3 ms·

> Adobe has probably captured back both mental and market share from Figma Unlikely. Based on the google trends [1], Figma sees around 10x more traffic than Fi

> Adobe has probably captured back both mental and market share from Figma Unlikely. Based on the google trends [1], Figma sees around 10x more traffic than Firefly, but more importantly it experiences severe weekend drop-offs, meaning people are using it for work. Firefly on the other hand has a constant amount of attention, in line with people playing around with it but not committing to it for serious projects. Anecdotally I work in UI/UX space as a contractor and I've been given every design in Figma, I hadn't even heard of Firefly until this comment. [1] https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=today%203-m&geo=US&q=%2Fg%2F11y1gbqmy3,%2Fg%2F11f65940xs https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=today%203-m&ge...

DoesntMatter22 3y ago
Things happen quickly and AI will change things quickly. Figma is nearly 8 years old and Firefly isn't even a year old. Of course a massive tool is going to be bigger than a very new tool and there is a lot of momentum at companies. The future is going to be AI/prompt based because it's a 100x speed savings. Who wins that pie is up for debate but Figma as it stands right now is very disruptable.
- coldtea 3y ago
  >Things happen quickly and AI will change things quickly. Yes, but oversold hype also dies quickly, not changing much in the end.
  - DoesntMatter22 3y ago
    That is a very silly way of viewing things. AI has already dramatically change logo creation and all sorts of image generation. The impact on design is already being felt and is going to rapidly increase. The cost savings are immense.
    - gibbitz 3y ago
      Sadly this is how we look at art thanks to AI. "It's just like a real person thought about it and made it intentionally -- but it's nearly free!". No one paying cares if it's just copied from other works and nearly randomly put together at the expense of those who can barely make a living doing it. Why don't we focus more on automating C-suite jobs? That's where a lot of corporate costs come from. Automating a logo design saves you 20k or likey (much) less. Automating a corporate merger saves you millions of dollars and years of time.
      - DoesntMatter22 3y ago
        I am incredibly happy about this. Otherwise it's like lamenting the invention of the car because it would eliminate all the jobs making buggies and whips. > No one paying cares if it's just copied from other works There are probably zero artists alive who didn't learn by copying other works or learning to make art in that style. It's no different with an AI. An AI is something that learns from others and creates it's own art. There isn't anything illegal about it any more so than you learning to draw and making characters that are similar to Mickey Mouse. You can trademark a specific thing but not a style. So at the end of the day, how is it any different than a person doing it other than the fact now a person won't be getting paid?
        coldtea 3y ago
        >I am incredibly happy about this. Otherwise it's like lamenting the invention of the car because it would eliminate all the jobs making buggies and whips. Between road accidents, air pollution, noise, horrendous cities and suburbs built around car use, and so on, I don't mind lamenting the invetion of the car either... In general it's pretty naive to celebrate new technologies without considering drawbacks. Especially if they are just stuffed down everyone's throats, whether they want them or not, and even more so if the technology has the potential to eliminate human creativity and cheapen creative output. Even more so if the technology has so much potential for abuse (for government surveillance, automated spam, all the way to far worse cases, so much so that even its creators warn about the potential existential threat). I guess what's the remove of creativity, or the existential threat, and countless of other negatives, compared to cheap logos, or (assuming it lives up to hype the way you say) killing off graphic design as a profession? >So at the end of the day, how is it any different than a person doing it other than the fact now a person won't be getting paid? In the removal of human creativity in the design, and its delegation to an algorithm.
    - coldtea 3y ago
      >That is a very silly way of viewing things. AI has already dramatically change logo creation and all sorts of image generation. It "changed" the logo creation tier which was already "changed" by Fiverr $10 logos, logo-making apps with recombinable logo graphics, and so on.

DoesntMatter22 3y ago

Things happen quickly and AI will change things quickly. Figma is nearly 8 years old and Firefly isn't even a year old. Of course a massive tool is going to be bigger than a very new tool and there is a lot of momentum at companies. The future is going to be AI/prompt based because it's a 100x speed savings. Who wins that pie is up for debate but Figma as it stands right now is very disruptable.

coldtea 3y ago
>Things happen quickly and AI will change things quickly. Yes, but oversold hype also dies quickly, not changing much in the end.
- DoesntMatter22 3y ago
  That is a very silly way of viewing things. AI has already dramatically change logo creation and all sorts of image generation. The impact on design is already being felt and is going to rapidly increase. The cost savings are immense.
  - gibbitz 3y ago
    Sadly this is how we look at art thanks to AI. "It's just like a real person thought about it and made it intentionally -- but it's nearly free!". No one paying cares if it's just copied from other works and nearly randomly put together at the expense of those who can barely make a living doing it. Why don't we focus more on automating C-suite jobs? That's where a lot of corporate costs come from. Automating a logo design saves you 20k or likey (much) less. Automating a corporate merger saves you millions of dollars and years of time.
    - DoesntMatter22 3y ago
      I am incredibly happy about this. Otherwise it's like lamenting the invention of the car because it would eliminate all the jobs making buggies and whips. > No one paying cares if it's just copied from other works There are probably zero artists alive who didn't learn by copying other works or learning to make art in that style. It's no different with an AI. An AI is something that learns from others and creates it's own art. There isn't anything illegal about it any more so than you learning to draw and making characters that are similar to Mickey Mouse. You can trademark a specific thing but not a style. So at the end of the day, how is it any different than a person doing it other than the fact now a person won't be getting paid?
      - coldtea 3y ago
        >I am incredibly happy about this. Otherwise it's like lamenting the invention of the car because it would eliminate all the jobs making buggies and whips. Between road accidents, air pollution, noise, horrendous cities and suburbs built around car use, and so on, I don't mind lamenting the invetion of the car either... In general it's pretty naive to celebrate new technologies without considering drawbacks. Especially if they are just stuffed down everyone's throats, whether they want them or not, and even more so if the technology has the potential to eliminate human creativity and cheapen creative output. Even more so if the technology has so much potential for abuse (for government surveillance, automated spam, all the way to far worse cases, so much so that even its creators warn about the potential existential threat). I guess what's the remove of creativity, or the existential threat, and countless of other negatives, compared to cheap logos, or (assuming it lives up to hype the way you say) killing off graphic design as a profession? >So at the end of the day, how is it any different than a person doing it other than the fact now a person won't be getting paid? In the removal of human creativity in the design, and its delegation to an algorithm.
  - coldtea 3y ago
    >That is a very silly way of viewing things. AI has already dramatically change logo creation and all sorts of image generation. It "changed" the logo creation tier which was already "changed" by Fiverr $10 logos, logo-making apps with recombinable logo graphics, and so on.