There is some confusion around what people mean when they use the term “no-code” (and also “low-code”). The idea, theoretically, behind no-code is that you do not need to be a programmer to use it. The problem with that concept is that some of the things that you are doing within a no-code environment actually does involve defining logic. But you’re typically doing that through some kind of drag-and-drop interface. So instead of writing a piece of code that defines the logic, you’re drawing something like a diagram on the screen, and that’s what defines the logic. So, the question there is, “haven’t we just given you a programming tool that just gives you a different way of programming?” We liken this to a WYSIWYG HTML tool like Dreamweaver used to be. I still had to tell it I want this option field to be a radio button. I want it to have these values, I want these values to mean these things, and I want the submit button to go here and write this to the database. I didn’t have to code it myself with a programming language, per se, but I still was programming in a different way. That is typically what people mean when they call something “no-code.” They mean something you can program through a drag-and-drop interface. And it theoretically does not require any programming skills.
Low-code is kind of a hybrid, where it requires some programming skills, but much of it can theoretically be done by someone without programming skills. So, the problem is that different people in different companies will describe their tools as no-code or low-code without a consistent definition of those terms across different companies and even people within those companies. The bottom line is that – in both cases – this category of low-code and no-code, which typically go together in discussions (which reinforces the fact that there is a lot of confusion between the two terms), they tend to be very highly opinionated environments. Which means that – whatever you’re building – you are going to be operating under the limitations that someone thought you might need when they built their platform. So, if you want to put a chart on the page, then you pick a chart from one of their drop-down meus, they put a chart on the page and they give you three things you can change like the color and the title and that’s it. Highly opinionated just means there are a lot of constraints because the closer you get to no-code, the less flexible it becomes. The other limitation is that – if you want to do something that the tool has not anticipated that you want to do – you probably just can’t do it. You probably have to wait until the vendor of that tool provides it because you have no ability to extend it yourself. Now, some low-code environments will give you a way to extend it, but it’s kind of weird because – if you bought the thing to use it without being a programmer – how are you expected to be a programmer when you get to the things that require a programmer?
They tend to be more suitable for simpler applications and they tend to make for a nice demo. They’ll show you how quickly you can make a page with some charts and gauges on it, how to hook it up to a data source and have a running application. But it’s typically a rather simple application that doesn’t involve anything that’s too far outside of what the capabilities are of the tool and isn’t particularly complex when it comes to the logic that it encapsulates.
The potential benefit to those types of tools is that they can sometimes be used to quickly prototype something. These are often great for prototyping a demo to show your idea’s potential to an investor or your board, for example. So the advantage of it being highly opinionated is that they tend to automatically make a lot of assumptions for you. So you go in and define a data source and the data is coming from wherever and when you drop your chart on the page, it’s usually smart enough to assume that the data is coming from that data source that you specified and it automatically hooks it up for you. As a result of it making a lot of assumptions for you, for doing a quick prototype, it can be useful. But they tend to break down when you go too far beyond simple solutions and basic prototypes and they don’t provide much flexibility when it comes to look and feel and user experience.
Also, just because a no-code environment doesn’t require true programming skills does not mean it doesn’t have a learning curve. The people that do those videos that show them building an app in three minutes? Yeah, they’ve been doing it for years, on that specific platform. It looks super easy because the people who are showing you that have been doing it for a while. They may even be the same people that developed it.
All FAQs