4 ms·

The trick is to use the no code implementation to learn what you need to build from scratch. Don't think of it as expensive time to redo - think of it as valuab

by cm2012 3y ago

The trick is to use the no code implementation to learn what you need to build from scratch. Don't think of it as expensive time to redo - think of it as valuable work finding out what your org actually needed. I'm sure you know that people don't even know what they need when they send developers their brief half the time. It's like excel. Yes excel is used for all sorts of messy things its not ideal for, and would be better built by a programmer. But the excel file teaches the developer what their co workers actually need the product to do. It's not wasted time, it's invaluable.

mellosouls 3y ago
That's a good observation but falls apart if actual developers have to maintain the Rube-Goldberg app created by well-meaning "Citizen Developers" (© Acme No-Code Corp) using a framework which is only intended for prototypes but not fit for purpose beyond that. Of course, that's a management issue - but managers who are easily taken in by consultancy sweet talk about the power of these frameworks are not always the most likely to understand the problems they cause or have the wisdom or resources to clean up afterwards by doing what you suggest.
- The_Colonel 3y ago
  We can't design tools which are incompetent-manager-proof. There are companies with incompetent management having no clue about software development, but business selection should eventually sort them out.
leejoramo 3y ago
The most successful projects I have been on started with a smart manager, admin, engineer or other non-programmer who used Excel, FileMaker, FrontPage or the like. Using the tools they know defined their real scope of work. Projects that start at an empty white board are much harder, which scope creep and higher failure rates
pdimitar 3y ago
I don't see how it's a valuable work finding out what your org actually needed if the cost compared to a proper programmer [team] is 3x - 10x more. I mean I get what you're saying but finding one senior dev and onboarding him into the business and using him as a litmus test for most of your ideas as your concept evolves seems like the more sensible and cheaper option.
- Brian_K_White 3y ago
  The most valuable code is the 2 or 3 prototypes you intentionally wrote in python and throw entirely away. The no-code could easily fall into the same category, as valuable hashing-out process. Any "proper programmer" should know this.
  - pdimitar 3y ago
    I as "a proper programmer" also include cost analysis, which was the main argument given by my parent poster.
- The_Colonel 3y ago
  > I don't see how it's a valuable work finding out what your org actually needed if the cost compared to a proper programmer [team] is 3x - 10x more. They seem to be talking about building real production systems using no-code. Building a prototype using no-code can be faster (at least in some cases) than coding them. Esp. if you consider the cross-org coordination needed to get an allocation for dev team.

by cm2012 3y ago

mellosouls 3y ago

That's a good observation but falls apart if actual developers have to maintain the Rube-Goldberg app created by well-meaning "Citizen Developers" (© Acme No-Code Corp) using a framework which is only intended for prototypes but not fit for purpose beyond that. Of course, that's a management issue - but managers who are easily taken in by consultancy sweet talk about the power of these frameworks are not always the most likely to understand the problems they cause or have the wisdom or resources to clean up afterwards by doing what you suggest.

The_Colonel 3y ago
We can't design tools which are incompetent-manager-proof. There are companies with incompetent management having no clue about software development, but business selection should eventually sort them out.

leejoramo 3y ago

The most successful projects I have been on started with a smart manager, admin, engineer or other non-programmer who used Excel, FileMaker, FrontPage or the like. Using the tools they know defined their real scope of work. Projects that start at an empty white board are much harder, which scope creep and higher failure rates

pdimitar 3y ago

I don't see how it's a valuable work finding out what your org actually needed if the cost compared to a proper programmer [team] is 3x - 10x more. I mean I get what you're saying but finding one senior dev and onboarding him into the business and using him as a litmus test for most of your ideas as your concept evolves seems like the more sensible and cheaper option.

Brian_K_White 3y ago
The most valuable code is the 2 or 3 prototypes you intentionally wrote in python and throw entirely away. The no-code could easily fall into the same category, as valuable hashing-out process. Any "proper programmer" should know this.
- pdimitar 3y ago
  I as "a proper programmer" also include cost analysis, which was the main argument given by my parent poster.
The_Colonel 3y ago
> I don't see how it's a valuable work finding out what your org actually needed if the cost compared to a proper programmer [team] is 3x - 10x more. They seem to be talking about building real production systems using no-code. Building a prototype using no-code can be faster (at least in some cases) than coding them. Esp. if you consider the cross-org coordination needed to get an allocation for dev team.