Good performance is important for an application to run smoothly for the end user, but good tools and documentation are just as important for a developer in order tobe able to create good applications in the shortest amount of time.  This paper is comparing the cross-platform frameworks Flutter and Xamarin to find the respective strengths of the frameworks and which one is the better option and in what aspect, the newer Flutter or the well established Xamarin. We did this by studying related works to the topic as well as building applications in each framework with methods to test the performance of the applications, all the while trying out the tools and documentation of each framework. Our initial hypothes is was that Xamarin as a mature framework would perform better on average and it would also have more well developed tools. However we instead found Xamarin severely lacking compared to the newer Flutter framework and were at best equal or just slightly better. Flutter outperformed Xamarin in CPU performance, at times 3 times better than Xamarin, Flutter’s application size being almost half of the Xamarin application and the Flutter application load times were also faster. The tools were for most parts equal but the results of the documentations were split, with Xamarin having better component documentation with code examples for the components and Flutter having inconsistencies in documentation structure. However the Xamarin documentation was severely lacking in updated documentation and confusing instructions at places. The only things Xamarin performed better on were the number of lines in the codeas well as being marginally better performing at the RAM capacity test. The conclusion would be that Flutter is a well performing framework that continues to develop while Xamarin feels stagnant and most of its development seems to have slowed down over the last two years

The development of apps in a cross-platform framework is something that has been appearing more over the latest years. But the knowledge of knowing which of the two popular frameworks, React Native, and Flutter are most efficient when it comes to resource management and general comparisons are less known. This is what this thesis investigates. To find out the comparisons between React Native and Flutter we created two similar apps and document the process of creating an app with the selected frameworks. To get data on the differences when developing an app with these frameworks, we made a survey to get more experienced developers' input. We then did performance tests of the apps to be able to compare the results of the respective framework. The applications we built had several similar functionalities that we used to measure the performance. We also touched on the subject of comparison between a cross-platform framework and a native framework. To do this we performed a literature review on related work to conclude the approaches. From our result, we could conclude that the performance of the Flutter app had a slight advantage over the React Native app. But the difference was not that remarkable, and the overall development was fairly similar. There were some differences to the approaches of development when it came to less experienced developers compared to more experienced developers which we learn from our survey. More experienced developers tended to use external debugging tools, while less experienced used built-in tools such as console commands. Finally, we want to conclude that both Flutter and React Native has their pros and cons. Both frameworks have a big community which is growing everyday, but we believe that Flutter might overtake the popularity from React Native due to its slight performance superiority.From our literature review we can conclude that both approaches has their advantages and it depends a lot on the concept of the app. When developing a more complex app, the native approach is superior. When developing smaller apps with shorter life periods, cross-platform will faster get the app on the market.

A mobile application has to be able to keep up with heavy demands to compete with all the new applications that are developed each day. Good performance and nice visuals are base requirements for the development of mobile applications. There are many options for tools when developing and one of these choices is a native application, which is said to have better performance and suitability to the mobile environment. Another choice is a tool which requires only one code base for multiple platforms and is therefore easier to maintain. Flutter is an open-source User Interface (UI) toolkit created by Google that can create cross-platform applications with one code base while said to maintain the aspects of looking native. This paper explores how Flutter compares to native applications, which are currently seen as superior in mobile behaviour and performance. An experiment was conducted to test how Flutter as a cross-compiler compared to two native applications made of kotlin and Android studio and swift and XCode, in terms of CPU performance. A survey was created to see if there was a difference in the perception of users with regards to appearance and animations. A literature study was conducted to strengthen the results from the experiment and survey and to give a background to the subject. Flutter is a new tool and it continues to grow incredibly fast. Conclusions are drawn that a Flutter application can compete with a native application when it comes to CPU performance, but is not as developed in the animation area. Flutter does not require complex code for creating a simple application and uses significantly less lines of code in development compared to native. The final conclusion is that Flutter is best to use when building smaller to medium-sized applications, but has a potential to grow to overcome its current drawbacks in the animation department. Further examination of the areas examined in this paper is needed in order to ensure and strengthen the results.

Background: Mobile applications can be developed using cross-platform frameworks. The advantage of using these frameworks is that it is possible to reach more platforms with an application while not having to code again. On the other hand, a common reason for not using cross-platform frameworks is that the performance is assumed to be worse than native frameworks targeting one platform. Objectives: To compare the performance of an Android application created using two different frameworks, native Android and cross-platform framework Flutter. Methods: An experiment was carried out by developing two applications and observing the execution time, CPU usage, and memory usage. Results: The experiment results show that the app created using Flutter has better performance for decoding files but worse for rendering animations than the native Android application. Locating the user using geo-location has the same performance for the two frameworks. Both frameworks perform reasonably well for database access and using infinitely scrolling lists. Conclusions: Due to continuous updates, Flutter's performance has improved, increasing its usability compared to earlier experimentation. Flutter's performance is relatively comparable on multiple factors with native Android applications. It is suggested that developers should not disregard Flutter being a cross-platform framework and assume its performance would be poor.

Background: These days when developing applications for mobile platforms, therehave been two main branches to pick between as a developer. The first option– denoted native development – targets only one specific mobile operating system(OS). The other is cross-platform development which can target multiple platformssimultaneously. A common concern with cross-platform development, however, is itsperformance when compared to native frameworks. Objectives: In this thesis, the objective is to compare the performance of applica-tions created for Android using the native framework and the cross-platform .NETMAUI framework by Microsoft. Methods: The method used in this thesis was a combination of a literature (map-ping) study and an experiment. The purpose of the mapping study was to identifyrelevant performance metrics. The experiment then observed those how those met-rics, CPU and memory (RAM) usage, differed between the applications created usingboth frameworks. Results: Overall, the .NET MAUI framework was significantly worse than the na-tive framework on both measured performance metrics in 9 out of 12 tasks tested.The .NET MAUI framework was significantly better in 1 task, while 2 other tasksended up with differences that were statistically insignificant. Conclusions: An experiment was conducted to compare CPU usage in % andmemory (RAM) usage in MB between the native framework and the .NET MAUIframework for Android development on a variety of tasks. The outcome of the ex-periment significantly favored the native framework statistically. However, due to ofthe small sample size in selected tasks as well as specific design choices it is unclearhow real-world use would compare.

Sedan smarta mobiltelefoner introducerades har användningen och likaså behovet av mobilapplikationer ökat exponentiellt. När utvecklingsprocessen för en mobilapplikation påbörjas måste en utvecklare utvärdera ett antal faktorer som kan påverka mobilapplikationens användning eller prestanda, till exempel utvecklingsplattform som denna studie fokuserar på. Syftet med denna studie är att fastställa prestandaskillnaderna för native Android och Xamarin cross-compile med hjälp av en experimentell studie. Tesen för denna studie är baserad på tidigare forskning som tyder på att cross-platform och Xamarin cross-compile har sämre prestanda än native Android, resultatet av denna studie kan bidra till valet av utvecklingsplattform för utvecklare. Avgränsningar har valts i form av Android som plattform, exekveringstid, CPU-användning samt RAM-användning för prestandamätning. Beräkningar som utförs är iterativ bubble sort i form av best case, worst case och random case med varierande antal nummer och en rekursiv Fibonaccisekvens med olika utgångspunkter. Resultatet av denna studie stämmer överens med tesen, Xamarin har i dagsläget sämre prestanda än native Android. / Throughout the last decade the mobile phone market has grown rapidly and with it, the need for mobile applications has grown as well. When the development process for a mobile application starts, a developer must review various factors that can affect the mobile applications usage or performance, for example the development platform to use which is the focus of this study. The purpose of this study is to determine the difference in performance between native Android and Xamarin cross-compile with the use of an experimental study. The hypothesis of this study is based on previous research which shows that cross-platform and Xamarin cross-compile have worse performance than native Android, the result of this study can contribute can help a developer make the decision on what development platform to choose. The delimitations have been chosen as Android as platform, execution time, CPU-usage and RAM-usage for performance testing. The algorithms that were chosen were an iterative bubble sort, in form of best case, worst case and random case with varying numbers, and a recursive Fibonacci sequence with different starting points. The result of this study is consistent with the hypothesis, Xamarin shows worse performance than native Android.

Creating native mobile application on multiple platforms generate a lot of duplicate code. This thesis has evaluated if the code quality attribute modifiability improves when migrating to React Native. One Android and one iOS codebase existed for an application and a third codebase was developed with React Native. The measurements of the codebases were based on the SQMMA-model. The metrics for the model were collected with static analyzers created specifically for this project. The results created consists of graphs that show the modifiability for some specific components over time and graphs that show the stability of the platforms. These graphs show that when measuring code metrics on applications over time it is better to do this on a large codebase that has been developed for some time. When calculating a modifiability value the sum of the metrics and the average value of the metrics between files should be used and it is shown that the React Native platform seems to be more stable than native.

Syftet med denna studie är att undersöka fördröjningsskillnader inom användargränssnitt mellan native­utvecklade appar (utveckling till varje plattform) och appar av typen generated apps. Eftersom arbetet syftar till att bidra med information om prestanda ansågs en experimentell metod vara det bästa valet. Mätning av laddningstider gjordes med hjälp av en videokamera som filmade utförandet av experimenten vilket gjorde metoden simpel och liknar det som en användare kommer att uppleva. Avgränsning till plattformarna Android och iOS gjordes där Xamarin valdes som ramverk inom tekniker som skapar generated apps. Mätdata från experiment som undersökte laddningstider, experiment med användare som hanterade listors respons samt undersökning av CPU­ och minnesanvändning tyder på ett återkommande mönster. Xamarin Forms med XAML är den teknik som presterat sämst under experimenten som sedan följs av Xamarin Forms. Xamarin Android/iOS hade inte lika stora prestandaförluster jämfört med native­utvecklade delar. Generellt hanterar Xamarin Forms telefonens resurser sämre än vad Xamarin Android/iOS och native gör. Resultat från studien kan användas som beslutsstöd vid val av teknik. Studien bidrar även med data som kan användas vid vidare forskning inom området. / The purpose of this study is to examine differences in delay during calculation and presentation of interfaces executing on different techniques. Specifically between native developed apps and generated apps. Since the work aims to contribute with information regarding performance, an experimental method was considered to be the best choice. Measurements of loading times was made with a video camera that captured the execution of the experiments which made the method simple and captures what the users would have experienced. Demarcation to the platforms Android and iOS was made and Xamarin was chosen as the framework for creating generated apps. Data from experiment that examined loading times, experiment with users that dealt with the responsiveness of lists and the analysis of CPU and memory usage indicate a recurring pattern. Xamarin Forms with XAML is the technique that has performed worst during the experiments, followed by Xamarin Forms. Xamarin Android/iOS didn’t have as big performance loss. Xamarin Forms does not manage the phones resources as efficient as Xamarin Android/iOS and native developed apps does. The results from this study can be used as material for making decisions witin organisations when choosing technology for creating apps. The study also contribute with data that can be used by other researchers.

During the last ten years the market for smartphones has grown drastically. Because of the current state of the market with different operating systems many smartphone applications need to be developed for several platforms. With this thesis, the goal was ultimately to contribute to the understanding of cross-platform development as a way of developing smartphone applications. React Native has been evaluated as a framework with which development is done for both Android and iOS using the same code. To study React Native as a framework, a smartphone application for Android and iOS was developed at an Uppsala based IT-company with expertise in web services, smartphone applications, and online gaming. Furthermore, performance tests and user tests were conducted in which React Native was compared to native applications and applications developed using Xamarin (similar cross-platform development framework owned by Microsoft). It was evident that using the same code for both Android and iOS was time saving. However, the performance tests results showed that applications developed with React Native did not perform as well as the native and Xamarin versions. Leading to the conclusion that choice of framework when developing cross-platform applications need to take into consideration performance, development time, and programming language preference.

In Automotive Industries, to be confident regarding the success of a planned operation, performing accurate methods in order to detect abnormal operating conditions, known as faults, is crucial. An effective method for diagnosis and fault recognition ensures the safety of the operation, reduces manufacturing cost and any other potential impacts. In addition, mobile solutions have been widely adopted among automotive manufactures during recent years and they have taken full advantage of mobile strategies. Accordingly, it is necessary for there to be a future-proof plan to control the diagnostic operations in advance. In this thesis, the immediate objective has been to offer a future-proof and user-friendly solution to assist engineers and service technicians in the monitoring, detecting, and diagnosing of faults on Toyota/BT/CESAB branded trucks. A mobile cross-platform framework is used to develop the diagnostic mobile solution which is not only able to be deployed on Android and iOS mobile platforms, but also provides wireless communication between truck machines and mobile devices through Bluetooth and Wi-Fi ad hoc technologies. The diagnostic mobile tool is capable of processing real-time controller area network messages and visualizing the condition of different sensors in a more user-friendly way through rich hybrid and client-side web user interfaces. The experience of evaluating a cross-platform diagnostic tool on different mobile operating systems proved that cross-platform mobile development methodology can be a reliable technique for developing projects that essentially require real-time data processing. In addition, it indicates that Apple iOS offers a better runtime performance than Google Android for the current tool.