Comment by danpalmer
20 hours ago
Coding yes, copywriting, design, identity, no. Using AI doesn't mean giving up on quality, unless you don't care about quality. Most of these issues come from folks who don't really care about quality and ship the first slop that comes out.
> Using AI doesn't mean giving up on quality
Look, I'm as anti-AI as the next guy but their homepage is good. They didn't compromise on quality.
Call a spade a spade.
I think the issue is that the prose on the homepage gives off AI marketing BS "Everything you'd expect. Nothing you don't." "Native down to the pixels" etc. in an age where the web is stuffed full of low value llm generated content this is a strong negative signal for me (and i suspect others). No reflection on the app itself which I've yet to try but seems like a great idea
> Most of these issues come from folks who don't really care about quality and ship the first slop that comes out.
Brings to mind The Show's "ugly MySpace" episode: https://archive.org/details/zefrank-theshow-083
It would be nice if everyone prioritised, and was capable of, shipping polished products. But more likely the apps you're bemoaning come from folks who are not product designers. Even prior to genAI there were plenty of developers (myself included) who had patchy competence in some subset of {copywriting, documentation information architecture, visual design, identity, UI/UX, ...}. I know good developers for whom UI coherence is "not their problem," although they know well enough that it needs to be someone's problem. "Programmer art" is also a thing. I would argue that the non-coding parts of many open-source projects are what lets them down, and when it is good it is usually documentation that impresses me the most. But I think Ze Frank's view might be that, given the sudden drop in barriers to entry, it is amazing that everyone is having a go and trying to express themselves.
Agreed