ABBYY Mobile Web Capture vs. Flutter by Google

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
ABBYY Mobile Web Capture
Score 0.0 out of 10
N/A
ABBYY Mobile Web Capture is an SDK that helps users create smooth customer self-service experiences with automatic data capture within a mobile app, providing real-time recognition and capturing photos of documents for back-end processing.N/A
Flutter
Score 8.1 out of 10
N/A
Flutter is an open-source mobile application development framework created by Google. It is used to develop applications for Android and iOS, as well as being the primary method of creating applications for Google Fuchsia.N/A
Pricing
ABBYY Mobile Web CaptureFlutter by Google
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
ABBYY Mobile Web CaptureFlutter
Free Trial
NoNo
Free/Freemium Version
NoYes
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
ABBYY Mobile Web CaptureFlutter by Google
User Ratings
ABBYY Mobile Web CaptureFlutter by Google
Likelihood to Recommend
-
(0 ratings)
7.9
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
ABBYY Mobile Web CaptureFlutter by Google
Likelihood to Recommend
No answers on this topic
Flutter is well known for native app development, if you have android studio installed on your system, you can quickly start using it. This might not be the best choice for you if you do not wish to learn a new language, i.e. Dart and you do not know it already.
Read full review
Pros
No answers on this topic
  • It is powered by Google, so a great technical community is backing it.
  • The development of native apps is an easy process using Flutter.
  • As it is an open-source tool, we can use it without paying anything.
  • It provides nice UI options.
Read full review
Cons
No answers on this topic
  • Occasionally updates to the Flutter SDK result in wide-sweeping changes that seem to not be thoroughly tested and considered. Flutter sometimes evolves too fast for its own good.
  • While the 3rd-party Flutter package ecosystem is vast and rich, 1st-party support for basic things (audio/video playback, battery information, Bluetooth services, etc.) are lacking. You are occasionally forced to rely on an open-source package for use-cases that other platforms have native support for.
  • Documentation, particularly around testing, is lacking. While there are some great docs, like the Dart Style Guide, many Flutter-focused support documents are lacking in quality and real-world usability.
  • Flutter allows you to architect an app however you want. While this is a great feature, it also adds complexity and leads to the current state of Flutter's state management, where there are 50+ options on how to organize your app, with very little official guidance or recommendations from the Flutter team. For a beginner, this can create decision paralysis.
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
No answers on this topic
I have experience with react and React Native. I would say that the idea behind all those frameworks are quite similar. However, I found the javascript-based frameworks a bit more accessible as you could utilise your javascript knowledge. Here, Flutter works with its own language. This has advantages and disadvantages sometimes. I found the community around javascript frameworks bigger and therefore sometimes more helpful. However, Flutter does a good job here as well. I think the main argument for Flutter is its usability for less experienced developers. If you do not have knowledge in javascript or other programming languages then I think it is much easier to start with Flutter than with another framework like react. I think the package that you get form scratch is better than in the other frameworks were you have to set up and learn a lot more before you can start.
Read full review
Return on Investment
No answers on this topic
  • The rapid development capabilities of Flutter allow us to build apps we could not have previously considered commercially viable, opening new revenue streams.
  • Free and open licensing made adoption very easy (ie. free/low cost!).
  • In comparison to Qt, our time spent arguing with build tools and perfecting development environments has decreased substantially.
Read full review
ScreenShots