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.

▲

qkeast 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

>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 exercise with little intrinsic value.

	▲	jug 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		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.

▲

eric_cc 4 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> does not replace Figma

Not entirely but I would use this and not Figma. I am passionate about system design not visual design so I don’t want to waste time in figma.

▲

atonse 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

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 me.

But then again I was never a "designer" – more a builder.

▲

simplyluke an hour ago | parent | next [-]

I'm much closer to your persona than a professional designer. 5 years ago if I was going to spin up a landing page for a side project I was probably getting something mediocre together with bootstrap or material UI. Today I'd probably get something marginally better together with a tool like this. In both scenarios I'd end up with an undifferentiated but acceptable end state.

I've never paid for a figma seat. A couple of employers have so that I can collaborate with designers in the product, but I don't think this changes that.

In an era where it's cheaper and more common to end up at that undifferentiated state, the ability for companies to make their products go above and beyond it is more valuable, not less.

I see this across the board with AI. It lowers the bar to get to passable, but as slop fills the internet we're already seeing people place more value in good products, good writing, good art, thoughtful code architecture, etc. Everyone and their cousin's uber driver is vibe coding a SaaS startup no one's going to pay for right now.

	▲	prescriptivist 32 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		> good writing, good art, thoughtful code architecture If you are talking about a consumer product, one of these is not like the others.

▲

nothinkjustai 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Spending 5 minutes on the most user facing, tactile part of your products? Sounds like less of a builder and more of a slopper to me :)

▲

hugeBirb an hour ago | parent | next [-]

Ah, slopper is hilarious. Too long has the title of builder just been an excuse to make dog shit UI and excusing yourself. If you're going to build user-facing tools, good UI/UX is a requirement not an option. Couldn't imagine this excuse flying in any other industry. Yeah I just made a chair where all 4 legs are different lengths and the back rest is in the middle of the seat, "I'm just more of a builder"

▲

atonse an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

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?

	▲	nothinkjustai 10 minutes ago \| parent \| next [-]
		I don’t think I can interpret it in better faith. You’re excusing low quality output by calling yourself a “builder” (meaningless term btw), is “slopper” not an accurate term here? How else would you describe somebody who spends 5 minutes prompting an LLM on one of the most important aspects of a product? Everyone who creates something is a “builder”, that term doesn’t excuse someone from not putting effort in. I don’t care if you aren’t a designer, it’s about the effort you put into your work :)
	▲	dugidugout 42 minutes ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		> 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.

▲

islewis 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> 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.

this overlap has been widening incredibly quickly. lots of designers are now writing code with the help of cursor, claude code, etc.

even if you believe "real designers" wont ever use this product, it's not hard to see how a low barrier-of-entry tool could affect Figams bottom line. slowing down Figma's adoption from the new wave of entry-level designers who dont already have muscle memory would not at all surprise me at all.

▲

whywhywhywhy an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

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.

▲

3sdfs 29 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Nevertheless, Dylan has done a bad job in communicating stuff about Figma to the stock market and why it won't get toppled.

He should probably go and let someone else take the reigns.

▲

ziml77 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I think they understand that the people running businesses are going to look at this vs a human who uses Figma and realize how much more cost and time efficient it is to pay for a machine than a human.

▲

motoxpro 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

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

▲

aurareturn an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Maybe Figma is better for large teams. Even here, teams are getting smaller and smaller.

But for me, I will never use it again.

▲

seizethecheese 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Just last week, I asked the designer on my team to try working in Codex instead of Figma. It’s just not a great workflow to pass a figma file to a developer to implement. She hasn’t wanted to go back yet…

▲

xnx 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> 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.

	▲	0gs an hour ago \| parent [-]
		how do you define "need?" by my estimation, there are more than 1000 software products in the world, so i do not think 1000 is anywhere near enough.

▲

2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

[deleted]

▲

an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

[deleted]