Material Design Lite vs NativeScript: What are the differences?
Material Design Lite belongs to "Front-End Frameworks" category of the tech stack, while NativeScript can be primarily classified under "Cross-Platform Mobile Development".
Some of the features offered by Material Design Lite are:
- Blog Template
- Dashboard Template
- Text Heavy Webpage Template
On the other hand, NativeScript provides the following key features:
- 100% Access to Native Platform API
- NativeScript is free of charge as an open source project
"Material Design straight from the original creators" is the primary reason why developers consider Material Design Lite over the competitors, whereas "Access to the entire native api" was stated as the key factor in picking NativeScript.
Material Design Lite and NativeScript are both open source tools. It seems that Material Design Lite with 31.3K GitHub stars and 5.31K forks on GitHub has more adoption than NativeScript with 17.2K GitHub stars and 1.28K GitHub forks.
According to the StackShare community, NativeScript has a broader approval, being mentioned in 9 company stacks & 26 developers stacks; compared to Material Design Lite, which is listed in 9 company stacks and 26 developer stacks.
What is Material Design Lite?
What is NativeScript?
Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
Sign up to add, upvote and see more prosMake informed product decisions
What are the cons of using Material Design Lite?
What are the cons of using NativeScript?
Sign up to get full access to all the companiesMake informed product decisions
What tools integrate with Material Design Lite?
Sign up to get full access to all the tool integrationsMake informed product decisions
So, i am preparing to adopt NativeScript.
For years my hybrid projects used Apache Cordova.
"Let's avoid to maintain two teams and double the deliver velocity".
It was good for a few years, we had those september issues, (i.e. apple broke some backward compatibility) , but for the last years, things seems to be losing the grip faster.
Last breaking changes, for instance, seems to have a workaround, however that growing feeling that simple things can not rely on so fragile webviews keeps growing faster and faster.
I've tested nativescript not only on it's "helloworld", but also on how do they respond on issues.
I got tweed support. I opened an github issue and got answers on less than 10 hours (yes i did it on another timezone and very close to a weekend). I saw the faulty docs get corrected in two days.
The bad news is i only can adopt nativescript on newer projects, since there is no budget to revamp the current solutions.
The good news is i can keep coding on Vue.js , without vou router, but that's ok. I've already exchanged vanilla html for real native app with background magic enabled, the router can be easily reproduced.
It is using the native components to build the UI and offers the best skills reuse story. All you need to know is JS/TS and CSS. Angular 2 is also supported which leads to even more code reuse across web and mobile.This is also the best way to access the native platform APIs directly.
NativeScript allows you to reuse your JS skills to build Native mobile apps without any sacrifices. It takes a bit to learn about all possible features, but each time you discover a new one you can't help but get more and more excited.
많은 버그가 존재하는데, 각각의 css 정의가 서로 연결되어서 수정이 쉽지 않다.
발견된 이슈조차 업데이트 하지 않으며, 사용자가 직접 수정해서 사용해야한다.