets in Flutter are used to build the user interface. They can be UI elements (buttons, text fields, images, etc.) or complex components such as lists, tables, and so on. Widgets can be reused and combined to create complex interfaces. Assets in Flutter can include images, fonts, animations, and other
files that the application uses visually or functionally. Assets are added to the project and can be loaded into the application as needed. Routing in Flutter manages navigation between screens. Typically, the Materia Lapp class is used, providing a convenient way to manage routes and their configuration.
Flutter supports the creation and application of themes and styles for consistent application design. This makes it easy to set common design parameters such as colors, fonts, and spacing. Flutter enables cross-platform application development, allowing the same code to be used for different platforms (iOS, Android, web, desktop). The key components of the Flutter application structure help organ-
- TexHuuecKue HayKU -
ize the code and logic of the application efficiently and conveniently.
Comparison of Flutter with native development using a simple mobile application example
Native applications are software developed for a specific operating system or platform using the appropriate tools and programming languages. They have direct access to all the capabilities of the operating system, which allows for optimizing performance and platform integration. They can use all device features, such as the camera, microphone, and GPS, with maximum efficiency. The user interface of native applications is also characterized by high speed and responsiveness, as they use components and controls optimized
According to the author, the choice between Flutter and native development depends on the project's requirements and available resources. Flutter enables the rapid creation of applications for multiple platforms while ensuring high-quality interfaces. However, native development allows for the full utilization of each platform's capabilities, which can be particularly important for types of applications. The conducted comparison highlights that Flutter offers extensive possibilities for integration with native libraries and components, allowing developers to leverage the best practices and technologies of
for the specific operating system. This contributes to a better user experience and allows for the creation of interfaces that fully comply with the design guidelines of each platform.
For iOS, native applications are developed using Swift or Objective-C languages and development tools provided by Apple, such as Xcode. For Android, native applications are developed using Java or Kotlin and Android Studio.
The differences between Flutter and native development can be clearly seen through the creation of a simple mobile application that displays a to-do list. The application includes basic functions: adding, deleting, and editing tasks. The results are presented in Table 1.
both platforms. Author emphasizes that the choice between Flutter and native development should be based on the specific requirements of the project and the resources available for its implementation.
Comparison of the performance of applications developed using Flutter with native applications for iOS and Android platforms
Application performance is one of the key factors for ensuring a good user experience. To analyze performance, three simple applications are studied for each technology. Their tasks include displaying a list of items with
Table 1. Comparison of Flutter with native development on key aspects [3]
Aspect Flutter Native applications
Programming languages Dart Swift, Objective-C (iOS); Java, Kotlin (Android)
Tools Flutter SDK, Dart SDK, Android Studio, Xcode Xcode (iOS), Android Studio (Android)
Codebase Single codebase for all platforms Separate codebases for iOS and Android
UI elements Customizable widgets provided by Flutter Native UI components
Performance Near-native performance Optimal performance
Access to platform API Through plugins and platform channels Direct access
Development time Generally shorter due to single codebase Longer due to separate codebases
Community and support Growing community, extensive documentation Established communities for iOS and Android
Usage examples Google Ads, Alibaba, Reflectly Instagram (iOS), WhatsApp (Android)
Updates and support Regular updates from Google, active community Regular updates from Apple and Google, active communities
Development complexity Moderate, simplified by single codebase and widgets High, due to managing multiple codebases
images and text, animating the movement of user actions. The results of the analysis are an object across the screen, and responding to presented in Table 2.
Table 2. Performance analysis results of Flutter applications compared to native applications for iOS and Android platforms [4]___
Criterion Flutter performance Native iOS performance Native Android performance
Startup speed Generally fast, but may be slower than native apps Fast and optimized for iOS Fast and optimized for Android
Interface responsiveness Responsive with occasional minor delays Highly responsive with minimal delay Highly responsive with minimal delay
Animation smoothness Generally smooth, with occasional frame drops Very smooth and consistent Very smooth and consistent
Memory usage Moderate memory usage Optimized for efficient memory usage Optimized for efficient memory usage
CPU usage Moderate CPU usage Optimized for low CPU usage Optimized for low CPU usage
Access to native features Good, but may require additional plugins Full access to all native features Full access to all native features
Development and debugging Faster development and easier debugging with hot reload Comprehensive tools and mature ecosystem Comprehensive tools and mature ecosystem
Native applications provide better performance due to direct interaction with the device's operating system and utilization of its capabilities. This allows for maximum speed and minimizes resource consumption. Native development requires knowledge of specific programming languages and tools for each platform, which can increase development time and training costs. Additionally, supporting multiple platforms can become a complex task, requiring additional effort and resources. Flutter, on the other hand, provides a single programming language and tools for creating applications that can run on various platforms without the need to write separate code for each of them. This simplifies the development process and reduces maintenance costs.
Experience with native and Flutter applications
In the world of mobile development, companies face choices between cross-platform solutions like Flutter and native applications for iOS and Android platforms. Native applications enable maximum utilization of device capabilities, ensuring high performance, smooth operation, and deep integration with the operating system's functionality [5].
Flutter applications, despite some overhead, demonstrate high performance, especially with proper code optimization. They show promising results in cross-platform de-
velopment, making them an excellent choice for projects prioritizing rapid development and cross-platform compatibility [6]. Many developers note that using Flutter significantly reduces development time and improves application performance. For example, eBay Motors not only simplified their development process but also enhanced application performance, making it more efficient and user-friendly after transitioning to Flutter [7].
The development team at Realtor.com opted for a cross-platform solution to streamline development and improve application scalability. This decision reduced development time and ensured a high-quality user experience on both iOS and Android platforms by more than 30% [8].
The ultimate choice between Flutter and native development depends on the project's specifics, performance requirements, and available resources for optimization. These examples illustrate that large companies choose different approaches based on their needs. Flutter is often chosen for cross-platform development and rapid market entry, whereas native development is preferred for projects requiring maximum performance and deep OS integration.
Conclusions
In the realm of mobile app development, the choice between Flutter and native devel-
opment for iOS/Android has significant implications for performance, user experience, and development efficiency. Native applications for iOS and Android demonstrate outstanding performance in responsiveness, loading times, and ability to leverage platform-specific features. These applications are characterized by smooth operation and highly optimized user experiences, crucial for resource-intensive applications.
On the other hand, Flutter offers an attractive alternative with a single codebase, ensuring faster development cycles and simplified maintenance across both platforms. While
References
1. Hussein H., Khan K., Farooqui F., Ali Q., Siddiqui I.F. Comparative study of Android native and flutter application development // Memory. - 2023. - Vol. 47. - P. 36-37.
2. Cross-platform mobile frameworks used by developers around the world in 2019-2023. -URL: https://www.statista.com/statistics/869224/worldwide-software-developer-working-hours/ (date of application 15.07.2024).
3. Bobunov A. Approaches to monitoring and logging in automated testing of financial applications // Sciences of Europe. - 2024. - № 142. - P. 62-66.
4. Tollin G., Markus L. React Native vs. Flutter: performance comparison of cross-platform frameworks for mobile application development. - 2023. - P. 274-279.
5. Lodhi M.K. Comparison and evaluation of cross-platform frameworks: diss. - Hochschule fur Angewandte Wissenschaften Hamburg, 2024. - P. 290-301.
6. Zhou K. Challenges and solutions in cross-platform mobile development: a qualitative study of Flutter and React Native. - 2024. - P. 445-452.
7. eBay Engines: Acceleration with Flutter. - URL: https://innovation.ebayinc.com/tech/product/ebay-motors-accelerating-with-fluttertm/ (date of application 14.07.2024).
8. Bukhtueva I. Improving the quality of customer service using personalization methods based on artificial intelligence // Innovative Science. - 2024. - № 4-1. - P. 114-119.
Flutter applications may exhibit slight performance, differences compared to native ones, the framework has made significant strides in narrowing these gaps.
The decision between Flutter and native development should be guided by the specific needs of the project. As the mobile development landscape evolves, both approaches -native and Flutter - are likely to coexist, each serving its distinct segments and contributing to the diversity of mobile applications available today.
АНАЛИЗ ПРОИЗВОДИТЕЛЬНОСТИ ПРИЛОЖЕНИЙ НА FLUTTER
ПО СРАВНЕНИЮ С НАТИВНЫМИ ПРИЛОЖЕНИЯМИ ДЛЯ IOS И ANDROID
Евгений Можаровский, бакалавр
Московский государственный университет имени М.В. Ломоносова (Россия, г. Москва)
Аннотация. В данной статье анализируются особенности разработки мобильных приложений с использованием Flutter и нативных языков программирования для платформ iOS и Android. Особое внимание уделяется производительности, удобству использования и эффективности разработки. Рассматриваются преимущества и недостатки каждого подхода. Проводится сравнительный анализ производительности приложений, созданных с помощью Flutter, по сравнению с нативными приложениями. Рассматриваются такие аспекты, как скорость запуска, отзывчивость интерфейса, потребление памяти и энергоэффективность. Также обсуждается интеграция Flutter с существующими нативными библиотеками и компонентами, а также потенциал кроссплатфор-менной разработки. В заключении приводятся выводы о том, какой подход лучше подходит для конкретных задач и проектов, с учетом требований к производительности, удобству использования и эффективности разработки.
Ключевые слова: Flutter, нативная разработка, мобильные приложения, производительность, пользовательский опыт, кроссплатформеннаяразработка, iOS, Android.
