HTML5’s pros and cons compared to native app development

Pros –

• Supports multimedia without plugin - It is the first version to support multimedia without plugins and has the ability to be “understood” by all computers and devices.
• HTML5 web apps can be accessed on any device via a web browser - Much like a mobile website.
  
  These web apps also provide the capability for offline access and usage via application cache, meaning you don’t have to have a network connection to use them.
• Single web app rather than multiple native apps - Some have predicted the impending demise of the native app.
• Ability to bypass app stores – This presents an additional advantage for companies that use mobile apps to engage consumers in purchase transactions.
• Makes things easier - HTML 5 is aimed at making things easier to build search front-ends, wikis, real-time chat, drag-and-drop tools, discussion boards and many other modern web elements into any site, and have them work more efficiently.

 Cons –

• Security issues - HTML5 web apps are set up in a way that ultra-savvy users could tamper with processing scripts, which might allow unauthorized access. Variables could be altered in a way that would allow hackers to access perks, discounts, etc. for which they really aren’t eligible.
• Functionality does not rival that of a native app (not yet anyway) - Most say that it’s pretty good, but it’s no native app.  It will be a while yet before web apps can offer the speed and features of a native app.  It’s important to remember that consumers use native apps because they’re easy, fast and convenient. Also, better integration with hardware and other apps.
• You lose the marketing benefits of being featured in app stores -  If you are a smaller company, new and potential customers are probably more likely to find you if you’re featured in an app store.

Strategic decision-makers for successful apps should weigh the importance of the following:

1. User experience
2. Performance
3. Monetization
4. Cross platform deployment costs
5. Fragmentation
6. Availability of programming expertise
7. Importance of immediate updates and distribution control
8. Timeliness of new OS innovations
9. Security

When does using HTML5 make sense?

The short answer: When the information is always updating; you don’t want Apple or Google as intermediaries, or if the user doesn't want to download an application.

Note: Above comparison may not hold true for hybrid container-based apps that run in a native shell 

Dojo vs jQuery Mobile: Quick Comparison

Both jQuery and DOJO are JavaScript Development Frameworks/Packages that provide functions to make the writing of JavaScript code easier, faster and more efficient. jQuery normalize things across browsers and serves as a great way of doing DOM manipulation. Dojo is a more on comprehensive toolkit which helps developers to build superior desktop and mobile web experiences.

Advantages of jQuery:

• Fast
• Well documented
• Easy to use
• Chaining
• Easy-to-use Ajax
• Nice event handlers
• CSS selectors
• Small (only 30 KB)
• Nice little built-in effects.
• Plugins

Advantages of Dojo:

• OOP (and other paradigms).
• Widget infrastructure.
• Modules done right with all necessary goodies:
• Lazy loading of modules dynamically.
• Asynchronous loading of modules if desired.
• Simple integration with CDNs (content delivery networks) for heavy-duty web applications.
• Sheer breadth of available modules in DojoX including graphics, charting, grids, and so on.
• Attention to details in widgets:
• Support for i18n (including LTR and RTL languages),
• Support for l10n (including standard date, currency, number formatting),
• Provisions for people with special needs (automatic high-contrast mode, keyboard-only support, and so on).

Deciding right tool for a project depends a lot on complexity of the application, scalability, DB/Web Service dependencies, current skill set, etc. jQuery offers little guidance on how to structure your codebase, how to ensure that everything you need is loaded, or how to build your code into production-ready files. Dojo really shines here, but again, it takes a bit of getting used to.

Personally, I think Dojo's lack of good documentation/reference code, lack of 'marketing', and relative complexity keep it from becoming popular. Documentation is a whole lot harder to use than jQuery’s because, at first glance, it’s quite a bit more scattered and substantially more API-based than task-based. It's much easier to get started with library like jQuery because of all these factors. However, once you get over that initial steep learning curve, Dojo is good!

References: 

http://dojotoolkit.org/

http://jquery.com/

http://rmurphey.com/blog/2009/11/12/dojo-confessions-or-how-i-gave-up-my-jquery-security-blanket-and-lived-to-tell-the-tale/

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4390831

http://stackoverflow.com/questions/394601/which-javascript-framework-jquery-vs-dojo-vs

Speed comparison of JavaScript charting libraries

Choosing a charting component for any organization is a complex task because the selection will have to be made considering both the present and future needs of the organization. It requires a careful evaluation of requirements.

In this section, I have compared some of the popular charting components suitable for hybrid app development –

S No	Description	Charts	Advantage	Remark/Comment
1	Using <div> tag as placeholder for charts helps developer to adjust height/width eaisly into the HTML page	amCharts	✓	Uses <div> tag
		Highcharts	✓	Uses <div> tag
		RGraph		Uses <canvas> tag
		Flot	✓	Uses <div> tag
		ZingCharts		Uses <canvas> tag
2	<div> tag is supported by all browsers whaeras <canvas> is a new HTML standard.	amCharts	✓	All browser support
		Highcharts	✓	All browser support
		RGraph		Only supported by HTML5 compliance browsers
		Flot	✓	All browser support
		ZingCharts		Only supported by HTML5 compliance browsers
3	SVG scene graph is a old and stable way to represent graph/chart. SVG is like a "draw" program whereas HTML5 is a "paint" program and is a new concept.	amCharts	✓	Uses SVG scene graph
		Highcharts	✓	Uses SVG scene graph
		RGraph		Uses HTML5 Canvas
		Flot		Unknown
		ZingCharts		Uses HTML5 Canvas
4	Can eaisly change according to the landscape/potrait orientation of the device.	amCharts	✓
		Highcharts	✓
		RGraph		Difficult to achieve this functionality in RGraph
		Flot
		ZingCharts
5	Enables event handlers to be associated with objects	amCharts	✓
		Highcharts	✓
		RGraph		Not possible
		Flot		Unknown
		ZingCharts		Unknown
6	Includes meter charts	amCharts		Meter charts not supported
		Highcharts	✓
		RGraph	✓
		Flot		Meter charts not supported
		ZingCharts		Unknown
7	High quality.Nice visually.	amCharts	✓
		Highcharts
		RGraph
		Flot
		ZingCharts	✓
8	3D Charts	amCharts	✓
		Highcharts
		RGraph
		Flot
		ZingCharts	✓
9	Good Documentation and Online Support	amCharts	✓
		Highcharts	✓
		RGraph	✓
		Flot		Limited Support & documentation
		ZingCharts	✓
10	Build chart online with the help of Chart builder	amCharts
		Highcharts
		RGraph
		Flot
		ZingCharts	✓	http://www.zingchart.com/builder/

From the above comparisons it is quite obvious that each charting tool has its pros and cons. But, as per my view there is a competition between Highcharts and amCharts.

When I started with charting I found amCharts to be more documented and user friendly than Highchart, but if you check on the net, there is huge fan base for Highchart!

Think twice if you want meter charts, amCharts do not support meter charts and is a big disadvantage in this area. If you are looking for visuals, amCharts are smooth and nice with 3D chart support.

Reference links -
https://developers.google.com/chart/interactive/docs/gallery/controls#programmatic_change
http://bimeanalytics.com/blog/which-chart/