Increasing Efficiency and Cost Savings in App Development with AI Tools and No-Code
--
The landscape of app development is constantly evolving, with new technologies reshaping the way we work. One recent change that merits consideration is the adoption of AI Tools and no-code solutions. Through a real-life story, we can observe how the use of AI Tools and no-code techniques can enhance efficiency and reduce costs in app development. This narrative is penned by Ab Advany, the founder of Coalias.com, based in the Netherlands, who recently supervised a project. In this article, we will explore how the decision to embrace AI Tools and no-code approaches led to surprising results and valuable lessons.
The Story of Alex and Hamid, the Programmers:
Advany hired two programmers, Alex and Hamid, to create a Minimum Viable Product (MVP) for a software application. Advany had previously collaborated with both programmers, each possessing different skill sets. However, the outcomes of their work left Advany astonished. Hamid, utilizing AI Tools and no-code techniques, completed his tasks in just one week, while Alex, adhering to conventional coding practices, accomplished only around 7% of his tasks in the same timeframe.
Hamid’s Advantages in Using AI Tools and No-Code:
Leveraging his expertise in integrating various tools like @Bubble, Cloudflare Worker, GPT-4, and Copilot, Hamid swiftly built the UI and frontend workflow of the application. AI Tools enabled Hamid to generate code automatically, while no-code solutions simplified the workflow without the need for manual coding. As a result, Hamid achieved 95% completion of his work, all at a lower cost compared to traditional methods.
Limitations of Alex’s Conventional Approach:
Alex, a programmer with 19 years of coding experience, opted to stick with conventional development approaches. He employed Vercel as the hosting platform and took a longer time to complete his tasks. Despite retaining full control over the application, Alex failed to recognize the negative consequences of his decision. The development costs and operational expenses incurred by Alex were significantly higher, and the development process itself took more time.
