Mobile Application Development: Analysis Of Application Types And Tools

edToolsToolsToolsToolsforforforforProgressive Web App Development .Native Apps - Android DevelopmentHybrid Apps Development . . . . .Cross-platform Apps Development .3 Identification - State of the Art3.1 Developers Survey . . . . . . . . . . .3.1.1 Survey Questions . . . . . . . .3.1.2 Target Group . . . . . . . . . .3.1.3 Response . . . . . . . . . . . .3.2 Literature Reviews . . . . . . . . . . .3.3 Systematic Literature Review . . . . .3.3.1 Research Questions . . . . . . .3.3.2 Search Strategy . . . . . . . . .3.3.2.1 Identifying Keywords .3.3.2.2 Defining Search String3.3.2.3 Data Source Selection3.3.3 Inclusion/Exclusion Criteria . .3.3.4 Data Extraction & Analysis . .3.3.5 Selected Studies Overview . . .3.3.6 Combining Results . . . . . . .3.3.6.1 Results for RQ1 . . .3.3.6.2 Results for RQ1.1 . . .3.3.6.3 Results for RQ2 . . .3.3.6.4 Results for RQ2.1 . . .3.3.6.5 Results for RQ2.2 . . .3.3.6.6 Results for RQ2.3 . . .3.3.6.7 Results for RQ2.4 . . .3.3.6.8 Results for RQ2.5 . . .4 Implementation - Experimentation with Tools4.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4.2 Application Prototype - Weather Watch . . . .4.2.1 User Interface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4.2.2 Sensors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4.2.3 Interaction with other Apps . . . . . . .4.2.4 Connectivity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4.2.5 Open Weather Map API . . . . . . . . .4.3 Implementation Experience . . . . . . . . . . .4.3.1 Mobile Web App . . . . . . . . . . . . .4.3.1.1 Sencha ExtJS . . . . . . . . . .4.3.1.2 JQuery Mobile . . . . . . . . .4.3.2 Progressive Web App . . . . . . . . . . 58616365.70707171727272737476777980.

4.44.54.3.2.1 Angular . . . . . .4.3.2.2 React . . . . . . .4.3.3 Native Apps - Android . . .4.3.3.1 Android Studio . .4.3.3.2 IntelliJ IDEA . . .4.3.3.3 Eclipse . . . . . . .4.3.4 Hybrid Apps . . . . . . . .4.3.4.1 Ionic . . . . . . . .4.3.4.2 Phone Gap . . . .4.3.5 Cross-platform Apps . . . .4.3.5.1 React Native . . .4.3.5.2 Flutter . . . . . .4.3.5.3 Xamarin . . . . . .Metrics evaluation . . . . . . . . .Implementation threats to validity .5 User’s Perspective5.1 Categorization . . . . . . . . .5.1.1 User Interface . . . . .5.1.2 User Experience . . . .5.1.3 Run time Performance5.2 Users Survey . . . . . . . . .5.2.1 Survey Questions . . .5.2.2 Target Group . . . . .5.2.3 Response . . . . . . .5.2.4 Threats to validity . 021031056 Discussion & Analysis of Results6.1 Application Types . . . . . . . . . . . .6.1.1 Systematic Review . . . . . . . .6.1.2 Based on Implementation . . . .6.2 Tools/Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . .6.2.1 Systematic Review . . . . . . . .6.2.2 Implementation . . . . . . . . . .6.2.2.1 Developer’s Perspective6.2.2.2 User’s Perspective . . .6.2.3 Survey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6.2.3.1 Developer’s Perspective6.2.3.2 User’s Perspective . . .106106106108109109111111112112112113.7 Conclusion1147.1 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1147.2 Future Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116

Bibliogrpahy117A Developers Survey Form121B Users Survey form126C List of Search Strings129D Inclusion Exclusion Criteria131E Formal Concept Analysis133F Gartner Hype Cycle134

Chapter 1Introduction“The mobile device has become our communications hub, our diary, our entertainmentportal, our primary source of media consumption, our wallet, and our gateway to real-timeinformation tailored to our needs. The revolution is now!”Nihal Mehta, Founding General Partner at Eniac Ventures1.1ContextMobile applications provide valuable tools to customers and prospects across mobile devices such as smartphones, tablets, and an ever-increasing array of wearabledevices such as smartwatches. There are more than a million different types ofmobile apps in use, each offering a wide variety of services.Sports, games, organizers, shopping, banking, reading, watching, listening,one cannot imagine any of these without mobile devices. Mobile phone users arethe most important factor when we talk about mobile applications because thenumber of mobile phone users defines the usage of mobile applications. Accordingto Statista [1], the current number of smartphone users in the world today is3.5 billion, and this means 45.15% of the world's population owns a smartphonewhereas 4.78 billion people own a mobile phone which is 61.67% of the world'spopulation.The increasing number of mobile phone users makes an increase in the numberof mobile applications in various app stores more significant. There were 500 appson the first version of Apple's App Store and a handful of apps in Google PlayStore in 2008. We have come a long way since then. As of the first quarter of2020 [2], Android users can choose between 2.56 million apps, making GooglePlay App Store the biggest store of mobile applications. Apple’s App Store is thesecond-largest app store with almost 1.85 million available apps for iOS followedby Windows and Blackberry apps.

IntroductionM.A.DThe increasing number of mobile device users and apps has no significance onits own. Apps cannot succeed without downloads. We are seeing growth in appdownloads each year. This trend will continue in the coming years as well. In thesecond quarter of 2020, users downloaded 28.7 million apps from Google Play. Incontrast, the mobile app only generated 9.1 million downloads in the Apple AppStore. The Google Play platform has always made up the bulk of app downloadsbut the Apple App Store is stronger in terms of revenue generation. [3]. That'sa 15% increase from the year prior. Experts predict that there will be a 25%increase in global app downloads by 2022.Talking about the revenue generated by these apps, According to Build fire[4], mobile applications are expected to generate 189 billion dollars by 2020. If weanalyze a portion of the company's sales come from mobile devices then we findout, a mobile-friendly site makes it 67% more likely that a customer will buy aproduct or service online.With all these big numbers of mobile device users, demand for mobile application, and the benefit of revenue received from mobile application development,it is evident how significant mobile apps have become both for developers and theusers. For users, because they get several mobile application options to choosefrom, which makes their life easier in all aspects. For developers, because of therise in demand and revenue each year and increasing options to develop. However,these various choices for developers come with several confusions.As mobile apps grow in the business world, companies face a problem: Misconceptions still surround mobile app development. Many businesses venture intomobile app development without truly understanding the difference between eachapproach. Others enter the mobile app world with false beliefs about the prosand cons of each method, that could cost them hundreds of thousands of dollars.Depending on the business objectives and overall product goals, the decision ofcorrect application type and the tools to develop each type of mobile applicationcan make or break the success of the mobile strategy. With various incomingchoices, as we get the flexibility of development, we also go into the dilemma ofchoosing a mobile app development approach.The purpose of this Master’s thesis is to clear the confusion, to better understand which mobile app approach is right and which tool/framework wouldbe preferable for each approach. Not just for big companies and businesses buteven for small startups or freelance developers or even individuals like studentsor learners, knowing the approach and the preferred tool/framework for each approach would be beneficial. We will go into the pros and cons of each type andtool which will help the reader better understand chronologically which approachwill be best suited, given the following requirements of a company/individual. Foreach approach, the best use case and business model will also be given to buildexamples for better understanding.Various top mobile app development companies prefer native developmentMaster ThesisPage 2

IntroductionM.A.Dwhen organizations think about smooth app performance. Native developmentfacilitates a user to experience inbuilt device features in the app and easily interact with it. For example: For an app concept that needs camera support. Nativedevelopment enables to integrate device camera with the app and use it hassle-free.With the surging enthusiasm towards the development of apps for mobile devices,there has been a myriad of questions & lots of confusion over cross-platform vs native vs hybrid app vs web apps development approaches, particularly from novicedevelopers. The lack of enough end-to-end resources for choosing the right mobileapp approach has continued to serve as a major barrier to find a lasting solutionfor the iOS vs Android battle. Even so, given that both platforms are critical for afruitful mobile app strategy, but with the changing time, things are taking a newshape.Before moving forward, a small introduction of all the types of mobile applications will help to provide a better understanding.1. Mobile Web Application: These are mobile-friendly websites.2. Progressive Web Application: These are the advanced version of mobilefriendly websites that can use a device sensor, can run offline, can be savedon the home screen as a thumbnail, and with more extra features.3. Native Application: These are mobile applications that need to be installedon phones and are platform-specific, meaning separate development is donefor Android, iOS, Windows, and other platforms. Android Application: These are mobile applications that can be installed in android devices.4. Hybrid Application: These are like native applications but with the blend ofweb elements.5. Cross-platform Application: As the name suggests, cross-platform apps aremeant to run in all platforms with the same code.Native, mobile web, hybrid, or cross-platform. For companies considering mobile apps, that is the million-dollar question. The answer is, “It depends”. Itdepends on budget, time to market, reach, functionality, and other factors. Onemight value each option against variables like cost, time, available resources, andthe complexity of the project but no one has been able to optimize for all valuablesand still build something meaningful. It is a saying, Pick two factors out of fourand choose wisely! [5]For each type of mobile app (web/native/hybrid/cross-platform), there are numerous tools, platforms, and technologies to choose from. The selection of platformsmight depend upon the learning curve for each platform, usability, extensibility,etc. It is the next important decision to make once the correct type of mobileMaster ThesisPage 3

IntroductionM.A.Dapplication is selected.1.2General OverviewThis thesis involves the discussion of 2 major topics.The first topic is Analyzing Application Types. The choice among differenttypes of mobile applications is dependent upon several categories, including business needs, app requirements, developer skills, and timelines. In this thesis, weanalyze the types of applications, based on the development model and try tounderstand which approach or type of mobile application is suitable for differentindividuals/companies considering several categories by mentioning about the prosand cons of each type. The analysis is done using the systematic review method (Insimple words, research analysis of current existing work) which helps to categorizethem based on the development model. Also, the results from the implementationprocess of the thesis, where different types of mobile apps are implemented usingseveral tools/frameworks help to validate the results from the scientific reviewmethod. Five different types of applications are analyzed in the thesis- MobileWeb, Progressive Web, Native-Android, Hybrid, and Cross-platform apps. Fornative apps, only the android platform is chosen to be analyzed, because of theunavailability of iOS devices required for iOS apps development.The second topic is Analyzing Tools/Frameworks. Here, the tools/ frameworks for each type of mobile app is analyzed. 2-3 tools/frameworks for each typeof mobile application is selected by Google Trend statistics and compared usingscientific literature review and developing the same reference application with multiple frameworks trying to highlight the main characteristics of these frameworksas they result from the implementation experience. A simple mobile app is madeusing each platform to better understand the platform and technologies used in itto develop different types of mobile applications.There are several other tools/frameworks available for each type of mobile application not covered in the thesis, which can be equally useful given the requirementsof developer and user, but the most used, ranked and trended frameworks amongthem are selected to be analyzed in this thesis. The tools/frameworks analyzedfor each type in this thesis are given below:1. Mobile Web App: Sencha ExtJS, jQuery Mobile2. Progressive Web App: Angular Framework, React Library3. Native - Android: Android Studio, IntelliJ IDEA, Eclipse4. Hybrid App: Ionic, Phone Gap5. Cross Platform App: React Native, Flutter, XamarinMaster ThesisPage 4

Introduction1.3M.A.DResearch ApproachThis thesis follows the following approaches for the analysis of types and tools:Identification (3), Implementation(4), and Survey (3 and 5). Before following theabove approaches the tools to be analyzed are selected by the help of GoogleTrend(2).1.3.1IdentificationThe validation of the selected tools is performed by a preliminary developers surveywhich is followed by identification. Identification means to identify the categoriesand factors based on which they will be differentiated. This work is carried byusing systematic review method [6], where we can find the answer of the researchquestions by reading several papers, articles and work related to that field andthen combining the result to draw conclusions and make decisions.”Scientific review is a review that attempts to collate all empirical evidence thatfits pre-specified eligibility criteria to answer a specific research question using explicit, systematic methods to minimize bias, thus providing more reliable findingsfrom which conclusions can be drawn and decisions made.”Altman 1992, Oxman 1993Analyzing Application TypesAfter following the above method, the set of factors were identified which canbe used to differ the various application types. These categories help the companyor individual to understand which type of mobile application is well-suited fortheir business or need. The following set of factors were identified, a very shortdescription for each of them is provided below:1. Platform compatibility: Mobile app works in a single platform or more thanone platform. Except for native, almost all other apps can work on morethan one platform, but this is also dependent on the platform.2. User friendly: Requirement of the rich and attractive interface and experienceor it can be compromised. Native apps are headliners in UI and UX.3. Native functionality: Access to device sensors, interaction with other applications installed, etc. Here also, native apps are a winner.4. Internet accessibility: It can work with or without internet access. Only forthe mobile web, mandatory internet is required.5. Code portability: This defines the flexibility of the development process.Master ThesisPage 5

IntroductionM.A.D6. Development Cost: The budget varies for each application type, dependingon the available funding, individual/company can decide which type. Nativeis the most expensive, whereas mobile web apps being the least expensive.7. Development Time: The time required for development is also dependentupon the skills of the developers and their knowledge about the technology.8. Performance: The performance of the app, based on interactivity, consistency, power, slow, or fast. Native apps give the best performance.9. Demand: The reach in the market in terms of usage as well as revenue.Analyzing Tools and FrameworksWith the help of the scientif

Likewise, every app development tool has its pros and cons, so there is no de ni-tive judgment. It solely depends on which approach suits an individual's mobile app development needs that are comprehended by the acknowledged comparison factors in this thesis. Keywords: Mobile Application Development, Approach, Types, Mobile Web,