No-Code: A Promising Tool or Just Another Tech Trap?
Our latest post about no-code received as many as half a million views!
https://www.linkedin.com/posts/kamil-kupcewicz_nocode-techtrends-software
development-activity-7229407659664326656-oIRC?utm_source=share&utm_
medium=member_desktop
Why such a reaction? Perhaps it’s because this topic evokes both hope and fear in people. No-code, while promising a revolution in the tech world, often leads to disappointment and frustration. But why? Because a hammer isn’t the right tool for every job, and no-code cannot suddenly be adapted to every possible application.
Is No-Code the Golden Grail?
One of the most persistent myths surrounding no-code is that it’s a perfect tool that will revolutionize any company and simplify every process. At first glance, it may seem that way. No-code tools allow people without programming experience to quickly create applications, automate processes, and implement innovations. It sounds like the perfect solution, right?
However, as experience shows, the reality is more complicated. In the initial phase, implementing no-code can indeed bring benefits. Companies that previously had to rely on external development teams can now independently create solutions tailored to their needs. This allows them to respond quickly to changing market demands and minimize programming costs. But as time goes on, problems begin to surface.
A comment from Ben, which appeared under the post, perfectly illustrates this:
https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:7229407659664326656comment
Urn=urn%3Ali%3Acomment%3A%28activity%3A7229407659664326656%2C72302
04346938916865%29&dashCommentUrn=urn%3Ali%3Afsd_comment%3A%287230
204346938916865%2Curn%3Ali%3Aactivity%3A7229407659664326656%29
“Controversial opinion, but I have seen multiple ‘mature’ no-code platforms in multiple companies and industries. Without exception, they all seem great in the beginning, enabling other business functions to contribute more rapidly, but over time eventually they all tend toward a huge, expensive, unmaintainable money sink that can’t be migrated to new technologies. They’ve been pushing no and low-code platforms since the early 00’s, IMHO it’s always been, and always will be, snake oil đ đ I feel that AI will bring the next round of this, and it will end up the same way. A little knowledge is a dangerous thing. My personal opinion!”
He highlights something very importantâthe fact that no-code can seem like a miraculous solution but, over time, becomes difficult to maintain and develop. The costs, which initially seemed low, start to rise, and no-code platforms turn into a “trap” that’s hard to escape from. Migrating to new technologies becomes almost impossible, and a company may find itself in a situation where it loses control over its own processes.
Disappointment and Frustration: The Financial Traps of No-Code
What initially seems like an opportunity to save money often turns into a financial trap. Many people, as the comments under our LinkedIn post suggest, have experienced disappointment after implementing no-code in their companies. It’s often a cheap and quick solution at firstârather than hiring an expensive developer, you can create an application yourself. But after some time, it becomes apparent that these savings are illusory.
Maintaining applications built with no-code often requires increasing financial investment. Every change, update, or adjustment to new business requirements becomes a challenge. No-code platforms, which were supposed to be flexible and easy to use, turn out to be difficult to modify and develop. These costs rise, and companies start paying more and more, while losing control over their technological processes.
People who initially invested in no-code feel deceived. What was supposed to be a simple and cheap solution becomes a difficult-to-manage financial nightmare. The comments clearly show the bitterness of those who “sank” money into these solutions, realizing that no-code is only good in the short term, but in the long run, it can lead to serious problems.
Adding to this discussion, Eric commented:
https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:7229407659664326656comment
Urn=urn%3Ali%3Acomment%3A%28activity%3A7229407659664326656%2C72326
82072593604608%29&dashCommentUrn=urn%3Ali%3Afsd_comment%3A%287232
682072593604608%2Curn%3Ali%3Aactivity%3A7229407659664326656%29
“Yes, many current no- and low-code tools are traps. I discussed this topic with InformationWeek two years ago. While the piece was about a specific tool, I’ve seen similar results elsewhere. I typically default to Pareto, but I have no qualms calling these the ‘90% problem’ (these are actually the 90% solution, but since 100% can’t be reached these often eventually become a problem). If anyone currently uses no- or low-code tooling, and they reasonably predict mid- to long-term issues, even after spending considerable funds, the time to start looking at other options is now: it’s largely not prudent to be concerned about sunk costs, which can’t be changed, but with avoidable future costs. And this is the time to check your ego at the door. In one role soon after being hired, I recommended that the firm abandon a no-code citizen data engineering tool due to all the issues. The key stakeholder was fixated on what they viewed as a great UX, ignoring almost all other factors. After wasting millions, they finally agreed to abandon it two years later.”
Eric’s experience echoes the growing concerns surrounding no-code platforms. While they offer a quick fix initially, they often evolve into more complex and expensive challenges over time. His advice is clear: it’s better to address potential issues early on rather than letting them fester, leading to even greater costs down the line.
AI: The Next Wave of Disappointment?
Benâs comment also contains an interesting observation about Artificial Intelligence (AI), which I believe is worth delving into. He suggests that AI might follow the same path as no-codeâinitial enthusiasm followed by disappointment. And it’s hard to disagree with that.
AI, much like no-code, promises a lot. Automation, personalization, data analysisâall these things sound like every entrepreneur’s dream come true. However, it’s important to remember that AI relies on the vast amounts of code available in various resources, such as GitHub. The problem is that much of this code is low quality.
As more and more code on platforms like GitHub is generated by Large Language Models (LLMs), there is a risk that AI will start relying on code created by other AI. This creates a dangerous loopâAI models relying on their own previous mistakes can lead to the creation of low-quality code, which will be difficult to correct. Consequently, just like with no-code, we might find ourselves in a situation where AI, instead of helping, starts creating more problems than it solves.
Not For Everyone and Not For Everything
Both no-code and AI are tools that can be incredibly useful, but only when applied correctly. There is no single tool that is perfect for everything. No-code works well in simple solutions where speed of implementation is crucial, but you canât build every application with it.
The key here is understanding the limitations of these tools. Technical departments in companies often know exactly where the boundaries of no-code or AI lie. However, in sales or marketing departments, this knowledge may be lacking, leading to excessive enthusiasm and misleading clients. No-code, like AI, may be sold as a solution for everything, but in reality, it has its limitations, which are not always disclosed.
Choosing the Right Tools
Itâs unrealistic to expect that one tool will meet all your needs. Every tool has its strengths and weaknesses, and the key to success lies in choosing the right one for the job. No-code can be an excellent solution in specific contextsâspeed of deployment, ease of useâbut it has its place and cannot be applied everywhere.
It’s crucial not to be swayed by promises that sound too good to be true. Companies must understand that no-code, AI, or any other tool is just thatâa tool. The success of a project depends on how well you can use it. If a tool doesn’t fit a particular task, it might do more harm than good.
Conclusion
No-code is a tool like any otherâit has its pros and cons. We shouldnât demonize it, but we also shouldnât treat it as a golden grail. For some companies, it might be a perfect fit, for othersâa dead-end. Itâs always wise to approach new technologies with caution, especially when the promises seem too good to be true.
In the tech world, thereâs no one-size-fits-all solution. Tools like no-code or AI can be powerful, but their success depends on how they are used. Companies must remember that technology is just a toolâand success depends on how well we can wield it.
Our most popular articles:
- Azure Functions: Overview and Common Use Cases
- How to enable error reporting and monitoring for Azure Functions
Our Linkedin profile: