Technology | Security | Making

PhoneGap: the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

tags: +android +mobile +phonegap

Having recently completed my first PhoneGap application, I wanted to take a moment to summarize my experience. What follows are my opinions regarding “The Good”, “The Bad”, and “The Ugly” of the PhoneGap framework.

The Good

The Vision

The PhoneGap team’s stated purpose is to promote the use of open standards like HTML5 for application development, such that the need for the PhoneGap framework itself would eventually disappear. I personally think that’s a worthy goal, and support it.

Using Web Technologies for App Development

One of PhoneGap’s principal selling points is that it allows web developers to create mobile applications. A web developer (with no mobile experience) should allegedly be able to jump into PhoneGap and quickly bang out an application without being subject to a steep learning curve.

While I personally had some mobile experience before undertaking my newly-released project, I won’t claim to have had a lot. And with that said, I felt like PhoneGap lived up to its promise. With few exceptions, I didn’t find writing a PhoneGap app to be much different from writing a typical web application. I was able to hack out a “Hello World” type app only moments after getting the dependencies installed, and even did most of my development directly within a browser like I normally would.

Cross-Device Compatibility

PhoneGap also claims to make it easier to develop for multiple platforms and devices by abstracting away much of the complexity that would normally entail. While I tailored my application strictly to Android (wanting nothing to do with Apple’s nightmare of a publishing process), I have yet to discover a single cross-device bug in testing.

I don’t have a strong basis of comparison for cross-device bugs between a PhoneGap app and an app coded the traditional way (though I’ve heard horror stories), but at the very least, I can say that PhoneGap did not disappoint me. I only had to write my application “once”, and it functioned fine on all devices tested.

Short API Learning-curve

Provided that you’re already a proficient client-side programmer (skilled with HTML5, CSS3, JavaScript, and Responsive Design), the PhoneGap API itself is simple to learn. It struck me as being well-conceived and well-structured, and feels natural and idiomatic to JavaScript.

Good API Documentation

I thought that the PhoneGap API documentation was clearly structured and well-written, and provided helpful code samples. It was also relatively brief, which I consider to be a feature.

The Bad

Out-of-Date Documentation

While PhoneGap’s API documentation was well-written, most of its other documentation was not. I had a particularly rough time tracking down information on what the many default project files did, including build.xml, everything in the res directory, and the required (I think?) assets/www/cordova.js. While the API documentation covers how to structure your resources within assets/www (mostly), I could find virtually no documentation on any of the other files that ship with a default project.

Worse than a lack of available documentation, though, was that there seemed to be a huge amount of misinformation out there as well. While I’m glad that PhoneGap is being aggressively developed, it seems that many of its recent changes have been backwards-incompatible, and that the documentation that applies to earlier versions of PhoneGap (though version numbers are infrequently specified in the documentation) does not necessarily apply to the current build at any given time. This is true not only on third-party sites over which the PhoneGap team would have no direct control (like Stack Overflow and such), but also through the official PhoneGap channels. Naturally, I found this to be frustrating and counter-productive.

Blurry Distinctions between PhoneGap and Cordova

Sometime around when Adobe acquired Nitobi, Nitobi open-sourced the “engine” of PhoneGap to the Apache Foundation as a project named “Cordova”. While I applaud them for open-sourcing their framework, this move has led to some very confusing documentation. (See the comments.)

For starters, “PhoneGap” ships with “Cordova”. (All of PhoneGap’s compilation assets live in cordova). That raises the question, though: where does Cordova end and PhoneGap begin? Does one entail the other? Does one contain the other? And what does the distinction between the two have to do with the myriad files mentioned above whose purpose I could never determine?

The documentation seemingly uses the terms “PhoneGap” and “Cordova” interchangeably, which was unhelpful to the point that I frequently didn’t even know which product I was using, let alone if the documentation I was reading was appropriate for the current release.

Insufficient Abstraction

I was disappointed with the far-from-perfect job that PhoneGap did with abstracting away implementation details for each platform, and I was surprised by how many Android assets lived directly within my project’s root. Given that my project was built for Android only, I fear that this problem scales linearly with the number of different platforms an app is trying to support.

At its worst, PhoneGap felt like it was adding layers of technical complexity to my project, rather than subtracting them through abstraction. I had to learn far more about Android programming than I anticipated, given that the purpose of the framework was to abstract away those details.


The graphical performance of my application didn’t live up to my expectations either. My app is essentially just a timer, which is about as simple as an app can get. And yet, at times its interface (implemented in jQuery Mobile) feels laggy and unresponsive. This is not a huge problem for an application like mine, but I could see it being a major problem for an app that requires more user interaction.

(The sluggish UI is admittedly not a fault of the PhoneGap project itself, but it was an unpleasant surprise that made me question whether its fundamental strategy - wrapping a web application in a single-purpose browser in order to make it appear native - was a good one.)

The Ugly

PhoneGap Build

The absolute worst thing about PhoneGap - without question - is its build system.

The PhoneGap team seems to expect you to use PhoneGap Build to compile your applications for deployment. I have two major problems with PhoneGap Build, though:

  1. I think its pricing model is just plain stupid. Why would I want to subscribe to a build service for $9.99 per month when I’m just trying to compile an application once? (One that I intend to give away for free, no less?)

  2. Worse: it only allows you to upload your web assets (those that live in assets/www) during the compilation process. The PhoneGap team is giving itself too much credit here if they think that’s going to work for everyone, because I had to modify some of the Android assets (that lived elsewhere) in order to get my app to function as desired. This means that PhoneGap Build would never be able to successfully compile my application, period.

So what if you’re trying to compile your application without using PhoneGap Build? You’re shit out of luck - that’s what. I couldn’t find documentation anywhere describing how to do this, and eventually ended up having to dig through the Cordova (or is it PhoneGap?) code to see how it worked “under the hood” when it compiled debug APKs. From there, I had to rely on the Android SDK documentation to implement my own build/sign/align tool so that I could actually publish the app.

I personally found those omissions in the documentation to be glaring, and bad-form on PhoneGap’s part. While I understand that PhoneGap Build is likely central to PhoneGap’s business model, I feel they should have made at least some effort to explain how to package your application without it - especially given that PhoneGap Build is essentially broken.

Concluding Thoughts

Despite my objections above, my overall experience with PhoneGap was generally positive, and I would consider using it again for another project. With that said, though, it did not turn out to be the silver-bullet that I had hoped it would be, and I am considering writing my next app in plain Java. We’ll see which approach turns out to be better.