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

661–670 of 819 posts

Re: Claude Design

#661

Post by boc »

taytus wrote: post #304

Anthropic is making the exact same mistake OpenAI did: lack of focus. Release, release, release, all good apps, all full of bugs. This is a massive mess and people aren't talking enough about how bad all of this is.

I think you're missing the larger point: software is about to be insanely easy to generate. Anthropic is churning out new products because they can basically spin these things up in a week, so there's really no "cost" to them in a traditional strategic sense.

The US had the atom bomb for a few years before anyone else had it. Anthropic has mythos now before anyone else - they are probably using it to churn out as many software clones as possible before someone else catches up.

Re: Claude Design

#662

Post by makingstuffs »

stevage wrote: post #548
teiferer wrote: post #521

Earlier quoted context omitted.

McDonalds. Homogenous everywhere in the world. US, Italy, Japan, Brazil, same stuff. Good pizza in Italy, goos ramen in Japan, grilled Picanha in Brazil, that's why you go there and want it different/original. But in software UI this is often overdone. I want the pizzazz in my audio software in what it produces , not in how the UI looks like.

McDonald's is extremely different around the world. Different menu, different price.

I’d say the only place I’ve experienced McDonald’s to be ‘extremely’ different is in India due to the obvious prevalence of vegetarianism and outlawing of beef.

In other countries the do have a lot of additional meals which are specific to their local taste (rice/fried chicken/different sauces) but the core burgers like a Big Mac, mcChicken and sides such as fries are there.

Re: Claude Design

#663

Post by sofixa »

ValentineC wrote: post #581
sdoering wrote: post #459

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is actually a rational choice. It is a defense against extremely bad experiences. A personal example from a few weeks back. My SO booked a hotel for a weekend as a birthday present. We went there, it had a fantastic spa, dinner was delicious, the room great, clean, and so on. Individually designed, well thought out, friendly staff. Breakfast came around and the coffee was abysmal. Really truly abysmal. What did we…

> Marriott is basically the same for hotels. Marriotts are sadly not the same between countries, and that's probably a good thing. The standard for large chain hotels in the US are much, much lower than everywhere else in the world. Full-service Hiltons in the US don't even have executive lounges anymore.

> Full-service Hiltons in the US don't even have executive lounges anymore.

Some (at least one) don't even have breakfast facilities...

Re: Claude Design

#664

Post by wraptile »

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…

Locking into products with such low entry cost for 2-3 years is an outdated pov. It's not photoshop that you need to spend months to retraining yourself - the entire selling point of AI-powered software is that you can pick it up in a week and replace or just compliment your existing tools with almost no added effort.

Re: Claude Design

#665

Post by makingstuffs »

mjr00 wrote: post #55
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…

There's no shame in being homogenous and obvious, though. If I'm building out an internal tool for, say, a hospital lawyer to search through malpractice lawsuits, I want my tool to be the most familiar, obvious, least-surprising UI/UX possible. Just stay out of the way and do what it's supposed to do. The trick is, of course, that the human is still responsible for knowing when homogenous is fine, or when there's rea…

Yeah I think the web is more a tool than anything else nowadays and it being homogeneous is a good thing.

Think of roads. It’s one of few things that humans have managed to agree on across the planet and there’s a good reason for that. The system (regardless of which side you drive on) works. Signs, markings and materials are all pretty much identical wherever you go.

Re: Claude Design

#666

Post by sofixa »

thewebguyd wrote: post #289
jerf wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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'll still die on this hill, but I think that the reason there's a computer literacy problem is because we moved away from following OS conventions (when they existed) and into bespoke, branded UIs for everything, and then eventually to web where every site and webapp behaves differently. In the early days, if you learned the OS, those usage patterns and skilled transferred to every app on that OS. They all looked ro…

> In the early days, if you learned the OS, those usage patterns and skilled transferred to every app on that OS

And locked your thinking into the OS' way of thinking. Every software vendor had to do their application a few times over with a different release for each OS, because the design is completely different.

As someone who uses multiple OSes (work macOS and iOS, home Windows and Ubuntu, Android) I hate nothing more than apps that behave differently on the different OSes, with different logic or features.

Re: Claude Design

#667

Post by KellyCriterion »

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…

> since the glass effect and drop-shadows took over

And rounded corners, of course! :)

Re: Claude Design

#668

Post by solatic »

d0gsg0w00f wrote: post #599
Growtika wrote: post #199

For my agency this won't replace Figma or designers. It's just a really useful tool to express yourself and communicate intent. Before these tools, when a client wanted a specific section built, we'd spend hours hunting references across the web. The output always ended up feeling like a mesh of 2-3 sites, never fully unique. Then we'd burn more time explaining the intent to the client's designers and devs, usually w…

That's how I see most of the system design capabilities of Opus. I've been an engineer for 15 years. It's so nice to describe what you want, it gets you in the ballpark, and you can refine and tweak to get it just right. Sometimes it's fun to have it design crazy stuff so you can play out a crazy idea without wasting too much time. I can see how it could easily translate to the visual design space. Now, if I could on…

There's multiple tools that generate architecture diagrams from text/code (Mermaid, LikeC4...). You start using one and tell the model to generate the text for the architecture diagram and it'll do it. Stuff like https://erode.dev tries to use LLMs to keep it in sync.

Re: Claude Design

#669

Post by stringfood »

baxtr wrote: post #654
paulryanrogers wrote: post #551

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's not replacing designers. Except it is. Plenty of places will say this is all good enough and not hire, or even lay off, the UI/UX person. I've seen this firsthand.

In those cases you’ve seen firsthand, who is actually using Claude design (or similar tools) to create the good enough design?

The important point is that 2 years ago these AI tools were like 20% percentile for UX designers, today it is as good as a junior or normal UI UX Developer, 2 years from now it will be in 90th percentile, etc

Re: Claude Design

#670

Post by brikym »

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.

As far as I can tell these tools have quite a low ceiling. Great to start off with but but at some point I just find it easier to express myself with bezier curve handles than prompting. Canva, and Stitch (and maybe Claude Design) don't go that far.
Post reply on HN