- Open source
- Self hosted
- VCS integration via git
- Lots of widgets
- Support for custom JS anywhere
- UI is okayish (for internal apps)
If this was open source & self host able then maybe but as it stands, there's no point. AppSmith has been the only low-code tool that allowed me to build exactly what I wanted thanks to their JS support. Budibase etc all lack that and fail miserably outside of a few standard cases.
I like it when there is more competition. It forces Retool, Appsmith, etc to up their game and not become complacent. One of them may have a couple of extrea feature here or there right now, but 12-18 months from now the current tech lead will become a wash and the race is on.
The big price in this space probably is the great unbundling of enterprise software, i.e. taking a bite out of Oracle, SAP. I attended a top 100 customers event at SAP once, you'd be shocked at the amount of despreration (from massive global 500 companies) to get SAP to implemented the stuff they urgently need. Apparently it takes multiple years on average...
We are currently working on improving the UI so that you can build more modern-looking applications. Is there anything that you think we should improve/add to the product?
- Managing users (user data is spread across multiple services/db so JS works very well here)
- SaaS analytics (total users, monthly users, subscriptions etc. For this AppSmith's charts "just worked" along with full support for MongoDB query language).
- Managing small internal tools (sending emails to users via GUI etc.)
I haven't tried some of the new stuff you guys have shipped yet (the new table, some light customization etc.). The whole reason behind choosing something like AppSmith was that I will only have to be concerned about data. No fuss about UI. No manual styling. No tinkering. For this AppSmith is perfect.
Along this line, I think what would be absolutely amazing is something like themes. They should be separate (think like editor themes). Theme designers can design how the widgets will look. Builders will focus on what they want to build. Instead of adding multitudes of controls and customizability in the widget view, this would be a better approach imo since I'd never be able to customize everything consistently which would result in a really broken UI.
Aside from that, AppSmith is great. Oh another thing that really frustrated me was the small inline editor for events/callbacks. It'd be super helpful to allow maximizing it somehow. Another thing in the same line is allowing importing modules. So for example, I can use AppSmith's minimal SDK to code my logic in TS using VSCode and then import that into AppSmith and it just works. It'd also allow using JS-only libraries from npm etc. This is definitely not as simple as it sounds but you get the idea.
Who even makes the decision to use these ? Management ?
However, it's actually much faster to use something like Laravel, where most of the work is boilerplate cli commands.
You don’t really run into issues because they never get more complicated then store this data into that. Or if this, show that. And if they do full re-write in real code.
That's the thing though: you just think it could be, because it looks useful.
I agree with the original point. The tech looks great on paper, but once you're actually doing more then a hello world example you'll quickly stumble upon a problem and it'll take ages to solve.
Id suggest everyone to prefer excel over any low/no-code solution. They usually already have basic competency in it and it's much easier to find help when you come upon a problem.
Unless they can code, then just write a simple PoC. It's not that hard with today's readily available frameworks
Not sure if this is a general trend but the companies I worked at anything computer related is an IT problem. The non coders at my company would never try a tool like this they would ask someone from IT to do it for them. The idea would be that a tool like this makes that process faster a cheaper. And perhaps makes the UX of the end result better then an excel sheet full of macros.
I guess a lot of comments here will be about low-code which probably speaks to the bias of HN but that's kind of silly since low-code is extremely powerful and pervasive in the corporate world now.
Can you explain why the emphasis is on the collaboration on tool building? The collaboration ability seems like a cool and valuable feature but it seems really confusing to make that so central to the marketing.
The tool building itself is extremely valuable and sophisticated on its own. That must have taken an enormous amount of work so I don't understand why the collaborative aspect is the main thing being highlighted.
I've dabbled in the whole Microsoft low/no-code ecosystem, but mostly just because it was easily available. Recommendations would be appreciated.
The only thing it's really lacking is granular (per-field/entity) access controls, which is on their roadmap (although it's worth noting it's been on their roadmap for quite a while).
Is it a low-code app builder with a real-time collaboration model? Something else?
Now that Google Workspaces costs $12/month/user (for anything over 15GB storage) it makes more sense for most small businesses to jump on the O365 platform:
Included with these dirt cheap plans, there's an Azure AD included that supports unlimited SSO to arbitrary third party apps.
At the very least, have a "Sign in with" button that supports Microsoft Accounts including Work/School not just personal.
Don't take on liability for user credentials and password management, there are plenty options to just accept a pre-auth'd identity:
And any business doing it right wants one account to work across SaaS providers, even if the business is only 3 girls in a garage just starting out.
Don't charge an SSO tax, it's good for you and your customers.
Can I host this myself/is it open-source? Trusting a solely hosted offering just won't work for me in this day and age.
In a perfect world this sounds great, in practice I can see it getting very messy.