🎉 Introducing Appmixer 6.0: New features bringing the future of automation closer to today
Learn more
.jpg)
In the world of embedded integration platforms, you may encounter various embedding methods—ways to enrich your software product with external components. In this comparison, we will focus on the two most common methods: JavaScript SDK and iFrame.
This decision is crucial when selecting a platform for in-product integrations and automations. The way you embed external integration technology into your product directly affects the customer experience, especially in terms of how cohesive your product feels, as well as its security and performance.
Looking for a quick overview of the key differences between iFrame and JavaScript SDK? Refer to the table below:
.png)
For those who want a deeper dive, let's explore how embedding via these two methods works and how they compare based on several key criteria that should be considered, namely:
Embedding via JavaScript SDK involves incorporating an external library (SDK) into your codebase, typically by adding a few lines of code. To initialize the SDK, you use an API key or other configuration settings. The purpose of an SDK is to embed a component (for example, a no-code automation designer) into your application and make it fully interactive, allowing it to seamlessly integrate with the rest of your app. Communication between your application and the component is managed through the SDK's API.
SDK is often the preferred method due to its seamless integration, unified user experience, enhanced security, and greater level of control.
.png)
As an example of how native an external component embedded via SDK can feel, take a look at Appmixer's no-code automation designer integrated to a few customer applications.
IFrames have been around for a long time and serve a valuable purpose, such as embedding videos or forms into web pages. An iFrame is an HTML tag that loads content from an external source and renders it within your application or web page as a separate window. Since the iFrame does not have access to the page's DOM, it does not communicate with the rest of the application, which limits its interactivity and integration with other components.
As we will explore in the pros and cons below, iFrames offer very limited customization options, often leading to an “alienated” look and feel within the context of the application. This makes them less ideal for embedding complex components (that require deeper integration with the host page or extensive customization), in contrast to simpler use cases like videos or forms.
To continue on the topic of automation, take a look at how Clicksend embedded Zapier into their product using an iFrame. The level of customization is clearly very limited, resulting in a component that feels unnatural within the context of the parent application, even forcing users to sign up or log in to Zapier from within the Clicksend application.
Let's now discuss a few key criteria to consider when choosing the right embedding method:
The extent to which you can customize and integrate the external component with your application largely determines how "native" the component feels within your product.
With a JavaScript SDK, developers can style and manipulate the UI component directly using CSS and JavaScript, making it blend seamlessly with the rest of the web application. This level of customization and integration can create a user experience so smooth that customers may not even realize they are interacting with an external component.
In the case of an iFrame, styles and scripts are typically sandboxed within it, meaning the parent page has limited control over the appearance and behavior of the content inside. This greatly restricts the ability to customize the final look and feel and provide a coherent user experience.
The customer experience is what matters most. As stated above, JavaScript SDK allows you to seamlessly blend external components into your application, integrating them naturally into your application's UI and functionalities.
IFrame, on the other hand, operates as a siloed technology that exists independently within your application. While some iFrame-based solution providers may customize basic UI elements, such as button colors or fonts, the experience will never be as seamless as with an SDK.
Check out how Appmixer's integration templates are embedded into Apify, a web-scraping platform. These Appmixer-powered integrations blend seamlessly with the interface, ensuring a smooth and cohesive user experience.
In an era of rising cyberattacks, security is a critical factor when comparing SDKs with iFrames. Both approaches involve some level of dependency on a third party to maintain security processes and tools.
JavaScript SDK offers a unique advantage by allowing you to implement your own security measures, aligned with your organization's security policies, standards, and contractual obligations (such as access controls or sandboxing rules). Additionally, because you have access to the SDK code, you can perform static code analysis to identify potential vulnerabilities and ensure the code meets your security requirements. In contrast, an iFrame offers no such control, as the content loaded within it can be modified arbitrarily by the third party at any time, limiting your ability to enforce consistent security measures.
However, with iFrames, the security responsibility rests entirely with the third-party vendor. Since iFrames do not directly interact with the rest of your application, they generally pose a lower risk of exposing critical data. This isolation can help mitigate the likelihood of certain attacks, such as cross-site scripting (XSS).
Regardless of the method, it's crucial to choose a trustworthy vendor. At Appmixer, we undergo regular SOC 2 audits conducted by independent auditors to continually assess and improve our security processes. We recommend considering such certifications and standards when selecting an embedded iPaaS vendor.
When using an SDK, performance is influenced by its size and any dependencies. The key factor is how well the SDK is designed, which is something we recommend evaluating before choosing an external solution like an embedded integration platform. A well-optimized SDK often allows for efficient API access with minimal overhead, reducing latency and improving the user experience.
With iFrames, performance primarily affects only the embedded window and does not influence the rest of the application. However, if the iFrame is poorly designed and loads multiple external resources, it can suffer from high latency, which can degrade the customer experience and create a disjointed feel within your application.
In terms of implementation, iFrames provide a faster way to embed an external component into your application, requiring just the addition of a single HTML tag. This makes iFrames quick and straightforward to implement.
On the other hand, SDKs—which generally require more development effort to implement—can also offer relatively simple customization and quick integration. For example, Appmixer customers report spending anywhere from a few hours to develop a working proof of concept, to just a few days to achieve a production-ready deployment.
Testing and debugging with an SDK integrate with the same tools used for the rest of the web app, such as browser developer tools and automated testing frameworks. Since the SDK code is part of the main codebase, issues can be easily tracked and fixed using familiar processes, simplifying workflows.
Testing and debugging issues within an iFrame can be challenging, especially if the source of the iFrame is not under the same control as the parent site. Browser restrictions, like the "Same-Origin Policy," limit access to the iFrame's internal content, making troubleshooting more complex. Additionally, test automation is harder to integrate, often requiring more manual effort and coordination with third-party providers.
In general, SDKs require more ongoing maintenance. Since they are integrated directly into the application codebase, any updates or changes to the SDK, whether bug fixes or feature enhancements, need to be managed by the development team. This can include tracking new version releases from the external provider, ensuring compatibility with the core application, and handling potential breaking changes. However, the advantage is that developers have greater control over the SDK and can often make updates without relying on third-party providers.
IFrames typically require less direct maintenance from the parent application team because they operate as an isolated component. The content within the iFrame is maintained by the external provider, so updates, bug fixes, and improvements happen independently of the parent site. However, this can also be a disadvantage, as any changes made by the third-party provider are outside the parent application's control, which can lead to unexpected behavior or compatibility issues. Additionally, if issues arise, the parent team may need to rely on external support to resolve them.
If your goal is to embed a component that feels fully native to your application and provides your customers with a truly seamless experience, SDK is the way to go. It also allows companies to implement their own security measures directly within the codebase, ensuring greater control over security and compliance.
On the other hand, if you need to allocate fewer development resources—both for initial development and ongoing maintenance—and are willing to accept limitations in user experience and security, then the slightly faster time to market and reduced maintenance requirements may make iFrame-based solutions more appealing.
Ultimately, the choice is yours. At Appmixer, we’re happy to provide you with a proof of concept (PoC), where we can help you quickly deliver native integrations and powerful automation features using our JavaScript SDK. This solution enables full customization, ensures security, and can seamlessly enhance your software product in as little as a few days.
To explore the exact steps to embed Appmixer into your application, follow this technical guide. If you want to discuss your requirements and plan the PoC, schedule a 1:1 call.
.png){kind=logo}
