Why no-code isn't “less” than custom development

“But isn't that a bit limited?”

I get asked that question regularly. Mostly from people with a technical background. Or from entrepreneurs who once hired a developer who said “real” software should be custom built. Let me explain why that is wrong. And why no-code is the better choice for most companies.

Where does the prejudice come from?

NO-code has had an image problem for a long time. And to be honest, that was partly right. The first generation of no-code tools were limited. It allowed you to create simple landing pages. Or a form that sent to your mailbox. Great for a hobby blog, not serious enough for a real company. But that was ten years ago. Today's tools are fundamentally different.

What no-code can do today

With the current generation of tools, you can build complete applications. The same functionality you would get with custom development:

• Databases with millions of records
• User management with various roles and rights
• API links with external systems
• Advanced Search Functionality
• Real-time dashboards
• Automated workflows

The backends run on enterprise infrastructure. Google Cloud. WAS. SOC 2 certified. GDPR compliant. This isn't a toy anymore.

The real difference lies in how you build

In custom development, you write code. Line by line. Every function, every button, every database query. In case of no-code, you configure. You drag elements to the right place. You set logic visually. You connect systems to each other via an interface. The end result is functionally the same. The process to get there is different.

When custom development does make sense

I'm not going to say that no-code is always the best choice. There are situations where custom development makes more sense:

• ‍Extremely specific requirements. If you're building something that has never been built before, with very specific technical requirements, custom code may be necessary.‍
• Integration with legacy systems. Old systems with outdated documentation and strange protocols can be difficult to link no-code to.‍
• Scale of millions of users. If you're building the next Instagram, you'll probably need a team that optimizes the code to the bone.

But this is true for maybe 5% of the projects. The other 95%? They are fine with no-code.

The benefits that no one mentions

People always focus on the limitations. But the benefits are just as important.

• ‍Speed. What takes months in custom development, we build in weeks. Not because we're better, but because the tools do the heavy lifting.‍
• Customizability. Do you want to change something after going live? With custom code, that means going back to the developers, planning a sprint, waiting. In case of no-code, you modify and publish it.‍
• Understandability. A visual structure is easier to understand than thousands of lines of code. You can see for yourself how something works, even without a technical background.‍
• Less error-prone. Less code means fewer places where bugs can occur. The tools have been tested by thousands of users.‍
• Independence. You are not dependent on the one developer who built everything and is now on vacation.

The real question

The question is not whether no-code is “less” than custom development. The question is what do you need. If you want an application that works, scales, is secure, and that your team can manage themselves. And if you prefer it in weeks rather than months. Then no-code is not “less”. Then it's smarter.

Want to experience what is possible for yourself?

I'd love to show it off. No theoretical story, but concrete examples of what we built. Then you can judge for yourself whether it is “less”.