DreamLabs
DreamLabs
[Beyond the mobile builders]
AI mobile builders put an app in the stores in a weekend. We rebuild Rork, Vibecode, and a0.dev apps as production React Native you own — store-compliant, tested, and shippable on your own schedule.
Free migration audit[Why it stalls]
The AI mobile builders are the most impressive thing to happen to app prototyping. You describe an app, and Rork, a0.dev, Vibecode, Emergent, and their peers hand back a working one and put it in front of TestFlight reviewers without you opening Xcode once. They also converged on the same output: Expo, React Native, and NativeWind. That matters more than it sounds, because unlike the web builders, what you are holding is a real mobile codebase in the framework the rest of the industry uses.
Mobile is where the prototype stage ends abruptly, because two other parties get a vote. The stores review you. Apple's enforcement of Guideline 2.5.2 in early 2026 — no downloading and executing code at runtime — caught a wave of AI-built apps that shipped updates exactly that way, and teams found out when an update was rejected rather than when it was written. Guideline 4.3 catches the rest: prompt-generated apps that look like a hundred other prompt-generated apps. And you cannot hot-fix. A bad web deploy is reverted in ninety seconds; a bad release sits in front of your users until review lets you replace it, which is why the missing test suite stops being a style question.
Underneath that is the native layer, which is where generated mobile apps are thinnest. Push notifications, deep links, background tasks, permission prompts written the way Apple wants them worded, offline state and sync, and in-app purchases with server-side receipt validation and a working restore flow: each of these has a happy path the generator handles and a long tail of real conditions it does not. Add credit-metered iteration that gets more expensive as the app grows, and the tool that made you fast in month one is the reason you cannot ship in month six.
[How it works]
[01]
We take the repository and the shipped app and review both: what is genuinely implemented versus stubbed, how the native layer behaves under real conditions, what your crash-free rate and cold-start times actually are, and where the build sits against current App Store and Play policy — runtime code execution, privacy manifests, tracking disclosures, data safety. You get a prioritized findings list and a fixed scope. If you are currently blocked from shipping an update, that becomes phase zero.
[02]
Before any refactor, we get you shipping again. Compliance fixes go in first, then a real build and release pipeline in your own accounts with signing credentials you own, plus crash reporting so you can see what your users are hitting. Teams stuck behind a rejected update usually clear review during this phase, which is the point: the urgent thing stops being urgent before the deeper work starts.
[03]
Senior engineers rebuild the structure the generator never designed: navigation and state architecture, typed models shared with the backend, shared components instead of per-screen duplicates, and native modules implemented rather than approximated. AI accelerates the mechanical refactors and test coverage while the architecture stays with the engineers. Automated tests and CI land alongside, so a regression is caught by the pipeline instead of by app review.
[04]
We ship through App Store and Play review, watch the crash-free rate and performance under real traffic, and stage the rollout so a problem reaches a fraction of your users rather than all of them. Then you get the repository, the store and infrastructure accounts, the signing credentials, and documentation a new React Native hire can onboard from.
[Where you land]
You land on production React Native — Expo where it fits, the bare workflow when a native module demands it — with TypeScript end to end, a real EAS or fastlane release pipeline in your accounts, your existing backend hardened behind it, and crash reporting and analytics wired in. One codebase still reaches both stores, and the same product can extend to the web when that earns its place.
If your roadmap is heavily native — sustained background work, tight platform integrations, demanding graphics — we will make the honest case for Flutter during the audit instead of defaulting to whatever you already have. Most Rork and Vibecode apps should stay in React Native, because staying preserves the code, the store listing, and the head start.
[Other platforms]
[Smaller engagements]
Migrating off FlutterFlow, Bubble, Webflow, or Airtable instead? See no-code migration →
[FAQs]
That is the most common reason teams call us about a mobile AI build, and it is what phase two exists for. Most rejections in this category come down to a small set of causes: executing code downloaded at runtime, which Apple's Guideline 2.5.2 prohibits and which some builders rely on to push updates; minimum-functionality and spam findings under 4.3; or missing privacy manifests and data-safety declarations. Each is fixable, and we sequence the compliance work first so you clear review before the deeper rebuild starts.
No. We build against the same bundle identifier and ship through your existing app record, so the listing, the ratings, the reviews, and the install base all stay. Your users see a normal version update. The only migration users ever notice is if your backend auth has to change, which for most of these apps it does not.
Because real React Native and production React Native are different things, and mobile punishes the gap harder than the web does. What you have is generated screens with per-screen state, native capabilities implemented to the happy path, no tests, no release pipeline you control, and signing and store configuration owned by the platform. The framework is right, which is exactly why this migration is fast — the work is architecture, native correctness, and the release engineering that was never there.
Usually no. Your app is already React Native, so staying keeps the codebase, the store listing, and every product decision you have made; switching means rebuilding every screen in a new language to reach the same place. Flutter earns the switch when the roadmap is genuinely native-heavy or you already have Dart expertise on the team. We give you the honest recommendation during the audit rather than steering you toward whichever we would rather build.
Prototypes start at $6,000 and full MVPs at $15,000. About 6 weeks and around $20,000 all-in for most apps, against roughly $200,000 and 6 months for a traditional agency rebuild. Compliance and release-unblocking work ships in the first week or two rather than waiting for the full timeline, because a team that cannot push an update is losing more than the migration costs. The audit produces a fixed quote before any code is written.
[Interested?]