[bentossell]

I disagree with codeless software being doomed to fail.

I’ve built lots of applications without code (and teach others how @ https://www.makerpad.co/) one being a mini Netflix ‘clone', Airbnb ‘clone’ and Fiverr ‘clone’.

They may not be able to withstand Netflix level of users and usage but why should every startup/business have to aim for that. It could service hundreds/thousands of users and turnover great revenue for those running it.

[meagher]

how many products with users have you built without code?

while very valuable for learning, i find that folks building thematic maker sites (no code, react/node, rails, etc.) are very biased towards their own way and often haven't made a "real" product built on what they profess.

engineers would be better off using "no code" more often, and non-engineers would be better off learning just enough react, python, etc. to ship something.

otherwise, everything begins to look like a hammer.

[sheeshkebab]

Few legitimate businesses want clones of other consumer tools.

[bentossell]

no of course not. But many are built in the same way.

The only reason these tutorials are built as 'clones' is to show the features for others to tweak for their own.

[sheeshkebab]

I think that's the point of the article - the moment you try to "tweak" a clone/"codeless"/"softwareless" tool with customizations, you end up writing code, hiring developers, and eventually scrapping and rewriting the said clone.