Native Application: What is It?

What is a Native Application?

A native application is a mobile application developed specifically for a mobile operating system using the target platform's official programming languages, SDKs, and development tools. Concretely, this means Swift or Objective-C with Xcode for iOS, and Kotlin or Java with Android Studio for Android. The code is compiled directly into the platform's machine instructions, without an intermediary layer.

The term "native" contrasts with cross-platform approaches (React Native, Flutter) and hybrid approaches (Cordova, Ionic) that use web technologies or intermediary frameworks to target multiple platforms. Native development has historically been the standard approach to mobile development, and it remains relevant for specific use cases demanding maximum performance or deep system integrations. However, with the maturation of cross-platform frameworks, native is no longer systematically the optimal choice.

Why Native Applications Matter

Understanding the strengths and limitations of native development is essential for making an informed mobile strategy choice. Native offers undeniable advantages, but these must be put in perspective against the associated costs.

• Maximum performance: Native code runs directly on the device processor without an abstraction layer. For computation-intensive applications (3D games, real-time image processing, augmented reality), this is a decisive advantage.
• Full system API access: Native development provides immediate and complete access to all platform APIs and features, including the newest ones, as soon as they are released by Apple or Google.
• Optimal user experience: Native components automatically respect platform guidelines (animations, gestures, transitions), delivering an experience perfectly integrated with the rest of the system.
• First-party platform support: Documentation, tutorials, and support are directly provided by Apple and Google, without dependence on a third-party framework.
• Long-term stability: Native languages and SDKs are maintained by the platform manufacturers, guaranteeing long-term compatibility with future OS versions.

How It Works

Native development relies on platform-specific tools and languages. On iOS, the developer uses Xcode (Apple's IDE), writes in Swift (or Objective-C for legacy projects), builds the interface with SwiftUI (declarative) or UIKit (imperative), and accesses Apple frameworks like Core Data, ARKit, HealthKit, and Core ML. The code is compiled to ARM binary by the LLVM compiler.

On Android, the developer uses Android Studio (based on IntelliJ IDEA), writes in Kotlin (or Java), builds the interface with Jetpack Compose (declarative) or the XML layout system (imperative), and accesses Android APIs like Room, CameraX, ML Kit, and ARCore. The code is compiled to Dalvik/ART bytecode via Gradle.

At KERN-IT, we are transparent with our clients: separate native development for iOS and Android is rarely the best option for standard enterprise projects. It doubles costs and timelines without delivering sufficient added value in 80% of cases. We recommend native only when the project requires platform-specific integrations (ARKit, HealthKit, advanced iOS widgets, Android NFC) or exceptional computational performance. For all other cases, React Native or a PWA offers a better value-to-investment ratio.

Concrete Example

Consider a Belgian medtech company developing a connected medical device (a Bluetooth blood pressure monitor) with an accompanying mobile application. The app must interact with HealthKit on iOS to synchronise health data, use Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE) to communicate with the device in real time, and comply with regulatory certifications that require total control over the code.

In this case, native iOS development in Swift is justified: HealthKit integration is complex and requires direct access to Apple APIs, real-time BLE communication demands optimal performance, and regulatory requirements mandate controlling every code layer without third-party framework dependencies. The Android app is developed separately in Kotlin with Google Health Connect APIs and the same BLE protocols. Both applications share the Django backend via a common RESTAPI.

Implementation

1. Assess the need for native: List features requiring direct native access (specific APIs, critical performance, regulatory certifications) to confirm native is genuinely necessary.
2. Build the teams: Native development requires distinct specialised skills: Swift/iOS developers and Kotlin/Android developers. This implies larger teams or rarer profiles.
3. Define a common architecture: Even with separate codebases, standardise architecture (layers, patterns, naming) and the backend API to maintain functional consistency between both versions.
4. Synchronise roadmaps: Plan development of both versions in parallel to avoid feature gaps between iOS and Android.
5. Test independently: Each platform requires its own test suite (XCTest for iOS, Espresso/JUnit for Android) and tests on representative physical devices.
6. Publish in parallel: Coordinate submissions to both stores for simultaneous launches, accounting for different validation timelines.

Associated Technologies and Tools

• Swift / Objective-C: Native programming languages for iOS development.
• Kotlin / Java: Native programming languages for Android development.
• Xcode: Apple's IDE for iOS development, including simulator, Instruments, and Interface Builder.
• Android Studio: Google's IDE for Android development, based on IntelliJ IDEA.
• SwiftUI / Jetpack Compose: Modern declarative frameworks for building interfaces on iOS and Android respectively.
• XCTest / Espresso: Native testing frameworks for iOS and Android respectively.

Conclusion

Native development remains the benchmark approach in terms of pure performance and system feature access. However, with the maturation of cross-platform frameworks like React Native, native is no longer the default choice for the majority of mobile projects. At KERN-IT, we help our clients make the right choice by objectively evaluating whether native's advantages justify the additional costs for their specific case. In our experience, 80% of enterprise projects are perfectly served by a cross-platform approach, while the remaining 20% (medtech, advanced IoT, games, AR) genuinely benefit from native development.