Development Paths: A Comprehensive Guide

The field of software development has evolved significantly over the past decade, with the rise of new technologies and frameworks. The concept of "Write Once, Deploy Everywhere" (WODE) has been the promise of many development frameworks, aimed at reducing the burden of writing multiple applications for different platforms. Choosing the right development path is a crucial decision for project managers, as it can have significant effects on the development team and the overall cost of the project.

In this article, we will examine the pros and cons of different development paths and how they impact the team composition, expenses, and user experience. Our goal is to help product managers make informed decisions when it comes to choosing the right development path.

WODE: The Idea

The WODE approach refers to the ability of a development team to write an application once using a single development stack, abstracting the platform, and retaining the ability to deploy the application on multiple platforms, without sacrificing functionality, efficiency, or user experience.

In contrast, the traditional approach of software development involves writing separate programs for each platform, which can be time-consuming and expensive.

Factors to Consider

When choosing a development path, several factors need to be taken into account, including:

• Project age
• Team composition and size
• Desired distribution platforms
• Timeline to market
• Availability of resources to switch to a different path if necessary

Development Paths

Development paths can be broadly divided into two groups: native and WODE. WODE can be further divided into two groups: hybrid systems and non-hybrid frameworks.

Native

Native applications are written specifically for a particular platform, taking advantage of the platform's native functionality and providing a seamless user experience.

Hybrid

Hybrid systems use web technologies across various platforms to render applications. The final result often falls short of the standards of a native application in terms of look and feel.

Non-hybrid

Non-hybrid frameworks use native UI components instead of rendering a web view within an application as hybrid frameworks do. They provide a more native-like experience compared to hybrid systems.

Each of these development paths has its own strengths and weaknesses, and as a result, each has different use cases for which it is most suitable. It's essential to carefully consider the criteria mentioned above and the requirements of the application before making a decision.