Are developers losing the race to no-code/vibe-coding?
I'm a developer. And as a developer, I probably have a huge disadvantage: I see every product with an overly critical, perfectionist mindset.
Meanwhile, no-code and AI tools are making it easier than ever to build software without technical skills. But here's the paradox: this shift favors non-technical makers over developers.
Why? Because they don’t care (or even think) about: that slow query that might crash under load; that pixel-perfect UI; that memory-hungry process; tha non-DRY code; that perfect payment integration; Etc...
I know what you're thinking: "Dude, just build an MVP and launch fast." But that's not my point. Even if I try to move fast, as a developer, it's hard to unsee the flaws.
So here's my real question: Are we in an era where people with fewer technical skills are actually at an advantage?
To me, it definitely feels like an advantage for non-technical makers.
Replies
Interestingly, I was thinking about this topic today. I have so many thoughts about "vibe coding" in general that I could easily write a more than 2,000-word essay on it. To put it simply, vibe coding has certainly opened many doors for non-technical makers and founders, allowing them to prototype quickly and build MVPs, CRUD apps, or mobile apps without too much complexity. It has also enabled developers to test their ideas quickly over a weekend and present them to the world. However, I cannot imagine any enterprise dealing with critical applications allowing the use of AI tools, except for generating unit tests or integration tests. Even then, there are many privacy concerns unless those AI models are used on-premises.
When it comes to launching an MVP, developers have a distinct advantage. They understand the code better, can fix issues quickly, and iterate faster, while a non-technical person may need to keep prompting AI to fix their code, often introducing bugs elsewhere in the process. So, to answer your question: are developers losing the race to no-code and vibe coding? Not at all. Experienced developers better understand the limitations using AI and can get their hands wet when required.
Readble Regex
It is until the non technical maker can't tell the AI properly how to fix something. The best world for devs is to work with AI. It's just an extension of us, it was built from our contributions and data. So we shape it and its adoption.
I think rejecting it can be tempting but debilitating to the productivity that's possible.
Non-technical builders bring the value of simplicity, speed to market, and consumer-product match. Technical builders make those solutions scalable, reliable, and performant. I think the focus of devs should be scale now, not just MVP'ing a product
I'm also a developer. Not sure non-technical people are at an advantage, but the playing field is more even now than it was. If your project takes off and you use no code, you will likely have to spend real considerable time recoding the app or you will be locked into that no code vendor forever, which can obviously cause major problems. If you use AI to generate your code but have no idea what it does or how to fix it, how will you really get things done or fixed?
My point is, if you can code why not move in on a no-code competitor and make a better product?
@rageix as a non-tech, this is an interesting topic bc in early-stage we're always trying to balance dev investment with traction and momentum. It doesn't matter how perfect a feature is, if it was actually the wrong feature to build at a given point in the company's growth cycle. I think that's where really good product folks are worth their weight in gold -- they marry the marketing insights with the dev roadmap and can transalte / facilitate decisions across those teams. Most of them don't want to work in startups though since they're getting paid bank in big tech 😂
No code tools favor non-technical people by definition. But can't you use AI coding tools (which are very much "code" not "no-code") with greater specificity and understanding than a non-technical person? I feel like "knowing what a good answer looks like" is a critical distinction of being able to leverage AI with maximum impact. My naive thought is: can't you just prompt the AI to create code that looks like yours (preventing memory leaks, pixel perfect, modular, etc.) when you see it make mistakes?
No, I don't think so that developers are losing; they’re adapting. No-code and vibe-coding empower non-coders, but complex systems still need developers for customization, scalability, and innovation, making both approaches valuable in tech development.
Actually, no. While it might have been user-friendly for non-technical people to begin with, when errors or fixes are required later on, non-technical individuals can't easily solve them. I think developers are needed for that.