> the true value of low code is the ability for business/ ops teams to create tools that serve their needs without waiting on a team of "real" developers to

> the true value of low code is the ability for business/ ops teams to create tools that serve their needs without waiting on a team of "real" developers to make time for them. I agree with this. There is a hidden market that exists between "Developers" and "End Users". With Pure Data, I found this in the games and interactive audio industry where much of the procedural sound we made was done by "artists" essentially. Rapid prototyping using visual languages gave "good enough" code that could be exported to C/C++ later for embedding. Again I saw that with LabView in industrial modelling, where engineers who are not at all "expert" coders could work within their domain of expertise and spit out code (also through tools like Matlab/Octave and NetLogo) as basically a very advanced (demonstrably working) "requirements spec" to any developer who wanted to take it further. The win comes when you realise the lifetime of many rapid prototypes is good enough, and real developers are expensive enough, that the no-code "mock-up" is the actual product. It happened with a job I did for the British Foreign and Commonwealth Office, when I showed the POC that took a few hours to knock together and they said, that's good enough, just put that demo into production as is. The scope was only a 7 day campaign. I see no-code as a peoples' config language that should basically replace the interface of devices like Android. Kids as young as 6 can understand stick and box dataflow diagrams. When "The diagram is the program", configuring things like privacy settings or app preferences might better be done in this domain. That doesn't make developers who use real languages obsolete.