Changes

         </th>

         </th>

       </tr>

       </tr>

       <tr><td colspan="2" class="logo">[[File:Low_Code_Application_Development_logo.png|200px]]</td></tr>

       <tr><td colspan="2" class="logo">[[File:Technology_Trends_-_Low_Code_Application_Development_logo.png|200px]]</td></tr>

       <tr>

       <tr>

         <th>Status</th>

         <th>Status</th>

   <div class="container">

   <div class="container">

     <div class="row">

     <div class="row">

       <div class="col-sm-4">

       <div class="col-sm-6">

         [[File:Technology_Trends_-_Low_Code_Application_Development_Forrester_Wave.png|center]]

         [[File:Technology_Trends_-_Low_Code_Application_Development_Forrester_Wave.png|center]]

         <p class="source">Figure 1 The Forrester Wave: Low-Code Development Platforms for AD&D Professionals, Q1 2019. Used without permission.</p>

         <p class="source">Figure 1 The Forrester Wave: Low-Code Development Platforms for AD&D Professionals, Q1 2019. Used without permission.</p>

       </div>

       </div>

       <div class="col-sm-8">

       <div class="col-sm-6">

         <table class="wikitable hypecycleTable">

         <table class="wikitable hypecycleTable">

           <tr>

           <tr>

   </ol>

   </ol>

   <p>Websites of the low-code tool leaders typically provide reference customers, and these include numerous prominent banks, insurance companies, airlines, government departments, and the US Army – though in most cases no details are given about the precise application domain. Most of the analysts’ reports, as well as self-reporting by OutSystems and Mendix, indicate that 88% of companies are adopting low-code, while 74% of those companies are integrating the business side into low-code development, thereby directly involving the clients who dictate the requirements .</p>

   <p class="inline">Websites of the low-code tool leaders typically provide reference customers, and these include numerous prominent banks, insurance companies, airlines, government departments, and the US Army – though in most cases no details are given about the precise application domain. Most of the analysts’ reports, as well as self-reporting by OutSystems and Mendix, indicate that 88% of companies are adopting low-code, while 74% of those companies are integrating the business side into low-code development, thereby directly involving the clients who dictate the requirements.</p><p class="highlighted inline mw-collapsible-content"> ([https://www.mendix.com/why-developers-should-embrace-low-code/ Example])</p>

   <div class="container">

   <div class="container">

     <div class="row">

     <div class="row">

       <div class="col-sm-4">

       <div class="col-sm-6">

         [[File:Technology_Trends_-_Low_Code_Application_Development_Gartner_Magic_Quadrant.png|center]]

         [[File:Technology_Trends_-_Low_Code_Application_Development_Gartner_Magic_Quadrant.png|center]]

         <p class="source">Figure 2 : Magic Quadrant de Gartner – Plate-forme d’application d’entreprise comme service à haute productivité. Utilisé sans autorisation.</p>

         <p class="source">Figure 2 : Magic Quadrant de Gartner – Plate-forme d’application d’entreprise comme service à haute productivité. Utilisé sans autorisation.</p>

       </div>

       </div>

       <div class="col-sm-8">

       <div class="col-sm-6">

         <table class="wikitable hypecycleTable">

         <table class="wikitable hypecycleTable">

           <tr>

           <tr>

   <div class="container">

   <div class="container">

     <div class="row">

     <div class="row">

       <div class="col-sm-4">

       <div class="col-sm-6">

         [[File:Technology_Trends_-_Low_Code_Application_Development_Top_Goals.png|center]]

         [[File:Technology_Trends_-_Low_Code_Application_Development_Top_Goals.png|center]]

         <p class="source">Figure 3 Top Goals with Respect to the Digital Experience Provided for Citizens. Used without permission from: Improving Digital Experience for End Users in the Public Sector, IDG Research Services, December 2018.</p>

         <p class="source">Figure 3 Top Goals with Respect to the Digital Experience Provided for Citizens. Used without permission from: Improving Digital Experience for End Users in the Public Sector, IDG Research Services, December 2018.</p>

       </div>

       </div>

       <div class="col-sm-8">

       <div class="col-sm-6">

         <table class="wikitable hypecycleTable">

         <table class="wikitable hypecycleTable">

           <tr>

           <tr>

     <li>Most organizations experience some pushback from traditional developers, partly due to skepticism, though often due to defensiveness as more (and cheaper) people become “developers.”</li>

     <li>Most organizations experience some pushback from traditional developers, partly due to skepticism, though often due to defensiveness as more (and cheaper) people become “developers.”</li>

     <li>Most traditional development environments involve a one-off purchase of the IDE, however, low-code licenses are considerably more complex, often involving per-deployed-app costs. Those costs are sometimes opaque and need to be fully worked through for the ROI analysis.</li>

     <li>Most traditional development environments involve a one-off purchase of the IDE, however, low-code licenses are considerably more complex, often involving per-deployed-app costs. Those costs are sometimes opaque and need to be fully worked through for the ROI analysis.</li>

     <li>There are several low-code systems to choose from, though the current leaders (which include Mendix, Microsoft and OutSystems) have consistently been ahead of the pack . Which platforms to choose is a challenge that depends heavily on legacy software to be supported, existing deployment platforms, etc. Supporting more than one low-code platform will bring its own challenges.</li>

     <li>There are several low-code systems to choose from, though the current leaders (which include Mendix, Microsoft and OutSystems) have consistently been ahead of the pack</p><p class="highlighted inline mw-collapsible-content"> (That is not quite true for Microsoft, which is relatively new to low-code, though their development environments and general platforms are very mature and strategic.)</p><p class="inline">. Which platforms to choose is a challenge that depends heavily on legacy software to be supported, existing deployment platforms, etc. Supporting more than one low-code platform will bring its own challenges.</li>

     <li>The proprietary nature of low-code gives a certain level of “lock-in,” preventing SSC from changing vendor or leaving low-code altogether. Vendors usually portray low-code as having no lock-in because C# or Java code is generated, which may be maintained further without low-code. In practice, this is not true for large apps.</li>

     <li>The proprietary nature of low-code gives a certain level of “lock-in,” preventing SSC from changing vendor or leaving low-code altogether. Vendors usually portray low-code as having no lock-in because C# or Java code is generated, which may be maintained further without low-code. In practice, this is not true for large apps.</li>

     <li>Low-code’s ease (“democratization”) of app development can cause problems for SSC: clients will be tempted to develop on their own if SSC is not fast enough, thereby creating a shadow IT (hidden/skunk works) mentality. If allowed to grow, this will create maintenance issues as well as an existential problem for SSC.</li>

     <li>Low-code’s ease (“democratization”) of app development can cause problems for SSC: clients will be tempted to develop on their own if SSC is not fast enough, thereby creating a shadow IT (hidden/skunk works) mentality. If allowed to grow, this will create maintenance issues as well as an existential problem for SSC.</li>

   <p>SSC should consider a low-code trial for several reasons: gaining exposure, evaluating low-code tools, and quantifying the ROI (at least for one project). Ideally, all of the leading low-code systems should be evaluated – though the field may be thinned (e.g. to Microsoft PowerApps or OutSystems) based on breadth of the system as well as the match to existing technologies in-use by SSC. During the trial, several aspects should be measured: training cost (which is then translated to amortized training costs as they would be across several projects), amortized licensing costs, elapsed time, client satisfaction, and amortized maintenance costs.</p>

   <p>SSC should consider a low-code trial for several reasons: gaining exposure, evaluating low-code tools, and quantifying the ROI (at least for one project). Ideally, all of the leading low-code systems should be evaluated – though the field may be thinned (e.g. to Microsoft PowerApps or OutSystems) based on breadth of the system as well as the match to existing technologies in-use by SSC. During the trial, several aspects should be measured: training cost (which is then translated to amortized training costs as they would be across several projects), amortized licensing costs, elapsed time, client satisfaction, and amortized maintenance costs.</p>

</div>

</div>

     width: 100%;

     width: 100%;

     display: table;

     display: table;

  content: " ";

    content: " ";

   }

   }

   .col-sm-8{

    width: 66.6666666666%;

    float:left;

  }

   .col-sm-8,

  .col-sm-11,

  .col-sm-12 {  float: left; }

   .col-sm-4{

    width: 33.33333333333%;

    float:left;

   }

   .col-sm-4 { width: 33.333333333333%;  }

  .col-sm-10 { width: 83.33333333333%; }

  .col-sm-11 { width: 91.6666666666%; }

   .col-sm-12 { width: 100%;  }

   .hypecycleTable{

   .hypecycleTable{

     }

     }

     .col-sm-8,

     .col-sm-8,

     .col-sm-6,

     .col-sm-9,

     .col-sm-4{

     .col-sm-10,

      display: block;

      width: 100%;

    .col-sm-12 { clear: both; display: block; width: 100%; margin: auto; }

      margin: auto;

    }

     div>a>img {

     div>a>img {