"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 test applied raw, first-attempt outputs from five AI tools to ten common UI prompts, including accessibility, error handling, and minimalist layouts. The experiment enforced one rule: no cherry-picking and no reruns, to evaluate unfiltered performance. Claude AI performed strongly on contextual understanding, UX writing, and accessibility-focused content. Stitch (Google) showed strength at producing structured, clean UI layouts despite beta status. UX Pilot functioned as a specialized tool for user experience and interface design. Mocha AI targeted rapid prototyping. The objective was to determine which tool came closest to solving real design challenges without manual selection.
Read at Medium
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]