However, there's an interesting statistic that may be a clue to why no-code will eventually overtake low-code. From 1980 to 2010 enterprise development times steadily declined as programming techniques and resources helped developers turn out software faster and faster. From 2010 to the present though, enterprise development times have trended in the opposite direction, even with the boost provided by low-code platforms.
Why is it taking longer to build new enterprise solutions? Part of the problem is the need to integrate new software with an increasing amount of legacy code and to maintain that legacy code. Low code platforms have helped relieve some of that pressure by proving applications that are largely composed of "black box" building blocks that require less maintenance and testing. However, low code software still includes custom code and that code has to be tested and possibly modified whenever changes are made to the application or to the programming language used in the application.
No-code on the other hand is entirely (except in very special cases) "black box" which means that maintenance normally just consists of changing a few components or modifying the options associated with some elements in the software. in the long run that means that using no-code will be faster, more efficient, and require less effort than using low-code.
But what about very complex applications that can't be handled without coding? No-code supporters will argue that 10 or even 5 years ago no-code platforms couldn't produce software nearly as sophisticated as they can today - and it's only a matter of time until they develop to the point where you can build even the most complicated pieces of software.
So there's where the debate stands at the moment - what's your opinion?
No comments:
Post a Comment