An AI App Builder — What It Makes, and What It Costs.

You describe an app in plain language and Rork generates the interface, the application logic and the build. It is aimed at people who want to ship something without writing the code themselves, and the free tier exists to let you see the workflow before paying.

A credit is one request in which Rork builds or edits your app — a single prompt. They reset each month and do not roll over. Users report that iteration is what consumes them: asking for a colour change costs a credit the same way a new screen does, so a picky redesign can move through an allowance quickly.

Platforms. Pro covers Expo projects, Android with Kotlin and Compose, and web apps. Max adds the native Apple stack — iOS with SwiftUI, iPad, Apple Watch and Vision Pro, native-performance games and iOS widgets. If you only need cross-platform or Android, Pro is the tier that matches; the native Apple work is what Max is for.

Pro includes five Max uses per week, which is the intended way to see whether the native Apple output is worth the step up before committing to it.

Reviewers and users consistently report the same boundary: it is strong on front-end-shaped apps and weak once real backend work is involved — payments, push notifications, heavy server-side processing. Complex business logic such as pricing rules or multi-tier permissions gets hard to express through prompts. There is also no drag-and-drop editor, so layout changes are made by asking rather than by moving things. We have not run a controlled evaluation ourselves, so treat this as the shape of the reported feedback rather than a measured verdict.

Prototypes, MVPs and apps whose complexity sits mostly in the interface — which is close to how Rork describes Pro itself. If the app's difficulty lives in the backend, or you need pixel-level design control, the reported limits above are the ones to weigh first.