3 ms·
> Currently, the supply of no-code developers and agencies is far greater than the demand. Anecdotally, I'd estimate in the high hundreds or low thousands of en
by swyx 5y ago
> Currently, the supply of no-code developers and agencies is far greater than the demand. Anecdotally, I'd estimate in the high hundreds or low thousands of entities explicitly marketing themselves for this service. Then when it comes to ones who've worked on apps that have scaled 2-10x farther than yours (assuming you have a few thousand rows in your primary database table), there are far fewer. Most of the freelancers experience is centered around prototyping. All of these variables mean you'll be quoted in the range of ~$150+/hr for these freelancers.
> Now looking at a code-based developer (like one who builds apps with Node or Rails apps), you can hire great ones for $50-100/hr. This is simply because there are millions of developers out there.
this is the first time i've ever heard someone argue that its easier to hire normal developers than nocode developers. made me seriously question the piece.
- mrsuprawsm 5y agoI completely agree with the assertion that it's easier to hire normal devs vs no-code devs. I used to work at a company building one of the bigger low-code platforms (Mendix). Lots of our platform was "dogfooded", i.e. built in Mendix itself. Control plane apps, that kind of thing. This was a very bad idea for many reasons, but one major problem was hiring developers to work on it. There were simply very few competent specialized Mendix developers available on the market. The really good ones (that you wanted to hire) all became contractors earning >$150/hr. The other devs on the market were very junior. The alternative was to train up our own regular developers to use our low-code platform. But that didn't work either, because your average Java/Python dev recognized that low-code was a career dead-end, and didn't want to learn it.