Is there a reason why the term “multiplatform” was...

# multiplatform

[Sam Stone]

Is there a reason why the term “multiplatform” was chosen over “cross-platform”?

[jw]

I don't think there's a crystal-clear, canonical distinction between the two terms.

In general I think cross-platform is used for something that is built once and runs across multiple platforms, like say JS code or something that runs on the JVM.

Whereas multiplatform is something that can be built directly for multiple platforms, such as linux ARM for linux, macOS ARM for macs, etc. The latter also includes JS, JVM, WASM, and Android (which from Kotlin's perspective is still JVM) which are themselves cross-platform targets.

[darkmoon_uk]

It may also have been chosen in the awareness that Kotlin currently has most uptake in the Mobile space, in which the term 'cross-platform' might be taken to mean only iOS/Android. Multi-platform implies more than two, encouraging developers to look beyond that assumption.

[McEna]

At this point, cross-platform is a loaded term. Every tool and framework described as "cross-platform" meant to replace the platform specific kits with foreign languages, tools and patterns. Kotlin attempts to integrate with the platform specific languages instead, so sharing the "cross-platform" name would have hurt their brand.

[darkmoon_uk]

I agree @McEna; depending on who you ask, cross-platform can be a bit of a swear word in the mobile space. It was a smart decision to avoid that.

[Sam Stone]

Flutter also calls itself "a... framework...for building...natively compiled, multi-platform applications from a single codebase" - https://flutter.dev. Except it uses a VM, unlike Kotlin.