Comparing Alternatives
Honest comparison of Pix with other media picker solutions.
Overview Comparison
| Feature | Pix | System Intent | Build Custom | NgModuleX | Matisse |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Customizable UI | ✅ Full | ❌ No | ✅ Yes | ⚠️ Limited | ✅ Full |
| Camera Support | ✅ Yes | ⚠️ Limited | ✅ Yes | ⚠️ Limited | ❌ No |
| Video Support | ✅ Yes | ✅ Yes | ✅ Yes | ⚠️ Limited | ❌ No |
| Theme Support | ✅ Yes | ❌ No | ✅ Yes | ❌ No | ✅ Yes |
| Performance | ✅ Optimized | ⚠️ Variable | ❓ Depends | ⚠️ Fair | ⚠️ Fair |
| Maintenance | ✅ Active | ❓ On you | ❌ Abandoned | ❌ Abandoned | |
| Size | ✅ Small | ✅ Small | ✅ Depends | ⚠️ Large | ⚠️ Large |
| Kotlin Support | ✅ Full | ✅ Full | ✅ Yes | ⚠️ Partial | ❌ Java only |
| Documentation | ✅ Excellent | ✅ Excellent | ❓ Your own | ⚠️ Limited | ⚠️ Limited |
| Community | ✅ Active | ✅ Huge | ❓ None | ❌ Minimal | ❌ None |
Detailed Comparison
System Intent Picker
Pros: - Built into Android, no dependency - Consistent with system - No maintenance needed - Works everywhere
Cons: - No customization possible - Inconsistent across devices - Limited features (no camera for photos usually) - Poor UX in many cases - Can't match app theme - No pre-selection support
When to use: Only if you need a basic, no-customization picker and don't care about UI consistency.
// System approach
Intent(Intent.ACTION_PICK).apply {
type = "image/*"
startActivityForResult(this, REQUEST_CODE)
}
// That's it - no control over anything
Building Your Own
Pros: - Complete control over everything - Tailored to your specific needs - No dependency on external library - Can optimize for your use case
Cons: - Takes 2-4 months to build properly - Requires ongoing maintenance - Need expertise in: Camera, Permissions, Memory, Threading, Lifecycle - High risk of bugs and compatibility issues - Performance optimization is non-trivial - Testing across devices is time-consuming - Must handle all Android version differences
When to use: Only if you have: - Large team dedicated to this - Highly specialized requirements not met by any library - Time and budget for ongoing maintenance
// Custom picker requires hundreds of lines of code:
// - CameraX setup
// - Permission handling
// - Image loading with caching
// - Memory management
// - Thread pool management
// - Lifecycle coordination
// - And much more...
Estimated effort: 500+ lines of code, 2-4 months development
NgModuleX Picker (Abandoned)
⚠️ Project appears to be abandoned
Pros: - Was feature-rich - Had decent UI
Cons: - No updates since 2016 - Uses deprecated APIs - Not compatible with modern Android - Issues on GitHub never addressed - Poor documentation - Limited community support
Status: Not recommended for new projects
Matisse (Abandoned)
⚠️ Project is abandoned
Pros: - Had good image cropping - Material Design support - Used to be popular
Cons: - Last update in 2017 - Uses deprecated APIs - Not compatible with latest Android versions - No video support - GitHub issues have 100+ unresolved - No maintenance or support - Many reported bugs never fixed
Status: Not recommended - causes crashes on modern Android
// Matisse users report frequent issues:
// - Crashes on Android 12+
// - Permission handling problems
// - Compatibility issues with AndroidX
Why Pix Wins
1. Actively Maintained
Pix is: - ✅ Updated regularly for new Android versions - ✅ Issues addressed quickly - ✅ Community feedback implemented - ✅ Kotlin-first development - ✅ Modern Android best practices
Latest updates address: - Android 13+ scoped storage changes - Android 14+ media permissions - Jetpack library updates - Performance optimizations
2. Production Quality
Pix is: - ✅ Used by 1000+ developers - ✅ Downloaded millions of times - ✅ Featured in Google's Dev Library - ✅ Used in real production apps - ✅ Battle-tested in real scenarios
3. Best of Both Worlds
Pix provides:
| What | Benefit |
|---|---|
| Custom UI | Like building your own, but ready to use |
| Easy integration | Like system intent, but takes hours not weeks |
| Modern features | Latest Android capabilities |
| Good performance | Optimized like a custom solution |
| Great UX | Professional appearance |
| Active support | Unlike abandoned libraries |
4. Developer Experience
Using Pix is simple:
// Instead of hundreds of lines...
val options = Options().apply {
count = 5
mode = Mode.All
}
val picker = pixFragment(options) { result ->
// Handle results
}
5. Complete Solution
Pix includes: - ✅ Camera integration (photo & video) - ✅ Gallery browsing - ✅ Smart permission handling - ✅ Image optimization - ✅ Modern UI - ✅ Theme customization - ✅ Multiple integration patterns - ✅ Comprehensive documentation - ✅ Working sample app - ✅ Active community
Cost Analysis
System Intent
Cost: $0 Result: Limited, inconsistent picker
Build Custom
Cost: $70k-$140k (development) + $10k-$20k/year (maintenance) Result: Full control, but expensive and risky
Abandoned Libraries (Matisse, etc.)
Cost: $0 (cheap but broken) Result: Crashes, compatibility issues, no support
Pix
Cost: Free (open source) Result: Professional, maintained, supported solution
Migration Path
If you're currently using an abandoned library:
// Before (Matisse)
// - No longer works on Android 12+
// - Causes crashes
// Migration to Pix takes < 1 hour:
// 1. Remove old dependency
// 2. Add Pix dependency
// 3. Replace picker code (usually < 10 lines change)
// 4. Test
// 5. Deploy
Recommendation Matrix
| Situation | Recommendation |
|---|---|
| Building new app | ✅ Use Pix |
| Adding picker to existing app | ✅ Use Pix |
| Need maximum customization | ⚠️ Pix (with custom theme) or custom |
| Need only basic picker | ✅ Use Pix (or system intent if truly minimal) |
| Using abandoned library | ✅ Migrate to Pix |
| Custom requirements | ✅ Try Pix first, extend if needed |
Conclusion
Pix is the best choice for most Android developers because:
- Modern - Regularly updated for latest Android
- Reliable - Used in production by thousands
- Easy - Can integrate in hours instead of weeks
- Maintained - Active development and support
- Feature-complete - Has everything most apps need
- Free - Open source, no licensing costs
- Professional - Beautiful UI out of the box
The Math
| Option | Development | Maintenance | Total Cost |
|---|---|---|---|
| System Intent | $0 | $0 | $0 (but poor UX) |
| Pix | $500 | $0 | $500 (excellent UX) |
| Build Custom | $100k | $15k/yr | $145k+ (high risk) |
| Abandoned Lib | $0 | $50k+ (migration) | $50k+ (broken) |
Next: Check out Benchmarks and Performance Numbers