This is the question that regions and health agencies ask themselves when they activate more services for their clients. At present, between the two schools of thought, there is no clear prevalence.
Anyone who thinks it’s better to have a single app is because he thinks it’s dispersive to have multiple apps on your smartphone. The idea is then to concentrate in a single app all the services that are available to the assisted. You start from a menu from which you can choose the function of interest to start the guided tour, which can be more or less complicated.
The proponents of this solution mention, among the advantages, the uniformity of the user interface and user experience, the same authentication mechanism, and the simplicity in installing and using a single app.
On the contrary, those who believe that it is better to release more apps support this opinion, remembering the philosophy of the apps and the reasons that have determined their success: easiness in understanding what they are used for; the simplicity of use; the speed of operation. After all, who is in favour of this approach says that people are confident in using more than one app: the contact app to search for a phone or an email; the calendar to view appointments; the email to access messages. So, for example, having an app to manage bookings and another one to access your reports is not so different. Thinking about a single app is, for them, reasoning in the “old way”, how they did before the phenomenon of smartphones and apps.
They also say that, even if you create several apps, you can still provide the same user experience and the same user interface.
Finally, there is one aspect to consider in this dispute. At present, the prevailing idea is to create closed ecosystems, whether they are accessible from one or more apps. But what would happen if, even in healthcare, regions and companies provided not only apps, but APIs open to developers with which to create new apps that offer the same services already available, perhaps better or new features? The paradigm of the only app would automatically fall.
And you, what do you think about it? One or more apps? Have your say!
I’m for splitting the big-appinyo a set of mini-apps, one for each major task, only if they are coherent as user interface and able to easily pass information among them.
The user will easily access the mini-app to perform the task, instead of using the main menu of the big-app.
And will have the opportunity to choose which mini-app to install, among a variety of apps on the same task that will be made available by different parties.