Mobile applications are a critical part of everyday life. Animations in mobile applications demand optimized performance, which developers are persistently striving to achieve. This study examines the performance of mobile applications developed using native approaches for iOS and Android, as well as the Flutter framework for cross-platform approach, while executing animations. This was motivated by the fact that while cross-platform development offers advantages in terms of development efficiency, it often results in decreased performance. Since the field of mobile development is continuously evolving, it is important to explore new capabilities of mobile technologies. The purpose of this study is to understand the differences in CPU and RAM usage between native and cross-platform applications by examining two types of animation implementations, thereby aiming to identify the causes of the performance gap and propose solutions to decrease the performance gap. This study involved experiments, a literature study and an analysis of the results to address the research questions and fulfill the purpose. The findings of this study showed that the cross-platform approach resulted in higher CPU and RAM usage than the native approaches. However, the performance gap was less noticeable in one of the animation implementations. Thus indicating that the performance of mobile applications can be significantly influenced by the choice of animation implementation. Therefore, a strategic approach to mitigating the performance gap could involve careful selection of Flutter widgets or the incorporation of efficient libraries.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:UPSALLA1/oai:DiVA.org:hj-62029 |
| Date | January 2023 |
| Creators | Ametova, Sabina, Lindström, Tim |
| Source Sets | DiVA Archive at Upsalla University |
| Language | English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Student thesis, info:eu-repo/semantics/bachelorThesis, text |
| Format | application/pdf |
| Rights | info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
Page generated in 0.0014 seconds