Low code, in all its glory, is not a substitute for proper planning and solution design

by HubSite 365 about Alex Shlega [MVP]

Microsoft Power Platform Consultant/Solution Architect, Business Applications MVP

Citizen DeveloperPower AppsLearning Selection

I recently made a post on LinkedIn where I simply provided a link to an article posted by someone else, and that produced some interesting

Low code development is not necessarily a total replacement for meticulous planning and solution design. A recent discussion in a LinkedIn post points out that low-code often does not meet the expectations. However, this isn't necessarily an issue with the low-code itself, but rather with the expectations set. The issue with low-code isn't that it can't accomplish tasks; it definitely can, but it usually isn't as versatile as pro-code.

A useful analogy is considering the development of a solution as a funnel. At the top of the funnel, you have a wishlist, and at the bottom, you have a solution. In between these two points are several layers of refinement and modification. This process isn't drastically different for pro-code and low-code, but there are some notable distinctions:

Framework and platform abilities introduce certain constraints, which aren't usually present in pro-code.
Licensing costs generally add up in both low code and pro code, but the structure may vary. For instance, you might be looking at the per-user monthly subscriptions in the low-code world vs per-component perpetual subscriptions in the pro-code realm.
Low-code requires developers to acquire specific skills to work with the framework/tool productively and you may not always have these skills in your team.

More on Low-Code and Its Misconceptions

While low-code does indeed have a lot of potential in streamlining and simplifying the coding process, it is crucial to more keenly appreciate and communicate the limits and expectations of this development approach. Especially, the constant evolution of platform capabilities and the consequent effect on costs and skills present significant factors to be considered. Therefore, striking a balance between expectations and the actual potential of low-code is key to successful application.

Read the full article Low code, in all its glory, is not a substitute for proper planning and solution design

Learn about Low code, in all its glory, is not a substitute for proper planning and solution design

Low code can be an effective solution design tool, but it is important to have proper planning and expectations in place first. Low code solutions come with certain constraints due to the framework and platform capabilities, and can come with licensing costs. Additionally, developers must acquire certain skills to work with the low-code framework or tool productively. The solution development process can be thought of as a funnel, with a wish list at the top and the solution at the bottom, with several filtering layers in between. Pro-code and low-code solutions are similar in this process, but there are some key differences to be aware of. Low-code solutions may not be as versatile as pro-code and may require additional skillsets from developers. Licensing costs may also vary between pro-code and low-code solutions. Ultimately, low code can be a great tool for solution design, but it is important to understand the caveats and be aware of the differences between pro-code and low-code solutions.

Keywords

Low-code, Planning, Solution Design, Expectations, Framework