When considering technical platforms for enterprise mobility, Adam Sivell discusses why deploying a MEAP might be the best way to bypass the HTML5/native debate.
There is plenty of debate around whether to choose HTML5 (run in a browser) or native code (for example, Java or Objective C) as the tool of choice for mobile projects. As a proponent of a ‘horses for courses’ approach to mobility, I suggest it’s always sensible to start with the business/IT drivers and subsequent requirements before jumping into solution mode. Regardless, the debate on technical solutions will continue, and often it results in a summary like the following:
HTML5: The pros
- Portable across Operating Systems (OS)
- Only one coding skill set needed
HTML5: The cons
- Does not leverage every OS feature or API
- Performance is good – but not as fast as native
Native: The pros
- Leverage all OS features and APIs
- Fastest performance
Native: The cons
- Not portable across OS
- Multiple coding skill sets needed
Unfortunately, this either/or approach often leaves out what in my experience is a key component of enterprise mobile solutions – integration to the back-end systems. These days a student coder or a graphic artist can make some great looking screens in either HTML5 or native code. However a lot of enterprise mobile projects fail when it comes to business logic, data schema, synchronisation, and associated integration to the backend systems.
The third option that should be considered when deciding which path to take is a Mobile Enterprise Application Platform (MEAP). The beauty of a MEAP solution is it can leverage the advantages of both HTML5 and native, provide additional security and error handling, and incorporate strong integration to the back-end.
So what is a MEAP? According to Gartner/Wikipedia, a MEAP is “a comprehensive suite of products and services that enable development of mobile applications”. As you can see, the definition is fairly broad and there can be some distinct differences between providers. Some vendors offer a single product and others offer a collection of tools to achieve a mobile platform.
A MEAP is certainly not for everyone – there are likely to be licensing costs, a new skillset required, and enterprises will benefit most from a MEAP only if they intend on mobilising several back-end functions or business processes. Different MEAPs have different technical specifications, strengths, and weaknesses. As always, organisations should do due diligence and reference checks to evaluating a solution. Looking at the Gartner Magic Quadrant for Mobile Enterprise Application Platforms may provide some guidance, as well as evaluating how well the MEAP integrates with the required back-end systems.
A few years back, enterprise mobility was fully in the domain of Windows Mobile and there was no iOS or Android. In the not too distant future, the mobile computing landscape could look completely different. With new operating systems and input methods becoming the norm (Google Glasses anyone?), one of the key advantages of using a MEAP is hedging the risk of changes to the mobile landscape and technology.
MEAP: The pros
- Portable between Operating Systems
- Leverages all OS features
- Integration and Synchronisation benefits
- Security benefits
MEAP: The cons
- Licensing costs
- MEAP-specific learning
Adam Sivell is practice leader for mobility at Fujitsu Australia.
