Building a CRUD App: Is It Better to Use Claude Code or Pay for a Service?

The New Kid on the Block: Using Claude Code for Your CRUD App

The "Heck Yeah" Moments of Using Claude Code

• Mind-Blowing Speed for Prototyping & MVPs: This is the BIG one. I've seen videos of developers building entire e-commerce platforms with user authentication, product CRUD operations, & a shopping cart in about an hour. Now, let's be realistic – it's not a production-ready, polished app in 60 minutes. But getting a functional Minimum Viable Product (MVP) up that quickly is something that would have taken weeks or even months just a few years ago. You can test your ideas at a speed that was previously unimaginable.
• Demolishing Boilerplate & Mundane Tasks: Every developer knows the soul-crushing boredom of writing the same boilerplate code over & over. Setting up authentication, writing basic CRUD functions, configuring a new project – it's necessary but not exactly thrilling work. Claude Code absolutely obliterates this. One developer mentioned that they've gone from spending 70% of their time on boilerplate to just 30%, flipping their focus to architecture & business logic. That's a massive shift in how you spend your creative energy.
• It's Surprisingly Affordable (or even free to start): Compared to hiring a team or paying for a high-end platform, getting started with Claude Code is cheap. Anthropic has various tiers, including a paid plan that’s around $20 a month, which many find is enough for pretty heavy usage. When you think about the cost of a developer's hourly rate, that's an insane value proposition.
• A Super-Powered Learning Tool: If you're a junior developer or trying to learn a new stack, Claude can be an incredible teacher. It can explain complex code, show you idiomatic patterns in languages like Rust, & help you debug errors by just pasting the error message. It's like having a senior developer on call 24/7.
• Thinking at a Higher Level: When you're not bogged down in the nitty-gritty of every single line of code, you start thinking differently. You focus more on the "what" (the system architecture, the user flow) rather than the "how" (the syntax of a for-loop). It's a move from being a bricklayer to an architect, which is a powerful mental shift for any builder.

The "Hmm, Let's Think About This" Moments

• The "80% Rule" & the Last 20% Grind: A common sentiment among developers using these tools is that Claude gets you about 80% of the way there, FAST. But that last 20% – the part that involves hardening security, handling edge cases, optimizing for production, & implementing very specific business logic – that's still on you. & that last 20% can be a real grind. Don't expect to prompt your way to a fully finished, enterprise-grade application without getting your hands dirty.
• It Can Be Wrong (and Confidently So): AI models can make mistakes. They can generate buggy code, use outdated patterns, or just completely misunderstand your intent. One developer noted that the more expensive Claude model, Opus, tended to write elegant-looking code that was less practical than the code generated by the Sonnet model. You still need to be a skilled developer who can review, debug, & correct the AI's output. You are the pilot, not a passenger.
• The "Vibe Coding" Trap: There's a concern in the developer community about what some call "vibe coding" – building things that seem to work but aren't properly tested, secured, or scalable. The rapid progress can be seductive, making it easy to skip the hard, less glamorous work of building a robust application. People posting on social media about building 5-7 projects in a few weeks are likely building demos, not production-ready software.
• Context & Complexity Have Limits: While Claude Code is great at understanding a codebase, it can get lost in very large, complex, or legacy projects. It performs best on modern, well-structured codebases where the patterns are clear. If you're trying to patch a decade-old monolith, the AI might struggle more than it helps.

The Tried-&-True Path: Paying for a Service

1. Low-Code & No-Code Platforms

• Who they're for: No-code platforms are aimed at "citizen developers" – business users with zero coding knowledge who need a simple app for something like expense approvals or scheduling. Low-code platforms are a step up, targeting professional developers to speed up their workflow while still allowing for custom code when needed.
• The Good: The primary benefit is SPEED & lower initial cost for simple apps. You can get internal tools & simple customer-facing apps like portals or booking systems up & running very quickly. For a straightforward CRUD app, a platform like Budibase or UI Bakery can be a fantastic choice, as they are specifically designed for this purpose.
• The Bad: The trade-off is a lack of flexibility & control. You're locked into the platform's ecosystem. Customization can be limited, & you might hit a wall if your app needs to do something the platform wasn't designed for. Scalability can also be a concern with no-code solutions, as they might struggle with enterprise-level traffic or data loads.

2. Hiring a Freelancer or an Agency

• Freelancers: A freelancer is a single developer you hire for a specific project. This is often more budget-friendly, especially for smaller, well-defined projects. If your CRUD app is fairly straightforward & you have a clear vision, a good freelancer can be a great, cost-effective choice. However, YOU are the project manager. You'll need to coordinate everything, & if you need a designer or a QA tester, you'll have to hire them separately. There's also the risk that comes with relying on one person – if they get sick or disappear, your project is stalled.
• Agencies: An agency brings a whole team to the table – developers, designers, project managers, QA testers, the whole package. This is the one-stop-shop solution. It's ideal for larger, more complex projects where you need a variety of skills & want a more hands-off experience. The downside? Cost. Agencies have more overhead, so their prices are significantly higher. A project that might be under $20,000 with a freelancer could easily be $50,000+ with an agency. But for that price, you get a structured process, more resources, & greater accountability.

3. Using a Backend-as-a-Service (BaaS) Platform

• Who it's for: This is a FANTASTIC option for front-end developers or small teams who don't have deep backend expertise or just don't want to deal with server management. It's especially good for building MVPs quickly because it eliminates a huge chunk of the development work.
• The Good: You get the speed of a low-code platform for your backend, but with the full flexibility of custom coding for your front-end. It's scalable, secure (the provider handles it), & lets you get to market incredibly fast. The global BaaS market is projected to grow to over $30 billion by 2030, which tells you how popular this approach is becoming.
• The Bad: You're still relying on a third-party provider, which means you have less control over your backend environment. There's a risk of vendor lock-in, & if the provider shuts down or changes its pricing, you could be in a tough spot. Customization is also limited to what the BaaS provider offers. If you need some really unique, complex backend functionality, BaaS might not be flexible enough.

Let's Talk About Customer Interaction

The Big Comparison: Making the Final Call

So, What's the Real Answer?

• You're a developer (or learning to be one).
• Your number one priority is speed to get a prototype or MVP built.
• Your budget is extremely tight.
• You want full ownership & control over your codebase.
• You're comfortable with the "80% rule" & are prepared to do the final 20% of polishing & hardening yourself.

• You're a non-technical founder: A no-code platform or an agency is your best bet. Start with no-code to validate your idea, then maybe move to an agency when you have funding.
• You need it done RIGHT & don't have the time: An agency is the "fire & forget" option. It costs a lot, but you're paying for expertise & peace of mind.
• Your app is simple & internal: A low-code/no-code platform is almost certainly the most efficient choice.
• You're a front-end developer: A BaaS is your best friend. It lets you focus on what you do best without having to become a backend expert.