Yes for the app layer: mature plugins wrap each platform's stack so you implement discovery, GATT, and notifications once in Dart. You still design for platform differences,iOS bonding vs Android app-level bonding, background rules, and manufacturer-specific battery optimizations,those differences live in a thin platform-aware layer, not in two full native apps.
Web Bluetooth today is limited to Chromium desktop and Android; it does not run on iOS. It also cannot replace background connections or robust OTA transfer the way a native app can. It is a strong fit for occasional configuration in a browser on supported platforms, not for consumer iPhone apps or always-on peripherals.
If the hardware will ever need field updates, yes. OTA over BLE adds transfer orchestration, retries, and recovery paths that touch the same connection code as pairing and telemetry. Treating it as a late add-on usually means revisiting architecture under pressure; scoping it early keeps the device safe if a link drops mid-transfer.
Teams count the pairing UI and miss bonding edge cases, outdoor or industrial RF conditions, background execution limits, multi-device types, partner protocols, and OTA. Each item needs explicit state handling and hardware-backed QA, which stacks faster than a single 'Bluetooth screen' suggests.
If users expect the app to stay connected with the screen off,common in sports, medical-style monitors, or sensors,you must declare and test background modes on iOS and navigate Android scan and power policies across vendors. That is additional engineering and device lab time beyond foreground-only flows.
Both cover the full connection lifecycle on iOS and Android and are actively maintained. The choice is usually API style and team familiarity: reactive streams versus a more callback-oriented model. Either can sit behind your own small abstraction so you are not locked in if requirements change.
