If I had access to experienced developers on my team, I would be reluctant to leverage low code or no code for my core product, however would be fine for complimentary/non-essential items if it would allow us to build quicker. The reasons why I'd be reluctant for the core platform include things like, it introduces another dependency (what happens if the provider goes broke? Or triples the price), it makes it hard to create a moat (if your team could build quickly using a no-code solution, there is nothing stopping anyone else doing the same and undercutting you) and if you don't have complete build control over your product.

Ultimately, the only thing that matters is the end result. What are we actually trying to achieve. Hypothetically let's take something as simple and routine as a collecting some data from a form, tossing it into some spreadsheets and then sending out some messages when new entries are made in the spreadsheet. One person can write custom scripts to do all of that and maybe it will take them a day to do it. Another person can do the same job in 10 minutes using something like Zapier. At the end of the day the outcome matters a lot more than the journey, and if someone can get the same job done more efficiently with no code tools, why would you prevent them. The only time when I would advocate against relying on such things, is when you're building systems that need to be entirely standalone and self sufficient be it for security or reliability reasons, for all else, why make things more difficult than they have to be.

Depends. Low code for more complex stuff. No-code for one-page sites

As your business platform gets more complicated you will need to shift from no-code to low-code, and then hand-coding eventually. You can read out our insights from the blog link below: https://blog.function12.io/tag/i...