"AI design tools are everywhere right now. But here's the question every designer is asking: Do they actually solve real UI problems - or just generate pretty mockups? To find out, I ran a simple experiment with one rule: no cherry-picking, no reruns - just raw, first-attempt results. I fed 10 common UI design prompts - from accessibility and error handling to minimalist layouts - into 5 different AI tools. The goal? To see which AI came closest to solving real design challenges, unfiltered."
"🛠️ The 5 AI Tools I Tested Here's the lineup I put through the test: Claude AI - Anthropic's model, excellent at contextual understanding, UX writing, and accessibility-focused content. Stitch (Google) - Still in beta, but already showing strength at structured, clean UI layouts. UX Pilot - A specialized AI tool built specifically for user experience and interface design. Mocha AI - Designed for rapid prototyping."
A controlled experiment tested five AI tools by feeding ten common UI design prompts under a strict no-cherry-picking, no-rerun rule to capture only raw first-attempt outputs. Claude AI showed strength in contextual understanding, UX writing, and accessibility-focused content. Stitch demonstrated early capability for structured, clean UI layouts. UX Pilot targeted specialized user experience and interface design. Mocha AI focused on rapid prototyping. First-pass outputs varied widely: some addressed accessibility and layout structure, while many produced visually appealing mockups lacking depth in error handling, edge cases, and implementation readiness. AI appears useful for ideation and layout generation but requires human oversight for real-world constraints.
Read at Medium
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]