NativeScript vs. Node.js

NativeScript allows to easily integrate with native APIs by threading models. Moreover, the framework itself can be integrated with Angular, VueJS and JavaScript due to the fact that it was built on based on these frameworks. It allows you to easily maintain if you projects are based on these frameworks. Therefore, for the development of cross-platform applications it can be very handy!

Incentivized

If you need a fast, robust and reliable server side framework that allows you to write JS on the backend and therefore have your project in one language - Node.js is a stand out choice. It can easily handle heavy traffic on very little resources (CPU and memory usage is very efficient). I can't recommend it enough, it is such a pleasure to work with - I feel it gave me back my career. I was so bored with the banality of .NET, I had also come to dislike it's overly convoluted and complicated class structure. Node.js was the fresh start I needed, it can be as simple or as complicated as you like - but even at it's most complicated it can still beat the pants off .NET core any day.

Incentivized

• True native app. The app uses native components and that is quite noticeable in the overall performance of the app. NativeScript is also awesome in the way we can access the native APIs, so we are never really constrained by the framework. If we need, we can just dive into the native APIs without leaving our environment and language (JS).
• Cross-platform. Builds for Android and iOS. It deals with the platforms differences very well.
• Support for Vue.js. Even though it is just a community effort, the NativeScript-Vue plugin is the best alternative to build native Apps with Vue.js. That was a major factor to go with NativeScript.

Incentivized

• Node.js using V8 engine that allows run both UI and server side using JavaScript.
• Eliminates waiting time.
• Cross-platform that can execute different platforms like android, web apps, and other IoT devices.
• Uses Non-blocking property so that can be handled multiple requests with quick response.
• Easy to install and maintained.
• Open source.

• Nativescript runs everything on a single thread. i.e., the UI thread. If you want to offload some processing, you have to use web workers. This experience can be improved in the future releases.
• Currently NativeScript only have hot reload when you change the UI file or Css file. There is no hot reload when you change Js/Ts file, unlike Google's Flutter. This is also something which NativeScript will get in the future releases.
• In current version of NativeScript, there is no livesync when building with webpack. This feature will be added with NativeScript 4.x. (an RC version for 4.x is already available)

Incentivized

• Performance bottlenecks need to be profiled and ameliorated.
• The Asynchronous Programming Model has a learning curve which isn't always intuitive to entry-level coders.
• Much more suited to the cloud, as opposed to bare-metal installations.

Incentivized

The hybrid is ok but native is better for performance and the right use case I want to go for is the performance without dealing with too many development tools.

Incentivized

My focus has been, and must remain, with obtaining support from web resources over that of paid support programs. Many companies, including those of government agencies, do not have a budget sufficient for paying large sums of money to other organizations to answer questions. Even in cases where an organization did purchase support programs, developers often found that the delays in obtaining responses to development issues was excessive. I give NativeScript the lowest possible rating, due to the fact that their website content is severely outdated and of little use to a developer in a crunch. The NativeScript environment may be far better than I have been able to report, but held back from excelling due to poor support content. Being that I am often asked to push the boundaries in various areas, improper documentation is highly detrimental to a development team, and thuss a review. I would be more than happy to improve this review as the content of the support documentation provided by the NativeScript team makes its way to their website in the form of real-world examples which are applicable to all versions, or at least the most recent versions, of their product.

Node.js is easy and good to use, their support team is also good they always tend to help you, and solve your problem, even we know that Node is free to use and opensource but then also we get support from them but for getting much better results we need to purchase standard or enterprises support provided by them.

Incentivized

NativeScript was indeed a better experience at first than Ionic. But the real game-changer in 2022 for cross-platform applications is Flutter now. We changed to it shorty after NativeScript, as it is much more stable, more widely supported, has a ton of extra features, and does not rely on JavaScript and Android knowledge as much as NativeScript.

Incentivized

Node.js provides features that were used to solve the problem and overall there was no negative impact. That is why Node.js is selected.

Incentivized

• We had built this particular app once already, during a 6 month time frame, using Ionic. When we hit the wall, we chose NativeScript, and built the whole app from scratch. We estimated another 6 months, but completed the work in 4 months due to the ease of use.
• We have found collaboration with our client much easier because of the simplicity of releases and speed of development.
• Having a tool like NativeScript has allowed us to make competitive quotes for mobile app development contracts, where previously that would have been closed to us due to our lack of native development experience. Being able to build iOS apps without a Swift-code expert has opened those doors for us.

Incentivized

• It let us to make lo budget projects easily and faster.
• Node.js is easy and based on Javascript, so our interns and trainee could able to make projects using Node.js.

Incentivized