I design with Claude more than Figma now
blog.janestreet.com
June 7, 2026
5 min read
🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥
62/100
Summary
Claude Code is now preferred over Figma for design tasks. Previous experiences with LLMs like Copilot, Cursor, and Gemini resulted in unsatisfactory outcomes.
Key Takeaways
- The author has shifted from using Figma to Claude for design workflows, finding AI support indispensable for building prototype features directly in code.
- The new workflow allows for rapid iteration and testing of features, significantly reducing the time spent on mockups and documentation.
- AI has enabled the author to implement larger design ideas and prototypes without relying on traditional design tools, enhancing collaboration with engineers.
- The use of Claude has empowered designers to create working proofs of concept independently, facilitating easier evaluation of ideas by stakeholders.
Coverage & discussions
Hacker News · blog.janestreet.com
Community discussions
Hacker News discussion ↗
Historical count: 5 · 5 saved in sample · Historical sample
Analysis ready
Community Sentiment
Positives
- Claude Design allows for free, unlimited iterations, making it easier for designers to refine their work without incurring additional costs, which enhances creative flexibility.
- Designers are increasingly able to leverage AI tools like Claude to prototype quickly, which can lead to more efficient workflows and faster project completion.
- The ability to prompt Claude for specific design styles encourages creativity and customization, allowing designers to push beyond generic outputs.
Concerns
- The designs generated by Claude often adhere too closely to contemporary web tropes, which may limit innovation and lead to a lack of uniqueness in outputs.
- There is concern that reliance on AI tools like Claude could diminish the importance of foundational design skills, as designers may become less engaged with coding and traditional methods.
- The pressure to deliver quickly due to AI capabilities can lead to misunderstandings about design requirements, potentially compromising the quality of the final product.
