Tech • AI • Robotics
Open Design : j'ai testé l'alternative open-source à Claude Design
6/10TL;DR
Open Design, an open-source design tool inspired by Cloud Design, shows promise but suffers from slow performance, excessive token consumption, and missing key editing features.
KEY POINTS
Open Design Emerges as an Open-Source Alternative Open Design was recently launched as a fresh open-source design platform built on technology from popular tools like Cloud Design and Ouashu Design. It aims to offer an accessible option for users frustrated by the limits and wait times imposed by commercial design services, which typically allow only a few hours of use before requiring a cooldown period.
Installation and Setup Experience The installation process is straightforward but requires launching Visual Studio Code with administrator rights to avoid Corepac enable issues. Once installed, Open Design detects installed auxiliary tools such as Cloud Code and Codex, letting users choose their preferred setup without forcing exclusive API use.
Interface and Feature Set Closely Mirrors Cloud Design Open Design’s interface strongly resembles Cloud Design, incorporating design system management with options to upload brand assets for coherent creative output. Features include prototype creation, slide deck generation, templates, plus image, video, and audio handling. Notably, Open Design integrates GPT Image 2 for direct image generation, which is leveraged by users for creating visuals like thumbnails.
Importing Cloud Design Projects Users can import zipped project files directly from Cloud Design, facilitating workflow continuity. However, some functional discrepancies were observed, such as responsiveness issues in imported prototypes.
Performance and Functionality Drawbacks Compared to Cloud Design, Open Design is reported to be at least twice as slow. Crucially, core editing tools such as comment, edit, and draw are currently non-functional. These tools are essential in Cloud Design to allow efficient, finer modifications without large token expenditures. Their absence in Open Design severely limits usability.
Excessive Token Consumption Open Design’s current workflow leads to heavy token usage; for instance, a simple footer redesign took over seven minutes and consumed a very large number of tokens, which could become costly and unsustainable. Since comment and edit features are missing, users have no tools to make lighter modifications.
Slide Deck Creation Is Possible but Flawed Open Design offers a slide deck feature allowing users to create presentations by responding to prompts. However, the output quality is inconsistent, with issues such as inadequate padding and layout errors. Exporting slides to PPTX format is problematic, with export times exceeding 18 minutes and no clear progress indications, ultimately frustrating users.
User Experience Still Requires Improvement The interface also suffers from usability issues such as grayed-out controls during background tasks and lack of feedback on long-running operations. These hinder workflow efficiency and user confidence.
Promise Acknowledged Despite Limitations While Open Design shows potential, particularly as an open-source project in a space limited by paid services, its current deficiencies—slow speed, lack of core editing tools, and inefficient resource usage—make it unsuitable for immediate adoption by professionals relying on responsive design workflows.
CONCLUSION
Open Design represents a valuable open-source initiative seeking to democratize design tool access. However, significant improvements in speed, token efficiency, and the restoration of key editing functionalities are necessary before it can be considered a practical alternative to established commercial platforms.
Explain this