Hello. I am Andrey Putin, managing partner of the IT integrator kt.team. Recently, we increasingly often offer our large clients to use low-code solutions in IT architecture. Their functionality allows you to quickly make changes to integrations and business processes. This is critical for business, given the dynamics of changes in the market.
Forbes calls low-code a trend in the first lines, IDC statistics speak in favor of using low-code, and a low rate of change in traditional development poses a threat to business. But despite all this, an enterprise-scale business is wary and even distrustful of the low-code paradigm. According to its representatives, applied development for large companies can be carried out either on boxed solutions, or from scratch. And the low-code toolkit "does not match the scale of enterprise tasks and does not provide a sufficient level of protection for commercial information."
Today we will analyze the main objections to the use of low-code systems in an enterprise scale business and find out how fair they are.
A little about the low-code paradigm
Business regularly requires some kind of edits. Sometimes they are minor, for example, add an attribute or move a button, and sometimes they are more significant, requiring the development of something fundamentally new.
In the traditional code-first paradigm, the developer is responsible for the development of the functionality and all the edits. At the same time, everyone loses. Developers - because as the project grows, they are more and more involved in minor edits and less and less in reusable code. Business - because it has to wait for a change. We know of cases when developers are busy with minor improvements, and in the meantime, the company's waiting list accumulates 50 or more projects.
low-code , . : , - (, Gartner citizen developers). , : , API, Talend, Mule, WSO2.
low-code : -, , , , - . .
low-code 90- , , time to market, - .
low-code - . .
enterprise-.
№ 1. « »
. - . , low-code .
code-first , low-code.
, code-first . , , .
, . , , : , , -.
. : « ?» — : « ?» change-, . « » — , .
, - .
, , , - .
, , — « ». , « » -.
low-code. Low-code « »: , .
. , . .
« », low-code , CRM . — . .
№ 2. « low-code »
low-code . , Talend : , , — , . .
SaaS . .
1. .
« » - . , .
2. , .
— , low-code, — , . , , . low-code : , .
3. .
, low-code . , . , . , , .
4. low-code , .
, - . , .
, low-code ESB- , «»/«» . . Low-code - . - , , , , . , , BPMN ? LCAP .
№ 3. « , »
. , low-code «- , - , ».
.
-, low-code . : , (Strapi, Pimcore, Corteza, Builder). , .
-, . , , Power BI Microsoft: «» Power BI Azure, -.
e-Commerce low-code , .
in-house low-code , .
№ 4. « low-code highload-»
: low-code highload. . , , Talend, Honeycode, Creatio, Strapi, Pimcore.
: , , , . low-code . , low-code , , - , , low-code, code-first.
: , highload. - , , . , B2B-, 3000 , B2C - , highload. , , .
5000 , , highload. -.
highload-, low-code. , «». , «» BPMS (Camunda), -. , « » highload, .
low-code
low-code . , , low-code .
, low-code .
. - «». , , , ?
() low-code. , , -.
- , .
If you don't have time to rebuild (the project needs to be launched "yesterday") or you are faced with a huge legacy of old code.
If you have no choice. For example, you are part of a corporation and the set of technologies is set from above . For example, many headquarters use Magento as an e-Commerce standard, and regional offices are forced to use Magento as well.
If you want to maintain the status quo and any paradigm changes go against your goals.