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

341–350 of 819 posts

Re: Claude Design

#341

Post by apsurd »

eric_cc wrote: post #319
pilgrim0 wrote: post #285

On Notes on the Synthesis of Form, Alexander defines design as the rationalization of the forces that define a problem. You’ll won’t find a better definition. But people tend to think design is the synthesis and its results. This misunderstanding of the role of design and the designer is responsible for all the unfit designs we encounter on a daily basis. Anyone equipped with a synthesis tool and feeling empowered to…

> I feel sorry for anyone that will think using tools equals doing design, because of the truly marvelous human experiences that they’ll miss, and that could never be replaced by the shallow pride of empty achievement. What if you don’t give a shit about design and it’s a means to an end for a project that involves something different that you do care about?

> what if you don't give a shit about design and it's a means to an end…

the parent's point is that it doesn't work that way. The point is self reinforcing. Design is not a thing. it's the earned scars from the process. Fine to disagree but it reinforces the point.

Re: Claude Design

#342

Post by apsurd »

bauerd wrote: post #309
pilgrim0 wrote: post #285

On Notes on the Synthesis of Form, Alexander defines design as the rationalization of the forces that define a problem. You’ll won’t find a better definition. But people tend to think design is the synthesis and its results. This misunderstanding of the role of design and the designer is responsible for all the unfit designs we encounter on a daily basis. Anyone equipped with a synthesis tool and feeling empowered to…

This is a really verbose way to say that using generative AI has a detrimental effect on the user because one deprives themselves of the learning experience.

your paragraph is parent's point in action.

If only all great works could just be an X post!

Re: Claude Design

#343

Post by hkpack »

raviisoccupied wrote: post #335

I am not an engineer, I can't look at code and determine if it is good, performant, or elegant. However, I can look at designs and make a judgement. I'm curious to see how Claude Design changes how I think about AI and its capabilities.

If you are not a software engineer you can judge code the same way as you can judge design while not being a designer.

It is that in one case it is obvious for you that you don’t understand what you are looking at, and in another, for some reason, it is not.

Re: Claude Design

#344

Post by t0mas88 »

qingcharles wrote: post #250
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 ins…

Stitch with Google really doesn't work for me. Half created screens, random buttons. Hope Claude does better.

Re: Claude Design

#345

Post by pembrook »

quotemstr wrote: post #130

Postmodernists are annoying because they are right about design. "Taste", aesthetics, design, vibes they're all as socially-constructed and post-truth as that annoying sophomore says everything is. The world is design is an isekai manga in which Derrida's delusions are the rules of physics. It's weird. Part of this weirdness is the continual relativism of design. A taste-meme is good or cringe only relative to the pr…

Interesting take and I pretty much agree (also, I find it funny that now the only interesting comments on HN are all found at the bottom).

However, there is of course a raw mechanical side to design that comes more into play on practical applications like a software UI vs. pure play memes/vibes like branding or a landing page.

Think hierarchy, leading, kerning, scale, contrast, balance, etc. These things remain constant throughout trend cycles and can absolutely get you half way there. Then aesthetic memes can be sprinkled on top by a human to make people believe "this feels cool."

Re: Claude Design

#346

Post by RigelKentaurus »

Bilal_io wrote: post #109
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.

The folks at Wall Street do not understand this does not replace Figma. Figma is targeted towards designers who create thoughtful design systems and cohesive UIs and who don't code, while this is targeted towards vibe coders who can't design. Two different circles that intersect to some level. But like you said, if anthropic adds the tools in Figma, only then they can can take customers from Figma IMO.

Why can't it replace Figma? Seems like Figma is a thin UI layer on top of Claude Design.

Re: Claude Design

#347

Post by shrinks99 »

ossa-ma wrote: post #214
weinzierl wrote: post #207

"create polished visual work like designs, prototypes, slides, one-pagers, and more." I use Opus to generate Typst for that and I'm already pretty happy with that approach. It gives me a degree of control I do not have with other methods, because 1. Typst is really powerful 2. Opus is really good at surgically modifying Typst I basically never look at the Typst code for this. Telling Opus visually what I want changed…

How does it compare to LaTeX?

It compiles almost instantly which makes this visual design by Claude instruction viable. That alone is pretty neat.

It can't render all your math in exactly the same way. If you need it to do that, it may not be for you.

Re: Claude Design

#348

Post by tempest_ »

monarchwadia wrote: post #334
CaptWillard wrote: post #324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Big difference between gaining knowledge and building/maintaining cognitive skills.

I assure you, working with LLMs is intellectually challenging, and becomes more so as the technology matures.

It really really really depends on how you are using it and what you are using it for.

I can get LLMs to write most CSS I need by treating it like a slot machine and pulling the handle till it spits out what I need, this doesnt cause me to learn CSS at all.

Re: Claude Design

#349

Post by taylorlapeyre »

bauerd wrote: post #336
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…

They are building infrastructure components that they will soon wire together with an orchestration layer. Managed agents, scheduled tasks, workflow webhook automation.

The infrastructure piece is what they do best. I'd be happy if Anthropic became the AWS of AI. But this product is just a mediocre shot at Figma, when no such shot is strictly necessary for them. These kinds of consumer products are not what they do best.

Re: Claude Design

#350

Post by rightbyte »

namanyayg wrote: post #163
H8crilA wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Didn't know that anyone needed to hear that, but here it is: "hot" companies often have such workdays, especially pre-IPO and with such a fast growth.

Yeah exactly, if you're seeing your own stock go up like the Anthropic employees are, it's gonna be hard to not work 12 hours

Why? Do the extra hours give you more stocks?
Post reply on HN