Mobile App Maker Free: What “Free” Actually Costs You
Almost every guide on this topic ranks ten builders and calls them all free. None tell you what each tier actually withholds. Here is the honest audit, with one alternative that does not have a paid tier behind it.
The thesis: “free” is doing a lot of work
Search for a free mobile app maker and you get the same listicle ten times in a row. Appy Pie, Thunkable, Glide, FlutterFlow, MIT App Inventor, Kodular, AppsGeyser, Adalo, Jotform Apps, SAP Build Apps. Every article puts a green check next to the word “Free” on every row.
That green check is hiding three different paywalls. Build is usually free. Removing the platform watermark is not. Exporting something installable is not. Publishing to the App Store or Google Play is not. So “free” in this category usually means “free to design something you cannot fully use.”
That is not a scam. The platforms are upfront about it once you click into pricing. The problem is that a person searching the phrase has to click into ten of those pricing pages to figure out which paywall they are about to hit. The point of this article is to do that work for them, then describe a different shape that does not have those paywalls at all.
The trapdoor audit
What each popular “free” tier still asks you to pay for, in plain language. Sourced from each platform’s public pricing pages and the builder communities around them.
| Feature | Builder | Plain answer |
|---|---|---|
| Appy Pie | Free to design. Their branding ships on the splash screen and bottom bar. Removing it and publishing to stores is on a paid plan. | Build free, publish paid |
| Thunkable | Free tier exists but watermarks the app and limits component use. Pro removes both, runs as a monthly subscription. | Watermark on free |
| Glide | Free tier caps row count and editor seats. The free apps run on a glideapp.io subdomain. Custom domain and most data sources are paid. | Subdomain only on free |
| Adalo | “Build free, pay to publish.” That is their own framing in the free pricing table. Free tier disallows store submission. | No store push on free |
| FlutterFlow | Free to design and run in their player. Exporting the Flutter source code, publishing, and most integrations require a paid plan. | No code export on free |
| MIT App Inventor | Genuinely free. Android only. Hosted by MIT. Limited polish, simple component model, no iOS export. | Truly free, Android only |
| Kodular | Free to build and publish APKs. Android only. Monetization features are sponsor-paid. | Truly free, Android only |
| AppsGeyser | Free with no trial. Permanent platform branding on the free tier. Android only. | Truly free, branded forever |
| Jotform Apps | Free for low submission counts. Designed around forms, not full apps. | Form-shaped, capped |
| SAP Build Apps | Free community edition exists. Steep ramp for non-developers and most production paths route through paid SAP infrastructure. | Free if you know SAP |
Pricing tiers move. Confirm current limits on each platform before committing.
What “free” should mean
If a tool is going to call itself free, the bar should be that you can finish a small idea start to finish without ever pulling out a credit card or stripping a watermark off the result. That bar is harder than it sounds. Free hosting costs the platform money, and most of them recoup it by reselling either the publishing step or the branding surface.
There is one shape that does not fit that pattern: tools that output raw web code. The platform never holds your build hostage because there is no platform-locked build. You get HTML, CSS, and JavaScript. You host it anywhere. The platform’s only role was the act of generation.
What the first ten minutes look like
You land on a marketing page. Click Start Free. Pick a sign-in method. Verify email. Get nudged to upgrade before you have built anything. Pick a template you do not love. Step through a four-screen onboarding tour. Your first edit happens on the eleventh click.
- Account required before the editor opens
- Email verification before you can save
- Upgrade prompts on the welcome screen
- Template browser instead of a blank canvas
The anchor: how mk0r is mobile-first by default
Two things in the codebase pin the mobile angle, and both are verifiable in the public repository at github.com/m13v/appmaker.
The first is the preview frame. src/components/phone-preview.tsx defines the device size as { w: 390, h: 844 }. That is the iPhone 14 logical viewport. When you build something in mk0r, you see it inside that frame, not stretched across a desktop browser pretending to be a phone. The preview matches what your thumb actually sees.
The second is the agent’s house style. The system prompt that steers Claude during VM mode lives at src/core/vm-claude-md.ts. Line 91 reads “Build mobile-first: base styles, then sm:, md:, lg: breakpoints”. Tailwind utilities scale up from a phone, not down from a desktop. So the small layout is not the afterthought; it is the base case.
That pairing matters because most free app makers in the table above are Android-binary-shaped or web-app-shaped but desktop-laid-out. A page that says “mobile app builder” should actually render at phone width as the default. mk0r does. You can verify the dimensions in the file or by opening the live preview at mk0r.com.
What you actually own at the end
- A working web app at a public mk0r.com link
- Raw HTML, CSS, and JavaScript you can copy or download
- No watermark, no platform branding on the splash screen
- No store submission step (it is a link, not a binary)
- An iterable starting point you can hand to a developer
- An optional cloud VM with a full Vite + React + TypeScript project (VM mode)
When a builder still beats this
Honesty cuts both ways. The trapdoor list above is a real cost, but the platforms in the table are not silly: they are doing things mk0r is not.
If you need a real Android binary you can sideload, MIT App Inventor and Kodular are still the right answer, particularly for education and learning. If you need a real iOS submission, you need FlutterFlow, React Native, or a native toolchain, and you will pay Apple 99 dollars a year. If you want a polished drag-and-drop visual editor for someone who does not want to talk to an AI, Adalo and FlutterFlow have ten years of investment in that surface.
Where mk0r wins is the prototype. The first version. The thing you would normally cobble together in a notebook or a Figma mockup before you even know if it should exist. Skipping the account, the template picker, the watermark conversation, and getting a real shareable link in two minutes is a different workflow, not the same one done cheaper.
How to pick, in three honest questions
- Do I need a binary on the App Store or Google Play? If yes, you are not in “free” territory anyway. Apple wants 99 a year, Google wants 25 once. Pick a tool whose output the stores accept (FlutterFlow, native, React Native).
- Am I OK shipping the platform’s branding for now? If yes, AppsGeyser, Thunkable free, and Appy Pie free will all get you to a hosted app fast. If no, you need either a paid tier on those tools or a tool whose output you fully own (mk0r, MIT App Inventor, Kodular).
- Do I want to draw an app or describe an app? Drag-and-drop builders ask you to draw it, then run it. AI app makers ask you to describe it, then iterate with words. Neither is better in the abstract; they are different inputs. mk0r is the latter, with no signup gate in front of the input.
Want to walk through this on a real prototype?
20 minutes, screen share, we build something to your spec from a single sentence and you keep the link.
Frequently asked questions
Is anything in this category really free, or is 'free' always a trial?
A few are genuinely free for the build-and-host loop. MIT App Inventor is free forever (Android only, MIT-hosted). Kodular is free to build and publish to Google Play. AppsGeyser is free with no trial timer. Almost everything else is free to design, then paywalls show up at one of three gates: removing the builder's branding, exporting an installable binary, or pushing to the App Store and Google Play.
Why do most free mobile app makers slap a watermark on the app?
The watermark is a marketing tax. The platform owns the splash screen and the bottom bar in exchange for free hosting. Thunkable, Appy Pie, and several others remove it on paid tiers. AppsGeyser keeps it permanent on the free tier. If shipping a clean-feeling app matters, count on a paid upgrade or pick a builder whose output you can edit yourself.
What does a 'no signup' app maker like mk0r actually let me skip?
You skip account creation, email verification, the choose-a-template step, and the dashboard tour. Type one sentence at mk0r.com and the build starts streaming. There is no free-trial countdown either, because there is no account to put a clock on. You only sign in if you want to keep work across devices, publish to a custom domain, or use VM mode.
Can I publish a mobile app for free without paying Apple or Google?
If 'mobile app' means an installable iOS or Android binary on the official stores, no. Apple charges 99 dollars per year for the Developer Program and Google charges a one-time 25 dollars. That fee is separate from the app maker. If 'mobile app' means a mobile-first web app you send as a link, there is no store fee. mk0r outputs the second kind by default.
What is the 390 by 844 viewport mk0r mentions?
It is the iPhone 14 logical resolution. mk0r's preview renders generated apps inside a frame at exactly that size by default. The constant lives in src/components/phone-preview.tsx as DEVICE_SIZE.mobile = { w: 390, h: 844 }. Every app you describe is sized for that frame so what you see during build is what your phone shows when you open the link.
Do I get the actual code, or just a preview link?
Both, and which one matters depends on the builder. Glide, Appy Pie, and Adalo give you a preview and a hosted app, not exportable code. mk0r gives you raw HTML, CSS, and JavaScript on every build, and a full Vite + React + TypeScript project tree in VM mode. You can paste the HTML into any text editor, host it on any static host, or self-deliver as a single file.
Where does mk0r fall short compared to a traditional app builder?
Native iOS and Android binaries. Push notifications that wake the device. Background location. Camera and microphone permissions tied to a system identity. If your idea needs any of those, a code-generation tool that emits HTML is not the right shape. Stick with FlutterFlow or React Native or a native shell. The mobile-first web output is the right shape for prototypes, internal tools, calculators, trackers, and anything you would normally send as a Figma link.
Is mk0r open source?
Yes. The repository is at github.com/m13v/appmaker. The phone preview, the system prompt that steers Claude, and the VM orchestration code are all readable. If you want to verify the 390 by 844 preview claim or read the mobile-first style guidance the agent follows, both files are linked in the article.
Try a no-signup, no-watermark mobile app build right now. Type one sentence, watch it stream into a working link.
Build at mk0r.com