Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Claude Design

anthropic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 819 posts

Re: Claude Design

#241

Post by atonse »

nothinkjustai wrote: post #178
atonse wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tools like Figma are for an era (and persona) who still wants to have all the various knobs and dials to dial in exactly what they want. And that is one way of working if, like you said people are trying to be more thoughtful and know exactly what they want. But for the other 95% of people, being able to just say "ok can you make it look more modern" and have 4 variants in 5 mins, (like me) Figma will lose users like…

[flagged]

Would you like to attempt a more good faith interpretation on what I meant, and address that (you can even imagine doing this in front a user/client and iterating in minutes with them, ultimately getting even better outcomes), instead of inventing the most un-generous interpretation of what I said, that I'm just adding AI slop?

Re: Claude Design

#242

Post by bilekas »

Google ai studio has been doing this pretty well for mockups for me at least. I do see people running out of their already limited tokens using this though, unless they silo them to another collection of tokens.

Edit: I see they have a new token tier 'Claude Design' so that's good.

Re: Claude Design

#243

Post by AstroBen »

oaxacaoaxaca wrote: post #216
_the_inflator wrote: post #201

Lovable was a TailwindCSS recombinator, that’s it. Lately it is more and more ShadCN as well. TailwindCSS is a masterpiece but ironically doesn’t really get its fare share while “Build on top of TW” frameworks make money. TailwindCSS is the final evolution after all other frameworks always had its benefits but also massive limitations. BEM anyone? TW is really elegant a new paradigm in its purest sense and brilliantl…

Am I the only one who doesn't like Tailwind? The way it totally pollutes your html makes it seem like, while the benefits are impressive, they're not worth the collateral damage.

Yeah I'm not a huge fan of it, either. Well organized CSS is much nicer to work with. On the other hand, I'd prefer Tailwind to badly organized CSS.

Re: Claude Design

#244

Post by nate8bit »

Unless you want something that looks like it's designed by Anthropic, this is still pretty shit. Amazingly "AI" hasn't replaced the very first target on their radar - design.

Re: Claude Design

#245

Post by Bridged7756 »

voidfunc wrote: post #190
ljm wrote: post #18

I reckon something like this has only been possible to develop because of how homogenous the internet has become in terms of design ever since the glass effect and drop-shadows took over in Web 2.0 and Twitter Bootstrap entered the scene. You'll get a competent UI with little effort but nothing truly unique or mind-blowing. Impressive technology, but that old skool artisanal weirdness of yore only becomes more valuab…

Homogenous design is a good thing. The internet isn't nearly homogeneous enough actually. The mid-90s desktop apps got it right and we've been regressing ever since then because web designers are like kids with crayons.

UI Design is an art. Like any other art, it's bound to have constant currents and counter currents. More than the designer's whims, it's the population's need for novelty, generational differences, and the desire of companies to stand out what is driving the wheel.

Re: Claude Design

#246

Post by tomashertus »

taylorlapeyre wrote: post #198

It really feels like Anthropic's product area is extremely overextended at this point. If they want to extend themselves horizontally in an unlimited fashion, they will need unlimited focus, and agents can't supply that. Things will fall through the cracks. Why should I believe that Anthropic will care about this product in 2, 3 years? Whereas I firmly believe that Figma will care greatly about its product in that ti…

Are they, though? My thinking is that their roadmap is heavily focused on the SDLC and solving problems related to software development, so their model will be optimized for that domain. That leaves room in the market for models that are specialized in other areas of expertise.

Re: Claude Design

#247

Post by AstroBen »

nate8bit wrote: post #244

Unless you want something that looks like it's designed by Anthropic, this is still pretty shit. Amazingly "AI" hasn't replaced the very first target on their radar - design.

Design is very hard to verbally describe, and AI doesn't have good judgement on what is easy to use or attractive.

Re: Claude Design

#248

Post by enraged_camel »

oaxacaoaxaca wrote: post #216
_the_inflator wrote: post #201

Lovable was a TailwindCSS recombinator, that’s it. Lately it is more and more ShadCN as well. TailwindCSS is a masterpiece but ironically doesn’t really get its fare share while “Build on top of TW” frameworks make money. TailwindCSS is the final evolution after all other frameworks always had its benefits but also massive limitations. BEM anyone? TW is really elegant a new paradigm in its purest sense and brilliantl…

Am I the only one who doesn't like Tailwind? The way it totally pollutes your html makes it seem like, while the benefits are impressive, they're not worth the collateral damage.

You are not the only one. I also dislike it immensely. For a framework that established itself as "for developers who don't know or want to learn CSS", polluting the HTML in the manner you describe makes no sense. And no company I've worked at figured out how to prevent it from becoming a bloated, impossible-to-maintain mess.

Re: Claude Design

#249

Post by ljm »

carimura wrote: post #160
ljm wrote: post #18

I reckon something like this has only been possible to develop because of how homogenous the internet has become in terms of design ever since the glass effect and drop-shadows took over in Web 2.0 and Twitter Bootstrap entered the scene. You'll get a competent UI with little effort but nothing truly unique or mind-blowing. Impressive technology, but that old skool artisanal weirdness of yore only becomes more valuab…

Music isn't really new either it's just recombining riffs already created. But the recombinations create new experiences. Might be the same with design?

AI can already generate music and it stands out a mile both in terms of the lyrical content and how middle of the road it all is. People will create some slop on Suno and lip-sync to it on TikTok because they absolutely don't sound like a thousand country singers blended into one.

So it's competent, for sure, but that is damning it with faint praise.

Re: Claude Design

#250

Post by qingcharles »

GenerWork wrote: post #64

If you look at Figmas stock price, it started falling right at 11 AM as this news was released. Anyways, this is 100% a shot at Figma, but also catching Lovable in the crossfire. If anybody from Anthropic is reading this, if you keep developing this with features in Figma and other design tools, you'll have a major hit on your hands.

This is 100% a response to "Stitch With Google" which has been doing amazing work in this space for a long time now, and is Google's answer to Lovable.

https://stitch.withgoogle.com/

I'm now pasting all my Stitch output into Claude Design to see what happens.

edit: First impressions are great. It asked me a ton of really great questions about my design aspirations and direction, which were incredibly relevant and insightful. Waiting to see what it makes.

edit2: It did astonishingly well with the first design pass. Really outstanding. This is probably going to be my primary prototyping tool until the Next Best Thing(tm) drops in a few weeks.

Post reply on HN