RubyMotion vs Xamarin Forms

Overview

RubyMotion

Stacks25

Followers54

Votes25

Xamarin Forms

Stacks356

Followers278

Votes5

RubyMotion vs Xamarin Forms: What are the differences?

## Introduction
In this markdown, we will explore the key differences between RubyMotion and Xamarin Forms.

1. **Language**: RubyMotion uses Ruby programming language for development, which is known for its simplicity and ease of use, while Xamarin Forms uses C# and .NET languages, providing a familiar environment for developers who are already well-versed in Microsoft technologies.

2. **Platform Support**: RubyMotion primarily targets iOS and macOS platforms, whereas Xamarin Forms allow developers to build applications for not only iOS and macOS but also Android, Windows, and even Web platforms, making it a more versatile solution for cross-platform development.

3. **Tooling**: RubyMotion comes with a more simplified toolset and development environment, focusing on the essentials required for iOS and macOS development, whereas Xamarin Forms offers a comprehensive set of tools and plugins, allowing developers to leverage a wide range of features and integrations for their multi-platform projects.

4. **Community and Ecosystem**: Xamarin Forms has a larger and more active community, providing extensive documentation, support forums, and third-party libraries, while RubyMotion has a smaller community with fewer resources and community-driven contributions, which may affect the availability of resources and support for developers.

5. **License and Pricing**: Xamarin Forms offers a free license option with limited features and capabilities, while providing paid subscriptions for access to advanced functionalities and support, whereas RubyMotion follows a different pricing model with a one-time payment for a perpetual license, offering a more straightforward approach without recurring fees.

6. **Performance and Optimization**: Xamarin Forms, being built around the .NET framework, may have better performance optimizations and integration with native platform APIs, leading to potentially faster and more efficient cross-platform applications compared to RubyMotion, which might rely more on Ruby abstractions and libraries.

In Summary, the key differences between RubyMotion and Xamarin Forms lie in their choice of language, platform support, tooling, community ecosystem, license/pricing models, and performance optimizations.

Share your Stack

Help developers discover the tools you use. Get visibility for your team's tech choices and contribute to the community's knowledge.

View Docs

CLI (Node.js)

Manual

Detailed Comparison

RubyMotion	Xamarin Forms
RubyMotion lets you quickly develop cross-platform native apps for iOS, Android and OS X, all using your favorite editor and the awesome Ruby language you know and love.	A mobile application framework for building user interfaces.It easily create native user interface layouts that can be shared across Android, iOS, and Windows Phone.
Statistics
Stacks 25	Stacks 356
Followers 54	Followers 278
Votes 25	Votes 5
Pros & Cons
Pros 6 Ruby Syntax 4 Editor + Terminal workflow; minimal Xcode involvement 4 Great Community 3 Great gems, libraries, and frameworks 3 Fast Prototyping	Pros 5 Native Development SDK with shared C# code-base
Integrations
Ruby	No integrations available

What are some alternatives to RubyMotion, Xamarin Forms?

Ionic

Free and open source, Ionic offers a library of mobile and desktop-optimized HTML, CSS and JS components for building highly interactive apps. Use with Angular, React, Vue, or plain JavaScript.

Flutter

Flutter is a mobile app SDK to help developers and designers build modern mobile apps for iOS and Android.

React Native

React Native enables you to build world-class application experiences on native platforms using a consistent developer experience based on JavaScript and React. The focus of React Native is on developer efficiency across all the platforms you care about - learn once, write anywhere. Facebook uses React Native in multiple production apps and will continue investing in React Native.

Xamarin

Xamarin’s Mono-based products enable .NET developers to use their existing code, libraries and tools (including Visual Studio*), as well as skills in .NET and the C# programming language, to create mobile applications for the industry’s most widely-used mobile devices, including Android-based smartphones and tablets, iPhone, iPad and iPod Touch.

NativeScript

NativeScript enables developers to build native apps for iOS, Android and Windows Universal while sharing the application code across the platforms. When building the application UI, developers use our libraries, which abstract the differences between the native platforms.

Apache Cordova

Apache Cordova is a set of device APIs that allow a mobile app developer to access native device function such as the camera or accelerometer from JavaScript. Combined with a UI framework such as jQuery Mobile or Dojo Mobile or Sencha Touch, this allows a smartphone app to be developed with just HTML, CSS, and JavaScript.

Framework7

It is a free and open source mobile HTML framework to develop hybrid mobile apps or web apps with iOS native look and feel. All you need to make it work is a simple HTML layout and attached framework's CSS and JS files.

Qt

Qt, a leading cross-platform application and UI framework. With Qt, you can develop applications once and deploy to leading desktop, embedded & mobile targets.

PhoneGap

PhoneGap is a web platform that exposes native mobile device apis and data to JavaScript. PhoneGap is a distribution of Apache Cordova. PhoneGap allows you to use standard web technologies such as HTML5, CSS3, and JavaScript for cross-platform development, avoiding each mobile platforms' native development language. Applications execute within wrappers targeted to each platform, and rely on standards-compliant API bindings to access each device's sensors, data, and network status.

Expo

It is a framework and a platform for universal React applications. It is a set of tools and services built around React Native and native platforms that help you develop, build, deploy, and quickly iterate on iOS, Android, and web apps.

Related Comparisons

RubyMotion vs Xamarin Forms: What are the differences?

## Introduction
In this markdown, we will explore the key differences between RubyMotion and Xamarin Forms.

1. **Language**: RubyMotion uses Ruby programming language for development, which is known for its simplicity and ease of use, while Xamarin Forms uses C# and .NET languages, providing a familiar environment for developers who are already well-versed in Microsoft technologies.

2. **Platform Support**: RubyMotion primarily targets iOS and macOS platforms, whereas Xamarin Forms allow developers to build applications for not only iOS and macOS but also Android, Windows, and even Web platforms, making it a more versatile solution for cross-platform development.

3. **Tooling**: RubyMotion comes with a more simplified toolset and development environment, focusing on the essentials required for iOS and macOS development, whereas Xamarin Forms offers a comprehensive set of tools and plugins, allowing developers to leverage a wide range of features and integrations for their multi-platform projects.

4. **Community and Ecosystem**: Xamarin Forms has a larger and more active community, providing extensive documentation, support forums, and third-party libraries, while RubyMotion has a smaller community with fewer resources and community-driven contributions, which may affect the availability of resources and support for developers.

5. **License and Pricing**: Xamarin Forms offers a free license option with limited features and capabilities, while providing paid subscriptions for access to advanced functionalities and support, whereas RubyMotion follows a different pricing model with a one-time payment for a perpetual license, offering a more straightforward approach without recurring fees.

6. **Performance and Optimization**: Xamarin Forms, being built around the .NET framework, may have better performance optimizations and integration with native platform APIs, leading to potentially faster and more efficient cross-platform applications compared to RubyMotion, which might rely more on Ruby abstractions and libraries.

RubyMotion vs Xamarin Forms

Overview