Fuse Studio

The world's first visual, real-time app development tool

#2 Product of the DayToday

Fuse Studio is a visual IDE that lets you write real production code without typing a single line.

Around the web

Reviews

 

Discussion

You need to become a Contributor to join the discussion - Find out how.
Bent Stamnes
Maker
@gloom303 · Real-time Graphics Enthusiast
Hi all! My name is Bent and I work at Fuse. Today I'm super-excited to share Fuse Studio and Fuse 1.0 with you all. We've been in beta for three years (wow, has it really been that long..?) building our platform, and finally we are able to announce the next iteration of app development tools built on Fuse. This is really a few announcements baked into one: 1) Fuse Studio, our next-generation visual desktop tool suite for making iOS and Android apps in real-time. 2) Fuse 1.0, our platform has finally reached 1.0 which is also out today, free for all users. 3) We're making our core libraries Open Source. This has been in flight for a long time, and finally we were able to make it happen (https://github.com/fusetools/fus...) I, and other members of the Fuse team, are here today to answer any and all questions you might have (and to have a small glass of celebratory bubbly :) Edit: I'm taking the liberty to add this description of the Fuse platform itself (that Fuse Studio sits on top of), for technical clarity and disambiguation. It's an important point that you do NOT need Fuse Studio or a paid plan to take advantage of Fuse as your app development platform: ---[ copy paste begins ]--- Fuse introduces UX Markup, a declarative-reactive XML-based language for creating native, responsive and smoothly animated interactive components for iOS and Android. UX is easy to learn, fun to write and incredibly powerful. UX Markup gives you unified access to the three most powerful UI technologies available in phones: each platform's native UI components, ultra-fast OpenGL-based rendering and flexible vector-based graphics, all wrapped in intuitive declarative abstractions. UX Markup compiles down to C++ for optimal native performance on mobile devices. Fuse is powered by Uno, a lightweight C# dialect that compiles to C++, and has seamless interoperability with Objective-C (iOS) and Java (Android) where needed. UX Markup components can be dropped into existing native apps, or used to build stand-alone cross-platform apps within Fuse by adding business logic in JavaScript. Fuse values non-verbosity, reactive programming, and expressiveness. Fuse strives to design the most intuitive APIs out there to make UX development accessible to all creatives. ---[ copy paste ends ]---
Pravil@pravilz
@gloom303 Congratulations on the launch 👏👏. I have a basic question though. I am not a developer but interested in making a basic Android app. Can I play around with existing templates and create a 2-3 page app by editing some existing code?
Bent Stamnes
Maker
@gloom303 · Real-time Graphics Enthusiast
@pravilz Thanks Pravil! You can play around, but I'm going to break your heart here a little and say no; you can't make an app by stitching together already written code (either from our examples or elsewhere). Making an app requires coding — always have, always will. :) Now: we make a point that the _amount_ of code you need and the _complexity_ of it is greatly reduced when you use Fuse, but we're also clear on not being a drag'n'drop "app maker". Those things seem appealing on the surface but they don't work very well. It's a little like expecting to use a Wordpress template and some plugins to put together a functioning and beautiful website — it's practically impossible. But: if you want to dip your feet in, I'd recommend taking a look at our Getting Started-tutorial to see how you feel about it: https://www.fusetools.com/docs/t...
Nick Smith@nicksmithr
@gloom303 @pravilz I'd add on to this to say that I've looked at Fuse for about an hour, and it's by far the friendliest and most achievable framework (IMO) to develop an app. @pravilz I'd go ahead through the awesome tutorial Bent mentioned, and also take a look on Fuse's GitHub for further examples. Even if you aren't a seasoned developer, I would say Fuse won't take you long to get your head around.
Alex @tpbtv
@pravilz great question!
Leonid@nleonid
Great! Congratulations! Fuse Studio — only available for teams, from $104 in month? Not good price for a designer who want just prototyping applications without sending them to stores :(
Bent Stamnes
Maker
@gloom303 · Real-time Graphics Enthusiast
@nleonid I totally get that — thankfully Fuse 1.0 remains free and better than ever (has the same real-time desktop preview engine for both Windows and macOS, uses the same descriptive UX Markup language, and lets you deploy without cost to both iOS and Android like you're used to). Fuse Studio is meant for people who want or need extra tooling on top, and is indeed our premium offering (the Fuse Professional plan doesn't just include Fuse Studio, but also premium components, Xcode and Android Studio library export support, multiple viewports and more). It's definitely not just for teams either, it's just _more suited_ if you work together with others. There's a 30-day free trial of Fuse Studio too, so check it out and see if you'll do more than well enough with regular Fuse.
Lars Kwiatkowski@lars_kwiatkowski
@gloom303 @nleonid Hi Brent, congrats from me also. At the first view, it seems, that designers like Leonid are your target group. Every company has developers and mostly no need for visual development, because developers have their tools and routines already. I think, you are missing the target, if you provide studio only to the professional plan. You really should think about offering an indie plan, which includes Studio also. for example for 20$/mo and a limitation in app downloads or monthly app income. @nleonid you are totally right. I am in the same boat. And for a lot of other indies this will be a deal breaker.
Bent Stamnes
Maker
@gloom303 · Real-time Graphics Enthusiast
@lars_kwiatkowski @nleonid Thanks for the feedback, we'll definitely take that into account moving forward! We deliberately didn't want to include any kind of limitations on what you can make with Fuse (or Fuse Studio) — stuff like making it incredibly expensive if you have many users / start making money, or making the experience crippled in some way just feels wrong to us.
Lars Kwiatkowski@lars_kwiatkowski
@gloom303 @nleonid Just to give you an example about working payment plans. The well known company Adobe has a plan for a single application for around 20$/mo. the whole package costs around 50$/mo and offers a huge package of applications. Pinegrow (a really great visual web editor) costs 99$/year. Sketch 99$/year. You see the differences?
Lars Kwiatkowski@lars_kwiatkowski
@gloom303 @nleonid thanks for your answer. I will test the 30 days. after this, hopefully you woke up :D I really wish you a big success. Because Fuse always looked great to me...
Bent Stamnes
Maker
@gloom303 · Real-time Graphics Enthusiast
@lars_kwiatkowski @nleonid Totally, but I would compare Fuse to something like Unity. If you call Fuse "Unity for Apps", it's a pretty comparable technical situation: both provide a tool and a deep tech stack for a specific purpose. Unity's Professional plan starts at $125/month. Or take something like Appcelerator (hybrid apps framework), which provides professional plans and services, which start at $99/month. So those are comparisons I feel more comfortable with. I completely get the point that Fuse Studio is out of reach for many, price-wise, which is why Fuse itself remains free (and now the core libraries are Open Source as well). One way to think of Fuse Studio is this: it's Fuse's own UX Markup editor that we charge for — but that's not going to be the only UX Markup editor out there in the future, for sure. :)
Lars Kwiatkowski@lars_kwiatkowski
@gloom303 @nleonid yes, this is, what I expected - a visual editor for Fuse Markup, which brings me back to the point, that this seems to be mainly for designers. For designers with their visual thinking, it can be hard to understand even an easy language such as Fuse Markup or HTML. And a huge amount of designers are freelancers which already have to pay 2-5 payment plans. So the main benefit of Fuse Tools seems to be not made for the main target group? For a company who can afford that, the other extra features such xcode & android integration and premium components are more the selling point than the Studio IDE. You mentioned Unity. Unity for itself is free in the standard version, I don´t know about the payment plan, but I know their visual development platform Playmaker which is available for 60$ ... If you compare unity and fuse, you should compare Playmaker and Fuse Studio :)
Bent Stamnes
Maker
@gloom303 · Real-time Graphics Enthusiast
@lars_kwiatkowski @nleonid To go with that analogy, I'd say that the primary users of something like Chrome Developer Tools are indeed developers looking to identify issues with their code that express themselves visually. In the same way you can view Fuse Studio as a tool that aids in the same way. It's not meant to do drag'n'drop composition of apps, but fit in later in the app design/development pipeline. As for Unity (I don't think they have a product called Playmaker), the natural comparison would be Unity Professional which retails at $125/month (https://store.unity.com/configur...). But we could probably go on with this for a while. :) Needless to say: we recognize that the price might be too high for some, but that it might originate from us not describing clearly enough who Fuse Studio is meant for. Fuse remains free :)
Lars Kwiatkowski@lars_kwiatkowski
@gloom303 @nleonid good to hear. And this is playmaker. I have it, I love it: http://www.hutonggames.com/
Bent Stamnes
Maker
@gloom303 · Real-time Graphics Enthusiast
@lars_kwiatkowski Oh right, so it's a 3rd party tool — I was under the impression it was a Unity product, my bad. :)
Lars Kwiatkowski@lars_kwiatkowski
@gloom303 :D yes, true... But not to ignore, that Unity has a PLUS payment plan which is 35$ per month... That´s comparable to what I was asking for in my first comment.
Bent Stamnes
Maker
@gloom303 · Real-time Graphics Enthusiast
@lars_kwiatkowski They do indeed, and we're exploring something like that too, but remember this: Unity had been in business for 11 years before they announced their Plus plan (something that happened less than a year ago). Comparatively, Fuse has had a commercial product available for less than half a day — give us a minute to get our bearings. ;)
DanielHiring@intothemild · Full Stack Idiot
Congrats guys!!! I've been loving Fuse for the last year and a bit, and it's amazing to see you finally come out of beta! Terrific framework!!!
Bent Stamnes
Maker
@gloom303 · Real-time Graphics Enthusiast
@intothemild Hey Daniel, that's lovely to hear! :)
Noah Kim@wuss · Blakbits.com in progress ▓▓▓▓▓▓░░ 80%
I agree with all the pricing comments. I think if you approach it from the functional angle, there's an argument to charge 100+/month. But as many of the comments point out, if you approach it from the "who are you targeting to actually pay for it" angle, the 100/month doesn't feel great. This is squarely targeted at coding-as-a-2nd/3rd-discipline people (primarily designers), in an indie use case. It's actually pretty hard to monetize even just $100/month from an app just to break even and justify the cost. At $20-$30, an indie designer could financially justify keeping the app alive for at least several months to give the app a fighting chance for some resemblance of traction. Going to go out on a limb and guess here, but I'm thinking you'll also get a lot more people signing up and forgetting/not caring to cancel at the 20-30 price point, vs. people completely dismissing it at $100.
Bent Stamnes
Maker
@gloom303 · Real-time Graphics Enthusiast
@wuss Thanks for your comments — a lot of this we have definitely discussed a lot internally. As for the target audience of Fuse Professional, our most active users are not at all "coding-as-a-2nd/3rd-discipline-people", but rather professional developers and teams of creatives working together on projects or who are simply trying to cut down their time-to-market. You are right that making money on apps is difficult (very difficult), which is also why the regular Fuse offering is for those audiences. Fuse Professional (including Fuse Studio) is not geared towards indie developers struggling to make ends meet, but rather agencies, larger teams and yes — freelancers with sustainable recurring revenue. This is our first commercial product we are releasing, with more to come, and while I cannot guarantee anything at this time, we're definitely interested in being able to provide even more app development products to the price-sentitive market. For now, however, we are targeting the premium market with the Professional package (like Unity does with theirs, as an example).
Noah Kim@wuss · Blakbits.com in progress ▓▓▓▓▓▓░░ 80%
@gloom303 Thanks for the thoughtful reply. If your bread and butter customer base is made up of primarily agencies and full-time freelancers (i.e. not self-starters), then it would seem offering the full package but with publishing limits wouldn't effect your bottom line, and only potentially increase the indie market. While all these pricing comments may seem really whiny, what we're all really saying is "WE WANT TO USE IT", but it's just slightly out of reach. :)
Bent Stamnes
Maker
@gloom303 · Real-time Graphics Enthusiast
@wuss Haha, yeah — I totally get it, no worries :) Yeah, we definitely want to make it more accessible, but we're starting by targeting a market we know and will take it from there. I should mention that we're sending out discount codes to tens of thousands of users who have been part of our awesome community so far too, making it far more accessible, for this exact reason.
ra͜m@ramganesh
Looks like a great tool for designers... But priced for enterprise devs who will not touch a WYSIWYG tool no matter how good (they are paid big bucks for their programming skills) Not many dev will say I used a drag and drop tool to do this app. This app is perfect for UX designers but it expects them to code, while giving a visual tool for programmers🤔🤔 something wrong with that picture. But tool looks fantastic.. good luck!!
Bent Stamnes
Maker
@gloom303 · Real-time Graphics Enthusiast
@ramganesh Thanks for your comment! Fuse Studio is actually not a WYSIWYG or "drag and drop" tool for designers. I’ll elaborate on why though: There is simply no way to build a WYSIWYG tool for building apps (*that works well*). Many have tried, but they have all failed. We believe that they have failed because the _idea_ of dragging and dropping and inspecting elements to put together an _actual_ mobile app is deeply flawed. App development consists of so much more and is incredibly complex, so the format of a WYSIWYG design environment simply doesn’t fit the problem it's trying to solve. A fundamental pain point in mobile app development is the waterfall-based process, where an app is first designed, then prototyped, and then handed over to development for implementation on each platform. This leads to a disconnect between the design process and the actual end product, making it hard to iterate and improve on the end-to-end user experience. Because of this, nuances in design, animation and look and feel tend to be the first things to go out the window when resources are scarce. Fuse instead offers an integrated workflow where design and development can happen continuously on the same code base and within the same tool suite. This allows fast, direct iterations on the actual end product running on real devices and with real data, and frequent real-world user testing. Fuse can be used to build full production apps, components for use in existing native apps, or high fidelity rapid prototyping with a sliding transition from prototype to production. So Fuse (and Fuse Studio) exists to bridge that gap. Though I can understand why it might at first glance look like a WYSIWYG editor. :)