Straight answers about which technology to pick.
We build in both sides of every comparison here, which is the only honest basis for writing one. Each gives each option a real case — good enough that you could act on it and never speak to us.
Pick the decision you're facing
Each page opens with the answer in one paragraph, then shows the working: when each option wins, the differences that actually matter, and the caveat most comparisons leave out.
Showing 7 of 7 comparisons
React Native vs Flutter: which should you build in?
Choose React Native if your team already writes React or you want the largest hiring pool; choose Flutter if the interface is heavily custom, animation-dense or game-like, or the design must be pixel-identical on both platforms. For a typical app of screens, forms and an API, either produces a good result in a similar timeframe and no user could tell which you used.
Read the comparisonWordPress vs Next.js: which is right for your site?
Stay on WordPress if non-technical people publish and restructure content regularly and mature plugins already cover what you need. Build in Next.js if it is a product rather than a set of pages, or if performance, custom design or a small security surface are commercially material. Running WordPress headless behind a Next.js front end is a real third option, not a compromise.
Read the comparisonFirebase vs Supabase: which backend should you build on?
Choose Supabase if your data has real relationships and you want SQL, reviewable migrations and the ability to take the database elsewhere. Choose Firebase if your app is mobile-first and needs offline-first sync, your data is document-shaped, or you are already inside Google Cloud. For a new product with structured data, Supabase is our default; for offline-heavy mobile, Firebase is still the stronger answer.
Read the comparisonNative vs Cross-platform: do you need Swift and Kotlin?
Build cross-platform unless you have a specific reason not to: for the overwhelming majority of business apps it produces the same product for roughly half the build effort and one team instead of two. Go native when the app is built around a platform capability at the edge of what is exposed — sustained camera or audio processing, deep OS integration, complex background behaviour — or when a large in-house team already works that way.
Read the comparisonChatbot vs Agent: which does your business need?
Build a chatbot if the job is answering questions from information you already have — it is cheaper, faster to ship and its worst failure is a wrong answer. Build an agent if the value is in the system doing something on your behalf: booking, updating records, moving work between tools. An agent needs permissions, an audit trail and a human checkpoint on anything irreversible, and that governance is most of the real cost.
Read the comparisonRAG vs Fine-tuning: how do you make an AI know your business?
Use retrieval-augmented generation when the model needs to know things — your documents, policies, products, prices — because the knowledge stays outside the model, updates the moment the source does, and can cite where an answer came from. Use fine-tuning when the model needs to behave a particular way: a house format, a specialist tone, a rigid output structure. Facts are a retrieval problem; style is a fine-tuning problem, and confusing the two is the most expensive mistake in this area.
Read the comparisonWeb app vs Mobile app: which should you build first?
Build the web app first unless your product needs something only a phone can do — camera, location in the background, offline use, push notifications, or a place on the home screen people return to daily. A web app is one build, reaches anyone with a link, and updates the moment you deploy. The strongest argument for a mobile app is habit: if the product has to be opened repeatedly without being remembered, that icon is the product.
Read the comparisonHow these are written
A technology comparison written by the company selling one of the options is worth nothing unless it is constrained. These are the three constraints.
We build in both
No comparison goes up unless we have shipped production work in each option. That is what separates a recommendation from a preference dressed as analysis.
Both sides get a real case
Each option gets a genuine "pick this one if" section, written well enough to act on. When the honest answer is the option we build in less often, the page says so.
No invented numbers
No benchmarks we did not run, no market share percentages, no "three times faster". Those figures move, and a stale number in a quotable page is worse than none.