Introduction

The future of software development is being debated everywhere, with bold claims, polarized opinions, and very few arguments grounded in real data. Some predict that AI will erase the need for developers altogether. Others claim demand will keep rising, just with new tools in the mix. Reality, however, is not being shaped by hot takes, but by what the numbers show, what industry leaders are observing, and what companies are already doing on the ground.

That’s why this article doesn’t rely on speculation. It draws from different concrete lenses:

TL;DR,  What this article is built on:

• 📊 Global market and employment data from credible institutions show growth that is real but moderate, not explosive and not collapsing.
• 🧠 Tech leaders like Altman, Pichai, Brynjolfsson, Huang, O’Reilly, Dohmke, and Zuckerberg are divided: most see transformation and reconfiguration, not disappearance.
• 🌎 Executives and founders in nearshore companies report rising pressure to upgrade skills, not shrinking teams.
• 🎯 The biggest shift is not whether developers are needed, but what kind of developers remain relevant.

As VP of Engineering at Rootstrap, a company whose vision is to become a globally recognized digital master, I can’t afford to interpret this shift through hype, uncertainty or bias. The industry is evolving too fast, and any real strategy requires evidence, not intuition. 

This article was built from the research I conducted while completing my MBA, combining global data, expert perspectives, and firsthand interviews with leaders in the software industry. The goal is not to guess whether developers will “vanish” or “multiply,” but to understand how the role is evolving, where demand is actually shifting, and what signals are already visible inside teams and markets.

What emerges when you combine these three perspectives is not a single storyline, but a clear tension backed by data:

• The software market continues to expand across industries, though at a moderate pace.
• AI is reshaping work faster than previous platform shifts.
• And the pressure is no longer about headcount, but about capability, specialization, and adaptability.

If you want a grounded view of the future of developer demand, beyond the noise, this is for you.

What the data really shows about developer demand

Understanding how developer demand might evolve starts with the institutions that track the global software economy and tech employment over time. Their projections don’t zoom into delivery models, verticals, or service types—they look at the industry in aggregate. Each uses different methodologies, but they align on one signal: the market isn’t shrinking. Growth continues, even if it’s not uniform or exponential.

What the market data really shows about growth

Two of the most widely used global sources for software market forecasting, Statista and Mordor Intelligence, analyze total market size rather than specific segments or delivery models. Their methodologies differ, but their conclusions point in the same direction: global software spending is still rising.

Statista builds its projections using a mix of national statistics, company disclosures, private research, macroeconomic indicators, and analyst inputs. Its scope covers enterprise software, consumer applications, and digital infrastructure in every major region.

Key projections:

• US$740.89 billion estimated market size in 2025
• Growth to US$896.17 billion by 2029
• CAGR of 4.87% for 2025–2029

Mordor Intelligence uses a different mix, regulatory publications, government data, academic research, company filings, and expert interviews, to validate its projections. Like Statista, it models the software market as a whole rather than by sub-industry.

Key projections:

• Around US$720 billion estimated for 2025
• Growth to approximately US$1.23 trillion by 2030
• CAGR of 11.23% over the period

Even with different methodologies and numbers, the conclusion is consistent: the software economy is still expanding. The growth is not explosive, but it is sustained, not a contraction.

Jobs aren’t disappearing, but the mix is changing

Employment projections from public and industry sources also point to continued growth, just not in the same shape as today. The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) and CompTIA forecast larger tech workforces over the next decade, even though they measure different segments of the industry.

The BLS tracks formally classified occupations in the U.S. economy. For software developers, it looks specifically at professionals who design, build, and maintain software systems, excluding broader IT roles.

Key projections:

• 1,692,100 developer roles in 2023
• Rising to 1,995,700 by 2033
• Total growth of 17.9% (approx. 1.66% CAGR)

CompTIA models a broader definition of tech employment, using labor statistics, employer surveys, and proprietary data such as Lightcast postings. Its scope goes beyond developers to include infrastructure, operations, support, and data-focused roles.

Key projections:

• 6 million tech workers in 2024
• Reaching 7.1 million by 2034
• Total increase of 18.3% (approx. 1.7% CAGR)

Even with different scopes, both projections signal the same direction: headcount is not expected to shrink. What will shift is the mix, seniority levels, responsibilities, and the capabilities required as AI reshapes how software gets built.

The AI wildcard: what the numbers still can’t predict

None of the major market forecasts explicitly model developer productivity as a standalone variable, but they do account for it indirectly. In the case of Statista and Mordor Intelligence, productivity gains from AI are assumed to fuel greater software adoption and spending, not fewer jobs. Their projections treat software as a growing economic layer pushed by digital demand, not something that will shrink because teams get faster.

Employment forecasts handle productivity differently. The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, for example, does factor in efficiency when estimating headcount. If an industry is expected to produce more with fewer hours, growth is adjusted downward. If technology shifts work toward higher-complexity tasks, demand is redistributed rather than reduced. These adjustments, however, are applied at the sector level, not through a direct model of AI-assisted development. CompTIA follows a similar approach, inferring productivity shifts indirectly through job postings and employer surveys.

The result is a useful but conservative picture. Current projections reflect today’s understanding of efficiency gains, but they don’t fully capture what happens if AI accelerates faster than expected or changes team structures more abruptly than historical trends suggest.

What Experts and Industry Leaders Actually See Happening

‍

As compelling as forecasts and market data are, they don’t capture how change is being felt by the people closest to it. To see beyond the numbers, we need to look at how experts, executives, and tech leaders are interpreting what AI means for software work—and whether they believe demand for developers will rise, fall, or transform.

This chapter brings together two lenses:

• Global experts who analyze the industry with a macro and research-based view.
• Latin American tech leaders who operate directly in the U.S. market and are already adapting delivery models, recruiting, and team structures in real time.
  
  

Their perspectives don’t always align, but together they give a clearer picture of how AI is reshaping demand, not in theory, but in practice.

What Global Tech Leaders Think Is Really Changing

The global conversation around the future of software development is being shaped by the people building, funding, and scaling the technologies behind it. Executives, founders, and researchers like Sam Altman, Sundar Pichai, Jensen Huang, Benedict Evans, Tim O’Reilly, Thomas Dohmke, Mark Zuckerberg, and Erik Brynjolfsson don’t agree on everything—but they’re not guessing either. They’re reacting to adoption signals, talent markets, product roadmaps, and the economics of software at scale.

What emerges from their views isn’t a single storyline, but a shared acknowledgment that the role of the developer is changing fast, and that demand will rise or fall depending on how companies adapt to AI, not because developers become obsolete overnight.

How global tech leaders see the shift in role and demand

When you analyze the views of the most influential voices in the tech industry side by side, one insight becomes clear: they don’t see a world with “no developers”, they see a world with different developers. AI isn’t treated as a replacement, but as a forcing function that pushes the role up the value chain.

Leaders like Sundar Pichai and Thomas Dohmke frame AI as a multiplier: developers will build faster and automate what used to be manual, but the need to design, reason, and oversee software systems doesn’t vanish. Jensen Huang goes further, suggesting that software creation is entering a new phase where humans shift from writing code line by line to directing AI agents and shaping architectures. Tim O’Reilly and Benedict Evans see this as part of a longer historical cycle: every leap in capability changes who does the work and what “skilled” means, it doesn’t eliminate the need for it.

At the same time, not all voices lean optimistic. Erik Brynjolfsson warns that productivity gains don’t automatically translate into more jobs unless new demand, products, or markets absorb the efficiency increases. Mark Zuckerberg has also floated a more disruptive possibility: if AI assistants eventually generate high-quality software with minimal human input, parts of today’s developer role, especially execution-heavy segments, could shrink or become unrecognizable. That tension is real, and it splits the discourse between reinvention and substitution.

But even the more cautious perspectives don’t predict a collapse in demand. they predict a reshuffling. The consensus is that companies will need fewer people focused on repetitive execution and more developers who can integrate AI tools, define requirements, maintain systems, design architectures, and adapt workflows. Seniority models may change, and entry points to the profession may look different, but the work of building software doesn’t get smaller, it gets redistributed.

Nowhere is this clearer than in how they talk about demand. Very few believe headcount will drop in absolute terms. Instead, they expect growth to come from:

• new product categories that AI makes feasible,
• companies shipping faster and therefore shipping more,
• software expanding into sectors that were previously analog,
• and developers taking on adjacent responsibilities once handled by other functions.

Where opinions diverge is on pace and distribution. Some see accelerated hiring cycles fueled by AI-enabled output; others caution that organizations might temporarily slow down hiring while they adapt their structures and upskill existing teams. The biggest unknown is how fast companies learn to take advantage of productivity gains instead of just reducing costs.

Taken together, the message isn't uniform, but it is directional: the developer role is being redefined, not erased, and demand will follow those who adapt fastest.

What nearshore Tech Leaders Are Seeing Inside Their Teams

While global CEOs and analysts speak from a macro view, leaders are living the transition from the inside, managing teams, hiring for U.S. clients, and adjusting delivery models in real time. The eight executives interviewed for this study lead companies with more than a decade in the U.S. software market, and none of them speak in abstractions. They’re dealing with client expectations, talent shortages, AI adoption, and changing cost structures all at once.

What they’re seeing isn’t a collapse in demand, it’s a shift in what “being valuable” means inside a development team.

How they interpret the evolution of the role

When you speak with the people running software teams and delivering projects for U.S. and global clients, none of them predict the disappearance of developers. What they describe is a restructuring of how value is created inside teams. AI isn’t eliminating work—it’s reshaping who does what and at what level of contribution.

A recurring theme is the decline of execution-only roles. Tasks that used to require mid-level effort are increasingly supported or accelerated by AI tools. That doesn’t translate into cutting developers—it means the expectations around autonomy, problem-solving, and systems thinking are rising. The shift they describe is from “writing code” to “designing and guiding solutions that AI helps implement.”

On demand, none of these leaders foresee contraction. What they anticipate is redistribution: fewer people focused purely on implementation, more developers involved in integration, product alignment, and technical decision-making. Some expect that productivity gains could slow hiring in certain layers, but they also point out that faster delivery cycles and expanding digital demand will continue to drive headcount needs.

Their tone is not alarmist—it’s operational. They’ve already integrated AI into workflows and assume that clients will expect more, not less, from development teams. In their view, the risk isn’t that the job disappears—it’s that some developers won’t adapt at the speed the market is moving.

Seen together, these voices don’t describe a uniform future, but they do show a consistent shift. Nobody is talking about a market that shrinks, only about one that reorganizes. What changes is who gets hired, how teams are structured, and what capabilities become non-negotiable.

With that in mind, the next step is to separate the noise from the signals and understand what’s already changing today.

Conclusions - Between the Noise, the Signals, and What Comes Next

The future is redistribution, not disappearance

Across data, expert views, and operator insights, one theme holds: AI is not erasing the developer role, it is redefining it. Tasks that once defined the profession are becoming partially automated, but that automation expands what teams can deliver rather than eliminates the need for people who understand software. The pressure is shifting from volume of coding to quality of decisions, architectural thinking, and the ability to direct intelligent tools.

Productivity shifts are changing hiring patterns

Market and employment projections still show moderate growth, but not uniform growth. The expansion of tech spending, estimated at CAGRs between ~5% and 11%, doesn’t translate to linear job creation in every layer of the profession. Instead, it suggests a redistribution of demand toward developers who can integrate AI, work across domains, and move beyond execution, or other tech roles. The forecasts from the BLS and CompTIA reflect this: hiring remains positive, but the composition of roles evolves.

Expert sentiment is divided but not dismissive

Some of the most visible figures in tech, Altman, Pichai, Huang, Dohmke, see AI as an accelerator that increases demand by unlocking new products and speeding delivery. Others, like Brynjolfsson and Zuckerberg, warn that efficiency gains could shrink some segments of developer employment unless new markets or services emerge fast enough to absorb the impact. They do not describe extinction, but they do anticipate a more selective demand landscape.

Nearshore leaders are already operating inside the shift

Executives building software for clients today don’t predict contraction, they predict reconfiguration. They see AI raising expectations, compressing delivery cycles, and pushing developers to take on product, integration, and technical design responsibilities. They’re not focused on hiring more or fewer people, they’re hiring different kinds of developers, with broader competencies and stronger adaptability, assuming clients will expect more impact per contributor.

AI adoption is no longer speculative, it’s operational

More than half of professional developers already use AI tools daily, and over 80% report adopting or planning to adopt them based on the Stack Overflow 2025 survey. That acceleration doesn’t reduce the relevance of the role, it redefines the baseline for contribution. The companies and professionals who adapt to this new baseline will capture the benefits; those who don’t will feel the pressure first.

Moderate optimism with structural uncertainty

There is no consensus narrative, and there shouldn’t be. The signals point to sustained demand for software, but with increasing asymmetry in how that demand translates into jobs. Growth will favor developers and teams that adapt to AI, product thinking, and hybrid responsibilities. Those expecting the old structure to persist will experience the transition as contraction.

My take on what’s coming

I don’t believe we're heading toward a world with fewer developers, I believe we're heading toward a world with different developers. The Jevons paradox is a useful lens here: when something becomes dramatically more efficient, consumption tends to rise, not fall. That’s what Polimeni, Mayumi, Giampietro, and Alcott showed in their work on resource efficiency, and I see the same logic applying to software. AI is making development faster, cheaper, and more accessible, and historically, that kind of shift expands markets instead of contracting them.

I also align with the idea that the role of the developer is mutating fast. In a previous article I wrote about AI IDE adoption at Rootstrap  (“Driving AI IDE Adoption That Actually Works: Rootstrap’s Strategy for Real Impact”), I described developers less as human code generators and more as orchestrators of intelligent systems. That shift elevates the importance of product understanding, technical judgment, and the ability to translate intent into architecture and tooling that AI can help implement.

Where I disagree with some of the pessimistic predictions is around junior talent. I don’t think AI eliminates the entry point, it reshapes it. Juniors who can learn AI-native workflows and contribute through reasoning, validation, and problem framing will add value faster than before. The responsibility moves to companies: training, pairing, and building the right environments will determine whether AI accelerates or excludes early-career developers.

Finally, it’s important to separate structural change from economic noise. As Gergely Orosz (“State of the Tech Market in 2025: Hiring, Managers, and Reality”) and others have pointed out, today’s hiring slowdown is heavily shaped by post-pandemic overexpansion, higher interest rates, and a correction cycle across tech. Some are misreading that as proof that AI is replacing developers. I don’t see it that way, the Jevons effect hasn’t fully kicked in yet, but it will.

In short, I’m moderately optimistic. The definition of “developer” is changing faster than many companies and schools are willing to admit, but that doesn’t signal the end of the profession. It signals the start of a new version of it. And right now remains an exceptional time to be learning software, or building businesses around it.

If you're leading teams, building digital products, or navigating how AI will reshape delivery, this conversation shouldn't stay theoretical. At Rootstrap, we're already helping companies adapt their talent, workflows, and architecture to this new reality.

Further reading on expert perspectives

• ‍Sam Altman – Stratechery Interview
• ‍Sundar Pichai – The Economic Times ‍
• Thomas Dohmke – Sequoia Podcast ‍
• Mark Zuckerberg – TechGig ‍
• Benedict Evans – Working with AI ‍
• Jensen Huang – Infobae ‍
• Erik Brynjolfsson – arXiv ‍
• Tim O’Reilly – O’Reilly Radar

‍