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

701–710 of 819 posts

Re: Claude Design

#701

Post by stingraycharles »

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…

You say homogenous as if it’s a bad thing. I look at proper desktop app ecosystems, and wish the web didn’t try to reinvent everything all the time.

It’s 2026 and every web application has a different menu layout, date picker, etc.

Re: Claude Design

#702

Post by paduc »

codegeek wrote: post #122
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.

On the other hand, Canva made a genius move to partner with Claude for this. One of my favorite products as a non designer.

Canva will be next to go.

Re: Claude Design

#703

Post by samrus »

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.

The bulls' theory is that right now the person who doesnt know how to design pay a designer that will use figma, but with something like claude design they can just vibecode the thing without having to get a designer involved.

Its making alot of bold assumptions, but we live in interesting times so thats par for the course

Re: Claude Design

#704

Post by imposter »

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…

[dead]

Re: Claude Design

#705

Post by samrus »

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…

The tool just allows them to synthesize an implementation, but if its designed badly then it will fail and they will have to get better at design anyway. I dont see how that itself is the problem. The tractor didnt make farmers worse at farming even if they lost the strength to work an old school plow

I think the challenge will be everything else the person will be doing. Will this person also try to coding? And financial management? And marketing? And operational planning? Just because there are tools out there for them to synthesize implementations of that. If so then they wont be able to get good at any of those. But i think the backwards pressure from failing at those things will bring it back to a stable equilibrium where you have specialists who are good at the abstract ideas of their field leveraging these things as a new abstraction layer of work, analogous to the compiler

I think itll be fine

Re: Claude Design

#706

Post by andoando »

BeetleB wrote: post #514
gbalduzzi wrote: post #384

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everyone remembers fondly the time they were young, I believe it is more about that then everything else. I understand your feelings but it is extremely tipical in human history to keep remembering "the good old times"

That may be true, and had you asked me half a lifetime ago, I would have likely said "The old days were better". But: I would have still said I enjoyed using computers. And I wouldn't have said "Today's interface sucks" (well, other than my HW not being able to keep up with eye candy...) I simply don't enjoy using the computer these days. And I do think the interface sucks. Pretty much anything that involves using th…

I don't either, but I really think Im just burnt out. The simplest things piss me off.

Re: Claude Design

#707

Post by maronato »

zormino wrote: post #321
spyckie2 wrote: post #278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is officially the 2010 Google era at Anthropic (the era where Google released tons of new products and spread themselves too thin). Anyone remember Google's social media platform??? Google Plus? This is a good era to be in! Its the era of product experimentation. As long as you realize that 90% of the products will not be supported long term if it doesn't contribute to bottom line revenue, then just appreciate it…

You mean you aren't still using Google Duo and Allo? Google Reader? Playing games on your Stadia? I'd be worried about really locking into a specific Anthropic product at this point other than Claude Code

I never recovered from Inbox being killed.

Re: Claude Design

#708

Post by eecc »

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…

Well well well, that was nice read thanks!

And if it’s LLM the prompt or the rework were very good because I really liked the flow and clarity. That, or you’re a really good writer ;)

Re: Claude Design

#709

Post by dilberx »

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…

but other llm's won't even give good design at all. For low effort automated design, being homogenous is not bad right?

Re: Claude Design

#710

Post by Gud »

mbesto wrote: post #450
mjr00 wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> There's no shame in being homogenous and obvious, though. The real world analog is this... The reason people (especially Americans) stay in Marriott property hotels is because they are homogenous. If all I want to do is travel to Phoenix, AZ for work I want to know that the hotel room has the same mattress, desk, TV, customer service, etc. There is real legitimate value to that. So I'll book the Courtyard in Phoeni…

More important than “same”, you don’t want any weird shit going on.

I travel 300 days a year work for and stay in hotel apartments, and I still miss the Hyatt I stayed in Manchester in 2021… last place I stayed that had gotten everything right.

Post reply on HN