I agree with many positive points mentioned in the article about no-code options but I'd like to disagree with the overall title of your's and here is my point:
You can only be as good of a "developer" as the no-code tool allows you to be.
While it is easy to walk into the trap of no-code (maybe because of laziness or cluelessness at the beginning) it makes you a slave of that software. You will never be able to understand what and why things actually behave like they behave because you only learn the software handling but not the actual intuition. Instead you are stuck with your limited tool-box that the software provides to you.
You end up having learned more with code
If you are already putting in so much effort into building something digital, why not trying to actually understand what you are building there. It's like selling a product but not really understanding it yourself. This is very dangerous especially when it comes to security concerns.
On the long run understanding how to code will turn out to be less of a hassle than having to figure your way through with a tool that will get overtaken by better softwares in the future anyways.
Aside from that: what happens if the project fails? When it comes to the technical aspects you would have learned basically nothing except for knowing which buttons to click on a no-code software tool. Not really insightful in my eyes. But if you actually learn the code and write it for yourself you will end up having learned a valuable skill which you can use in many many many more varieties than this no-code software tool.
But I have to admit:
Despite my critique I must say that in the end its about working smart and not hard and reaching your goal with the least amount of work. Yet, only learning no-code is a little too short-sighted. You will benefit more having learned both at least to the minimum extend. Knowing how to code made me a 10.000 times better webflow designer and developer and despite that I am still seeing the restrictions of such powerful no-code tools making me learn more about coding anyways.
To sum it up: Learn both. Work hard on understanding how to programm and work smart by using this knowledge to build the platform in a no-code builder and beyond.
I think one should learn both code and no code. Nowadays, building something with code is a lot easier, we have managed services like Supabase for database, railway for hosting your project, etc. Just learning nocode has severe limitations, and I think no code is best when you're building the frontend side of an application.
I still think there is huge value in learning how to code. I don't think it will be something that will ever not be needed so it's a useful skill to have. The barriers for no-code are much lower so you're not really gaining valuable skills, but I can see why so many people are into no-code, and your reasons are certainly valid.
No-code is good for building prototypes to validate demand and acquire initial users. You can hire devs later, after you acquire enough traction to justify the spending, preferably after the PMF.
During the final checks of the server expansion and performance improvements, we discovered an unexpected, but potentially critical, issue at the last minute. There were several internal debates on whether we should 'ignore the issue and fix it after launch' or 'wait until the issue is fully addressed.' After a lengthy discussion, we decided that it is the duty and responsibility of RedFox Games to provide a complete and stable service to all our 1M+ Pre-Registered users who have waited eagerly for the release of Kingdom Hunter. We have learned from game publishing for many years that unexpected problems will always occur, but these problems can cause damage to a game service and its reputation. For this reason, we have concluded our priority should be to carefully examine even the most minor problems and improve the stability of our service before the official game launch. At this time, we do not have an official release date, but our entire staff is working diligently around the clock to set a new launch date, and we will announce it to you all as soon as the date is confirmed. https://fashiondelight.store/products/sterling-silver-geo-game-necklace
One small thing to add: Often, the founder tries to continue the project with other very junior/low-paid developers. It can work for a while but never in the long term. Too many cooks spoil the broth.
I 100% agree, and I am a software engineer. I created a FinTech company previously, and it took EIGHT months to build and launch and eventually, it was too late to get in front of customers.
If it takes you more than FOUR weeks to launch, then you are doing something wrong. It is so important to get in front of customers in weeks, if not days.
I couldn't find a solution good enough for tech startups with data and designs, so that is why I ended up creating my own - www.dexla.io
Thanks for this - I've been thinking the same. It makes much more sense than learning how to code, and the problems you mention with hiring devs is very real.
Here is my take. Learn to code, or hire a real programmer.
Hi there!
I agree with many positive points mentioned in the article about no-code options but I'd like to disagree with the overall title of your's and here is my point:
You can only be as good of a "developer" as the no-code tool allows you to be.
While it is easy to walk into the trap of no-code (maybe because of laziness or cluelessness at the beginning) it makes you a slave of that software. You will never be able to understand what and why things actually behave like they behave because you only learn the software handling but not the actual intuition. Instead you are stuck with your limited tool-box that the software provides to you.
You end up having learned more with code
If you are already putting in so much effort into building something digital, why not trying to actually understand what you are building there. It's like selling a product but not really understanding it yourself. This is very dangerous especially when it comes to security concerns.
On the long run understanding how to code will turn out to be less of a hassle than having to figure your way through with a tool that will get overtaken by better softwares in the future anyways.
Aside from that: what happens if the project fails? When it comes to the technical aspects you would have learned basically nothing except for knowing which buttons to click on a no-code software tool. Not really insightful in my eyes. But if you actually learn the code and write it for yourself you will end up having learned a valuable skill which you can use in many many many more varieties than this no-code software tool.
But I have to admit:
Despite my critique I must say that in the end its about working smart and not hard and reaching your goal with the least amount of work. Yet, only learning no-code is a little too short-sighted. You will benefit more having learned both at least to the minimum extend. Knowing how to code made me a 10.000 times better webflow designer and developer and despite that I am still seeing the restrictions of such powerful no-code tools making me learn more about coding anyways.
To sum it up: Learn both. Work hard on understanding how to programm and work smart by using this knowledge to build the platform in a no-code builder and beyond.
Hope that this was valuable to you.
Cheers,
Jorim
I think one should learn both code and no code. Nowadays, building something with code is a lot easier, we have managed services like Supabase for database, railway for hosting your project, etc. Just learning nocode has severe limitations, and I think no code is best when you're building the frontend side of an application.
I still think there is huge value in learning how to code. I don't think it will be something that will ever not be needed so it's a useful skill to have. The barriers for no-code are much lower so you're not really gaining valuable skills, but I can see why so many people are into no-code, and your reasons are certainly valid.
No-code is the go-to tool for non-devs like us.At very least it allows us to showcase our idea to the world
No-code is good for building prototypes to validate demand and acquire initial users. You can hire devs later, after you acquire enough traction to justify the spending, preferably after the PMF.
During the final checks of the server expansion and performance improvements, we discovered an unexpected, but potentially critical, issue at the last minute. There were several internal debates on whether we should 'ignore the issue and fix it after launch' or 'wait until the issue is fully addressed.' After a lengthy discussion, we decided that it is the duty and responsibility of RedFox Games to provide a complete and stable service to all our 1M+ Pre-Registered users who have waited eagerly for the release of Kingdom Hunter. We have learned from game publishing for many years that unexpected problems will always occur, but these problems can cause damage to a game service and its reputation. For this reason, we have concluded our priority should be to carefully examine even the most minor problems and improve the stability of our service before the official game launch. At this time, we do not have an official release date, but our entire staff is working diligently around the clock to set a new launch date, and we will announce it to you all as soon as the date is confirmed.
https://fashiondelight.store/products/sterling-silver-geo-game-necklace
Interesting article. The cycle is spot on.
One small thing to add: Often, the founder tries to continue the project with other very junior/low-paid developers. It can work for a while but never in the long term. Too many cooks spoil the broth.
I 100% agree, and I am a software engineer. I created a FinTech company previously, and it took EIGHT months to build and launch and eventually, it was too late to get in front of customers.
If it takes you more than FOUR weeks to launch, then you are doing something wrong. It is so important to get in front of customers in weeks, if not days.
I couldn't find a solution good enough for tech startups with data and designs, so that is why I ended up creating my own - www.dexla.io
Thanks for this - I've been thinking the same. It makes much more sense than learning how to code, and the problems you mention with hiring devs is very real.