Had some fun with the wireframe mode, very useful to sketch some interaction concepts
Claude Design
261–270 of 819 posts
Re: Claude Design
#262Earlier quoted context omitted.
>> Of course, there is indeed no shame. There is also no pride. I disagree completely. The pride should come from the value that is delivered. Specifically, this: >> Useful, probably optimal and will be around for decades to come. Is something to be proud of, full stop.
I think there's something nice about the idea of a store owner which has unnecessarily decorated the store with love, even with the liability of a cat; it's not delivering the product better and the cat may actually make things worse because of allergies. A cold American convenience store may be delivering the fundamental value at American prices, but there's something to be said about that "extra" human or creative…
There's nothing stopping people from decorating their boutique stores (or personal blogs, portfolios, and fan websites) the way they want. And that's fun and delightful for me, as a visitor, just like boutique shops are IRL.
But I really don't need that quirkiness at Home Depot, the DMV or my bank (or Amazon, or government websites, or my banking site). I'm there to purchase some screws, register my car or pick up some checks. I just need a storefront (or a website) that lets me do that as fast and homogenously as possible.
99.9% of stores (and UIs) are the latter, not the former.
Re: Claude Design
#263Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's why I miss the days of old fashioned GUI toolkits (before the web thought of itself as an application distribution platform): you would just design any app as a bag of typical controls in typical containers, and you and your users would live with the expectation that they would look and feel just like the rest of the operating system, nothing more, nothing less. Frivolity would be generally frowned upon, with…
I remember when people would vigorously complain that Toolkit X was simply unsuitable for any task because it did not conform to the operating system's standard visual appearance. Now I struggle to even define what an "operating system's standard visual appearance" is. Apple's still the best but not what they used to be on that front even so.
I don't remember people complaining about Winamp being a non-standard UI, but if it were slow then there'd be tons of complaints - and many of the "fancy" UIs were terribly slow (or the programs were, hard for a user to tell the difference).
Re: Claude Design
#264If 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.
All Figma has spent the last 2 years doing is trying to get designers to use their Cursor/Claude Code text to code app.
Not convinced Figma cares about traditional design craft anymore.
Re: Claude Design
#265Earlier 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.
"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 whet…
[deleted]
Re: Claude Design
#266Earlier quoted context omitted.
Of course, there is indeed no shame. There is also no pride. Standardized interfaces are as exciting as kettle thermal switches or physical knobs in cars. Useful, probably optimal and will be around for decades to come. Also nobody talks about it, treats it with interest, or pays above market rate to work on it. The value becomes the architecture of the value of the tool, not the interface. There is still value being…
> Of course, there is indeed no shame. There is also no pride. But there's is "pride" in making tools people actually use without issue
But it's possible to have usability and a unique design character, if you use a human designer.
Re: Claude Design
#267Lovable 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.
Btw are you from Oaxaca? Nice to see another Mexican in here.
Re: Claude Design
#268If 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 tells me that Lovable is certainly not worth $6.6B.
That valuation is more insane than most, I would’ve loved to hear the arguments for it, it was a given they would have to compete with the companies who provides them with the models, anyone who thought they would just leave that market alone is a damn fool (the vendor lock-ins are great too, add some hosting, domain selling, etc and you got free money).
Re: Claude Design
#269Just started messing around with this but I like it. It produces better results than just using Claude Code on its own. The initial output has a lot of junk that needs to be removed (just like anything LLMs generate). I suspect it's only good at reproducing content that is relatively cookie-cutter and prominent in the training data. But still, as a non-designer this produces better results than I can and in line with the level of quality of many paid templates.
Re: Claude Design
#270Earlier quoted context omitted.
[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?
> 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 me.
Perhaps this phrasing is what invited the interpretation you seem to be annoyed with.
There is not much to gain by suggesting everyone is simply bad faith.