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

171–180 of 819 posts

Re: Claude Design

#171

Post by jug »

qkeast wrote: post #149
Bilal_io wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

>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. The challenge is that this sets an expectation of what "design" is, de-valuing the former and shifting us culturally towards the latter and a space where "design" is seen as a subjective visual ex…

I think there's a parallel here in advertising and what AI has done there. It's clearly used nowadays, a seasoned user can probably spot it straight away even if it gets harder over time. Still, it's deemed "good enough". The savings versus having a team and shooting on location etc. can be enormous. Even before this launch, I see it on the web. It's already happening.

Re: Claude Design

#172

Post by eloisant »

mikeaskew4 wrote: post #11

Thumbs down. Great design is original thought. AI is wholly incapable of that. Go ahead and roast me.

Having furniture made by a master designer and artisan woodworker is great. But sometimes, you don't have the budget for that and Ikea furnitures does the job just fine. Most of the time, actually.

Re: Claude Design

#173

Post by [deleted] »

ossa-ma wrote: post #121
ctoth wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I noticed in your list that you didn't mention accessibility. I would personally rather have an accessible design than one which is "original, groundbreaking and often counterintuitive." and here we are.

I should have mentioned accessibility. It supports my argument more than yours. Accessibility like captions, voice, keyboard nav, dark mode are all a deviation from the norm by a minority (something AI is completely incapable of doing) and a fight against familiarity which now serves as a great benefit to the majority.

[deleted]

Re: Claude Design

#174

Post by ktimespi »

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.

Is this really that big of a moat for Figma to cross though? They would have a much easier time integrating AI than the other way around

Re: Claude Design

#175

Post by coffeebeqn »

codegeek wrote: post #117
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…

"Twitter Bootstrap". Havent heard that term for years. The OG of CSS frameworks.

Most companies I’ve worked at still use bootstrap or something that looks very much like it for most internal web tools

Re: Claude Design

#176

Post by xnx »

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.

> Figma is targeted towards designers who create thoughtful design systems

How many such people does the world need? Probably less than 1,000. Not a very big market for Figma.

Re: Claude Design

#177

Post by clayhacks »

embedding-shape wrote: post #61
irishcoffee wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that's the wrong question. What kind of shadow spy network must exist around all these companies such that they all happen to be working on the same features at the same time.

> What kind of shadow spy network must exist around all these companies such that they all happen to be working on the same features at the same time. Stuff like that happened even before the invention of the telephone, humans within the same geographic location is even more predicable, so surely this shouldn't come as a surprise.

Yeah the spy network is just all these people living in a 7 mile radius of each other (San Francisco) and have lots of overlap in social circles

Re: Claude Design

#178

Post by nothinkjustai »

atonse wrote: post #133
Bilal_io wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

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]

Re: Claude Design

#179

Post by motoxpro »

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.

Thats like saying Claude Code is targeted at coders who cant code (which I know some poeple believe)

Re: Claude Design

#180

Post by adrian_b »

H8crilA wrote: post #85
subscribed wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

12+ hours a day regularly? What a toxic workplace :/

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.

"Hot" companies with stupid managers often have such workdays.

In the case of engineers and programmers, the amount of useful completed "work" has only a very weak correlation with the length of the workdays.

Good engineers or programmers will think anyway most of the time about the problems that they must currently solve, regardless whether they are in the office or at home or in any other place, and regardless whether to an external observer they appear to be "working" or they appear to do nothing.

Programmers who spend all day typing lines of code into a computer, are more likely to not be competent programmers, because otherwise they would have found ways to automate such activities that require continuous physical involvement, making impossible the allocation of enough time for thinking about the right solution.

If whatever they do does not require true thinking, then that is the kind of job that can be done by AI agents.

Post reply on HN