#1 is a different but similar problem. "If only language itself was simpler, people would have an easier time writing novels."
We could do a lot worse than excel in a lot of areas I think.
Nothing in particular has been solved by Excel, it's just that the languages that are built in are disdained by software engineers so people assume there's something special about them. It's cultural. You can write a Lisp in VBA if you want.
Microsoft's attempt at low/no code appears to be Power Automate, and it's awful (imo).
Excel’s market power is in what you can do in the formulas, interactive exploration, and incremental progress not in the (fairly awful dev-experience) VBA.
Well, then again, I also think you are also falling into the trap of underestimating the amount of VBA code, and businesses built on it, because of your cultural disdain for it.
I’ve written some VBA; the DX is terrible, but I have massive respect for what they’ve accomplished and I readily reach for it when it’s the right tool. I wrote some powershell for a manufacturing site a few weeks ago. Didn’t enjoy doing it, but it was the right horse for that course.
1. We need a richer library of standardized DSLs for various real-world environments, where the power of a full PL is perhaps too dangerous without excessive training.
2. The method of specifying algorithms in plain text (i.e. "code") is not intuitive or unapproachable for large numbers of people who could otherwise benefit greatly from the ability to "program" the tools they use.