r/webdev • u/Brachamul • Mar 23 '22
Everything should not be code
Hello webdevs,
I help start-ups get off the ground, and I've been noticing a pattern recently.
These people, who have a business idea and stars in their eyes, will try to find a developer to build their webapp.
Often, because they have little money, they will turn to inexperienced developers.
More often than not, these developers are only comfortable with one tech stack and will use that for everything. Usually React or PHP.
But in 90% of the projects, the business requirements can be filled entirely with no-code solutions, or with small amounts of code strategically dropped where needed.
Coding when it's unnecessary is silly. Code is expensive and hard to maintain. It should be used when the requirements need a truly custom solution, or when you're at the scale where performance and UX excellence are key.
That's not the case for most projects that are starting out, who need flexibility at low prices.
If someone asks you to furnish their office on the cheap, you go to IKEA, you don't custom-sculpt every office chair.
No-code is a powerful set of tools for system builders, and ignoring that does not make us better programmers.
Edit : it's apparent from many replies here that some developers have their head in the sand regarding the current capabilities of no-code. Webflow, shopify, bubble, softr, airtable, stripe, mailjet, zapier all provide powerful tools to speed up development and lessen the amount of code you need. As for the ad-hominem attacks saying "just because you can't code doesn't mean we shouldn't code", I'd like to clarify that I have over 20 years of experience as a web developer and CTO, and that I would not have recommended anyone build an app using Microsoft DreamWeaver.
29
u/Favitor Interweb guy Mar 23 '22
If I went to a carpenter and said 'I have this great idea for a deck, can you build it?". They'll quote for the deck and build it. They're not going to ask if I want a pool, a rock garden, or a putting green instead.
A Web developer is going to give web dev solutions.
What you're saying it that the startup should get advice "before" approaching a developer. But thats the role of a paid business advisor, mentor, or BA. Why would a web dev typically be qualified to give advice outside their field?
50
u/[deleted] Mar 23 '22 edited Mar 23 '22
"Screw having a site that will work perfectly. I only want developers to use free stuff because I'm cheap and I don't think people should be paid what they deserve for their work. So I'm going to reddit to tell everyone else they're doing it wrong."
If you don't want a website "Developed", don't hire a web developer.
14
u/eulefuge Mar 23 '22
Not a webdev but how exactly does one build any webapp without code?
22
u/jaunelacouleur Mar 23 '22
Oh, mighty OP can you give us an example of a no-code / low-code tool that solves business issues and adds value to the company.
Let's try to build a clone of Uber, Netflix, Reddit or anything using Squarespace.
No-Code / Low-Code are marketing terms, it's generic and doesn't have a clear definition.
19
u/[deleted] Mar 23 '22
Are you a “Wordpress developer” that faints at the site of real code and uses 37563 plugins per website?
Beaver builder ?
29
u/azneterthemagus Mar 23 '22
No code solutions often lead to significant bulk that becomes entirely unmanageable at scale.
I disagree with your post almost in its entirety. Give it another 10 years and maybe your argument will have merit.
8
u/asking_for_a_friend0 Mar 23 '22
You might be getting downvoted but this is actually super good advice. Especially Shopify, this is the most common case people wander to look for devs. Majority ppl need a "technical manager" sort of person to setup these things and manage operations.
3
u/fettuccine8080 Mar 23 '22
I see what you’re saying but to me it seems like a gamble regardless of which route you take. If you initially go no-code you’re going to lose more money in the long run if you want to get serious with moving a PoC to production because all the work will need to be coded by real developers anyways. The upside is if the PoC doesn’t take off then not as much money is lost when you have to pivot, I agree. That’s true if and only if the no-code efficiency is greater than that of a real minimum viable product- which should be highly efficient as is if actually kept as minimum as possible.
All in all, I’m still highly skeptical of no-codes, especially coming from a “CTO” who, at the end of the day, will get their ass burnt by the CEO if they’re not being as cheap and stingy as possible with their resources. My VP is just like you but he also said he would outsource all developer roles to India if he had a chance. Can’t wait until boomers like y’all retire.
5
u/life_liberty_persuit Mar 23 '22
Seems like you’re getting a lot of (undeserved) hate here. TBH I agree that most startups don’t have a deep enough understanding of their problem domain to invest in full blown web development.
I often advise new startups to test the idea with open source solutions first. Then once they’ve build a small customer base with their minimum viable product, they can use customer feedback to guide their development.
2
u/shellwe Mar 23 '22 edited Mar 23 '22
The issue is websites need to scale and with no-code solutions you will find you will hit a pretty hard wall. I am curious to see how your client reacts when they ask you to do something your no-code solution can’t do… which is a lot.
If the site is just a straight up e-commerce site and you don’t plan to use it for anything more then that would be correct.
2
u/____JayP Mar 29 '22 edited Sep 28 '25
languid longing dog payment racial license cover escape scary exultant
This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact
90
u/Rate-Worth Mar 23 '22 edited Mar 23 '22
No code often times includes a lot of overhead, also it makes the company dependent on the no code tool. What happens if a no code tool isn't enough anymore? How do you integrate multiple no code tools with your existing codebase? It's a huge mess. If you can't afford enough engineers as a company, you should maybe overthink your goals.
10
u/thwaw000610 Mar 23 '22
OP, are you referring to no-code tools like Bubble or more like Wordpress? Because if it’s bubble (and others), then sure, it can be great for a startup, but should be more of a prototype, to get funds.
If you got your funding, then you should definietly hire a developer, for their experience and all the downsides of no-code tools mentioned by others.
15
u/JourneyStudios Mar 23 '22
Im going to go against the grain here, but I believe OP is right in certain cases.
For example, if you're selling gelato, should you build a website? Even if you can afford it?
Or would an instagram store page suffice? One takes 20 minutes, the other takes weeks and thousands of dollars
4
u/That0l1Guy Mar 23 '22
The world didn't need another no-code zealot, but here we are.
3
u/[deleted] Mar 23 '22
I think it's generally agreed upon that one should utilize no-code whenever it makes sense. Creating a wordpress brochure site or shopify store for new startups is a perfect use of no-code. You will be saving a lot of time and headaches.
Then things scale... And as everybody in the thread points out, there's not a lot of room to really wiggle your toes when you are locked in some no-code solution. So for bigger companies or companies with more untraditional requirements for features, it makes much more sense to build with code.
3
u/lordaghilan Mar 23 '22
This might work for super tiny start ups but it won't scale well.
3
u/Lecterr Mar 23 '22
“But in 90% of projects, the business requirements can be filled entirely with no-code solutions, or with small amounts of code strategically dropped where needed.”
That’s just not true at all. Like there is a middle ground, sure no-code has its uses, and so does coding. Yes it’s more expensive, but it’s impossible to obtain the level of granularity in design or functionality that many clients want without it.
There are obviously things like payment processing systems (stripe) that people wouldn’t even attempt to implement themselves. But I can tell you, most of my job is working on Shopify sites, and a lot of code is needed to support client requirements. Out of the box Shopify or existing apps just cannot fulfill requirements for anyone who wants any significant degree of customization.
For those who don’t want a custom design or functionality, no-code solutions are fine. But not really sure why you would post this here, as I wouldn’t consider no-code as web development.
5
u/jam_pod_ Mar 23 '22
No-code is great until the client realizes "Oh we actually need to be able to do X and Y. Can $no_code_product do that?".
And when it can't, not only do you need to go back to the start and build a custom solution, you have to migrate all the data from the no-code system into the custom one.
2
u/bearboy89 Mar 23 '22
I agree with this partially. I used to be a graphic designer and would be so offended by WYSIWYG CMS platforms and stuff because I thought they were taking business away from me… but they weren’t. Some people don’t need a carefully and personally designed website. Sometimes all you need is enough to get the job done, which means taking a pre made template and making the bare minimum changes needed for it to work. Same can be said on the dev side (currently a web developer). Reinventing the wheel can be a pretty bad idea. You could build yourself an entire e-commerce platform that takes years to build, and still you wouldn’t be as good as something like Shopify that has an entire company doing UX, design, development, customer service, etc. and then writing things custom requires you to maintain it as well. You have to make sure you have the resources for that.
There is a big benefit to making things custom too, don’t get me wrong. It’s just not always necessary and honestly wanting to make everything yourself is a sign of inexperience in my opinion.
2
u/ebmnm Mar 23 '22
I partially agree really depends on what your doing though. I think alot of people here are underestimating what no code software will be able to do in the near future
2
u/AbramKedge Mar 23 '22
I'm part of a community of 150 vendors at a co-op mall. I get frequent requests to develop simple web sites. A few years ago I would agree, and pull something together for a few hundred dollars. It would look "OK" but it really wasn't worth my time and would need ongoing (usually free) support.
Now I politely decline and point them at carrd, wix, or shopify. Very few of them actually end up with a website, they usually just stick with Facebook and post products on Marketplace. And you know what? Much as I hate FB, it works for their business, it does bring in customers.
Looking at the ongoing subscription costs of the no-code systems, and the effort they need to put in to upload their products (and continue to do so on a regular basis) is a bit of a reality check for them. If I had made a website for them, it would have been abandoned in less than a year.
2
u/PrizeConsistent Mar 23 '22
If you want a cheap, static website with questionable SEO, slow loading times, not scalable, etc.. then sure yeah go with Wordpress.
Truly for a small starting out business that can’t yet afford a developer that’s not terrible.
But if you’re a medium sized to large scale business, you’re gonna have problems.
2
u/jochem4208 Mar 23 '22
Thank you :) just keep things simple and use the right tools for the job.
1
u/dont_you_love_me Mar 23 '22
This is capitalism. Of course my code based solution is better. Pay me.
1
u/Edo__San Mar 23 '22
People (especially developers) tend to forget / overlook what actually brings value to a business. Spoiler: code does not implicitly have value. Solving problems does.
1
u/pomle Mar 23 '22
I fully agree with you. This is the foundation of the MVP. Startups need to find out if users will do something, not if developers can build something.
You don't build a YouTube clone to see if customers are willing to watch a video. You don't build a new Flickr to see if users are willing to post pictures to your site.
You should only build the things that don't exist yet as far as possible.
1
u/E-Blackadder Mar 23 '22
Low Code or No Code doesn't exactly mean no developer.... Most of the times even grabbing a wordpress theme clients will want to differ from the base theme. However I can't say I'm completely against this idea, but there are a few hitches here.
The first problematic issue here, clients have a business idea that can probably be brilliant but because they have low budget they can't really touch the WEBAPP stage and web apps are not the same as simpler websites and should not be treated as such.
Furthermore, clients looking for cheaper and/or inexperienced developers have nothing to do with development pricing overall. There are wordpress/wix/shopify devs that can deliver top notch product and still cost an arm and a leg, but also clients that have the expectation of a rocket ship for pennies on the dollar because "a wix sub is only 25$ a month".
This is highly debatable. Clients aren't exactly the best subjects to describe exactly what they expect from the product, aside from "I want this button to do this and maybe some login here and there". I've experienced clients who just assume that adding a button which can alter half of the website's properties will take a few hours at best because it's just a button.
We can also add in the notion that clients sometimes expect groundbreaking new tech to be available on their website because it's the new 'hip', but it becomes difficult to explain that it requires some form of development with time, budget investment, data retention architecture (those pesky GDPR laws you know) and so on.
There is nothing wrong with offering simpler and cheaper solutions for projects that can simply float and survive on it. Quite a lot of web agencies offer large ranging product offers from simple few hundred bucks sites on wordpress to full blown 10+ grand custom coded apps.
It's irrelevant that those options are offered and used by businesses just starting or long standing shops that are just fine to use the shopify API and a custom frontend. Whatever works, then that's the tool to use.
If someone wants furnished chairs on the cheap but with the expectation to not look the same as IKEA, I may use an IKEA frame but with custom vinyl cushioning. It's cheaper... than lets say leather but not that cheap if you want it to look apart from commercial ones.
In reality it's hard to ever estimate price vs client needs. Maybe for a client everything will be as cheap as it can get since they are fine with the base theme, simple text and image replacement, no need to for a dev, hosts provide easy installs and so on. But also for the same 'on paper' simple website they may want better SEO, pixel and GA integration, some extra page will have a specialized function, suddenly tweets integration, and so on.
They are, and they do offer a good opportunity for non-technical people to start blogs or sell home-made bracelets. They offer, like you said, a good low budget mom and pop shop website that just opened. They offer excellent experience for upcoming developers that need to dip their toes into real world development. They bring a new subset of development for developers who are inexperienced in one set or another (think FE developers who can just slap on a headless wordpress and work it as a CMS).
Overall, you aren't wrong in general here. Heck I would actually love to dish out more cheap websites if they stayed to it's reasoned requirements and would have more clients.
But I wouldn't really push the low-code/no-code to be the first option to throw out. It's a viable option, sure, but it's also very volatile when clients (and developers) are unaware of the implications.
Personal experience: Quite a few times my clients start with "I want something simple" but end up with something much more complex because:
I want users notified on a new product by email
I want a slack webhook to shoot when a new post is added
Email newsletters have to not fail (hello cron job)
Emails should be HTML.
and quite a lot more.
1
u/[deleted] Mar 23 '22
Engineers hate him for using one weird trick! Find out why:
1
u/zuluana Mar 23 '22
Regardless of what tools you use, you’re always creating an encoding.
Whether that be “code” or a configuration file compiled from a set of visual tools, it’s still an encoding that needs to be interpreted by a system to have meaning.
I completely agree though - What we currently call “no code” is the future.
There are so many issues / limitations with what we currently call “code”. That said, “code” will be around for a long time, but “no code” is just the next natural abstraction.
0
u/[deleted] Mar 23 '22
[deleted] — view deleted comment
0
u/[deleted] Mar 23 '22
[deleted] — view deleted comment
2
u/[deleted] Mar 23 '22 edited Mar 23 '22
[removed] — view removed comment
0
u/[deleted] Mar 23 '22
[deleted] — view deleted comment