Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Codename one and PhoneGap, a performance comparison
Blekinge Institute of Technology, Faculty of Computing, Department of Software Engineering.
2015 (English)Independent thesis Basic level (degree of Bachelor), 10 credits / 15 HE creditsStudent thesis
Abstract [en]

Creating smartphone applications for more than one operating system requires knowledge of several code languages, more code maintenance, higher development costs and longer development time. To make this easier cross-platform tools (CPTs) exist. But using a CPT can decrease performance of the application. Applications with low performance are more likely to get uninstalled and this makes developers lose income. There are four main CPT approaches hybrid, interpreter, web and cross-compiler. Each has different disadvantages .and advantages. This study will examine the performance difference between two CPTs, Codename One and PhoneGap. The performance measurements, CPU load, memory usage, energy consumption, time execution and application size will be made to compare the CPTs. If cross-compilers have better performance than other CPT approaches will also be investigated. An experiment where three applications are created with native Android, Codename One and PhoneGap will be made and performance measurements will be made. A literature study with research from IEEE and Engineering village will be conducted on different CPT approaches. PhoneGap performed best with shortest execution time, least energy consumption and least CPU usage while Codename One had smallest application size and least memory usage. The research available on performance for CPTs is short and not well done. The difference between PhoneGap and Codename One is not big except for writing to SQLite. No basis was found for the statement that cross-compilers have better performance than other CPT approaches.  

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2015. , 42 p.
Keyword [en]
cross-platform tools, approach, performance, android
National Category
Software Engineering
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:bth-978OAI: oai:DiVA.org:bth-978DiVA: diva2:823803
Subject / course
PA1418 Bachelor's Thesis - Large Team Software Engineering Project
Educational program
PAGPT Software Engineering
Supervisors
Examiners
Available from: 2015-06-30 Created: 2015-06-18 Last updated: 2015-06-30Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(647 kB)1090 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT02.pdfFile size 647 kBChecksum SHA-512
091e54c4e071f160c28a30c3116d651dd4613dca90179392fba04e83fbf41ba03fbbd2c476ef41e31e84a48c2584bfc5b2ad98cebd0218a43cde75c1d958318f
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

By organisation
Department of Software Engineering
Software Engineering

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 1091 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

urn-nbn

Altmetric score

urn-nbn
Total: 1333 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf