[HN Gopher] Figma Alternatives
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Figma Alternatives
        
       Author : skilled
       Score  : 353 points
       Date   : 2022-09-16 13:27 UTC (9 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (stackdiary.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (stackdiary.com)
        
       | astonfred wrote:
       | Nice opportunistic post ;-) Well done. I must admit: I still love
       | Figma, even if they've joined the Adobe family (I've just
       | cancelled my Photoshop subscription btw, an unrelated move).
        
       | ssharp wrote:
       | People rave about Figma but I never really "got" it, compared to
       | Sketch. Granted, I'm on a Mac, am only in Sketch for 2-3 hours a
       | week, typically work alone and generally use it to re-arrange
       | website items and hack up what a new element on a site might look
       | like in the current site structure.
       | 
       | The few times I've tried to use Figma, I walk away frustrated by
       | the fact that I can't easily cut things out of an image that I've
       | imported/pasted in. I thought I was insane at first for not being
       | able to figure this out but after searching around, it sounded
       | like this is a feature that is missing. The workaround is
       | spending way too much effort making multiple copies of your image
       | and then cropping each individual element you want control over
       | moving. Pretty absurd but this my need here has to be an edge
       | case, even though it doesn't seem like one. I suppose if 99% of
       | people are designing interfaces natively in Figma and aren't
       | using screenshots as a starting point, this isn't an issue.
        
         | goldenchrome wrote:
         | With regards to editing an imported image, you're looking for a
         | bitmap editor like Photoshop. Figma is vector based and
         | definitely made for digital experience designers who need to
         | collaborate with large cross-functional teams.
        
       | wly_cdgr wrote:
       | Missing both of my favorites....Framer and Justinmind
        
       | unnamed76ri wrote:
       | I only recently started learning Figma and it was for the express
       | reason of wanting to build apps via Bravo Studio because I'm also
       | not a programmer.
       | 
       | Do any of these alternatives have integration with Bravo Studio?
        
       | insane_dreamer wrote:
       | Miro is a good FigJam alternative, though not as disigner
       | oriented as Figma, more for whiteboarding / diagramming.
        
       | pen2l wrote:
       | I like this list, I like that Sketch is #2, and #1 is an OSS
       | self-hostable solution, https://penpot.app/ --
       | https://github.com/penpot so we can't quite get burned like we
       | did with Figma.
       | 
       | From some cursory review, it seems pretty good! And there's now
       | effort underway to be able to import Figma files.
       | 
       | edit: okay, I've gotten signed up with penpot, made rudimentary
       | sketches, it seems solid and promising. I'm now a fan and I think
       | this seals the deal for me, I'm glad that it was an easy
       | decision. And I will give them the benefit of the doubt when it's
       | not exactly up to par because 1) they seem to be new and
       | characterize themselves as still being in beta and 2) it's self-
       | hostable OSS and the inherent security of this offering is
       | something I value deeply.
        
         | davidjgraph wrote:
         | I'm not quite sure why everyone feels OS means you'll have the
         | app forever. This isn't true in my experience.
         | 
         | Adobe can buy the company that is supplying the devs for penpot
         | the same way it bought Figma.
         | 
         | Sure the source can be reused, but you think another collection
         | of individuals will come along and host the project in the same
         | way?
         | 
         | You think the codebase would be developed/maintained at all if
         | all the original devs left? History says otherwise, from the
         | examples I've seen.
        
           | that_guy_iain wrote:
           | It just feels like one of those things people want to believe
           | no matter if it's true or not. For example, when New York
           | shutdown a recycling plant because it was worse for the
           | environment than not recycling and everyone protested to have
           | it reopened because no matter what anyone told them they
           | believed that recycling is good therefore, the recycling
           | plant was good for the environment.
           | 
           | Most people here need open source tools to do their job in
           | one way or another. They love the fact they don't need to pay
           | for it and they can just use it. They've been sold on the
           | free software ideogly that it's possible to fork means that
           | someone will or they even they will do it. No matter how much
           | their employers refuse to open source their code, refuse to
           | pay for open source contributors they fully believe that
           | using an open source library or tool means there is less risk
           | for their company because they can make the changes
           | themselves. However, the risk is often greater. Almost
           | certainly their employer won't pay for it and they will have
           | to look for a replacement. They won't have any support
           | contracts that can enforce how much notice they get given to
           | find a replacement. The open source tool will most often just
           | be abandoned.
        
           | fny wrote:
           | I've said this before elsewhere and was downvoted to hell.
           | We're about to enter the golden age of bitrot. Software, due
           | to its immense chain of dependencies, requires constant
           | maintenance. There is _no guarantee_ * _any software*_
           | --proprietary or FOSS--will survive unless some human gives a
           | shit.
           | 
           | So penpot is a great alternative to Figma for as long as
           | you're damn sure someone will be willing to keep it alive.
           | 
           | Everyone has become so used to pulling or downloading
           | whatever random software and have it work and creating forks
           | like wildfire (just look at how many ubuntu flavors there
           | are) without considering what will happen if the devs just
           | don't have the time anymore or don't care. And if something
           | massive upstream changes like CPU architecture (hello M1) or
           | some browser change or some migration to Oauth5, everything
           | gets borked in one shot.
           | 
           | Also, what's going to happen when a package creator _dies_?
           | The first generation of FOSS devs are still alive and well.
           | Will the second generation decide to maintain their work or
           | is it easier to rewrite things?
           | 
           | Personally this is why I started only pushing packages that
           | have _extremely_ small surface areas (a single function call)
           | that I know I 'm willing to maintain indefinitely.
           | 
           | This is also why I became so married to plain text.
        
             | alexvoda wrote:
             | The difference is that for FLOSS it is sufficient for
             | anyone to care enough (time and money) but for proprietary
             | software it is NECESSARY for the copyright holder to care
             | and to be alligned or at least not in direct conflict with
             | the users.
        
             | zegl wrote:
             | Oh, tell me about it! I've spent this week trying to
             | reproduce the results of a paper from 2019.
             | 
             | Out of the box, the referenced sources doesn't even compile
             | or run. I've been fighting random Python/Java/Scala
             | dependencies, using whatever version was the "latest" at
             | time of publishing usually works, unless of course, it
             | doesn't support M1...
        
             | mrits wrote:
             | Having a bunch of small packages instead of a few larger
             | ones would be considered increasing surface area in most
             | security software. You could do it safely but I wouldn't be
             | evangelizing this as a sound idea.
        
           | jchw wrote:
           | Honestly, I don't think this is fair. If software is useful
           | enough, there are people and other _companies_ that are often
           | willing to put in money and resources. For a pure community
           | example, consider the story of Jellyfin, a fork of Emby.
           | 
           | Open source is not a panacea. But just because keeping the
           | door open doesn't guarantee anyone will bother to use it
           | doesn't mean having the door open is not ridiculously useful.
           | 
           | I think there _Is_ a way to tell if an open source project is
           | robust against shenanigans:
           | 
           | - The more stakeholders investing, the better.
           | 
           | - Projects with governance and copyright not assigned to a
           | single company have a lot less chance of needing a fork to
           | begin with.
        
           | mekoka wrote:
           | _> why everyone feels OS means you 'll have the app forever._
           | 
           | Your hyperboles aside, I don't think there's much to prove.
           | Maintained and long lasting forks abound. Enough to instill
           | confidence in the principle.
           | 
           | If Figma was open source, there would be a fork right now and
           | a team of contributors forming around it as we speak. That
           | and a migration of a substantial part of its community.
           | 
           |  _> This isn 't true in my experience._
           | 
           | Could you share, so that the naive optimist could at least
           | have some context?
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | orbital-decay wrote:
           | With a non-gatekept solution you have two options typically
           | unavailable for proprietary software:
           | 
           | - freeze the versions, keeping using it until you find a
           | better one. Practice shows it can be done for quite a while
           | in many cases (years if needed)
           | 
           | - migrate to the different similar software, or hire an
           | expert to do it for you
           | 
           | There were too many cases of wonderful proprietary products
           | suddenly becoming ransomware overnight, holding your data
           | hostage.
        
           | btown wrote:
           | Bryan Cantrill's LISA11 talk on this history of OpenSolaris
           | provides a great anecdote for this, and it largely tracks
           | your fears here.
           | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-zRN7XLCRhc&t=1680s
           | 
           | It also, a couple minutes later, devolves into a hilariously
           | entertaining rant about Oracle and Larry Ellison and the
           | perils of anthropomorphizing lawnmowers, and it's one of my
           | favorite things ever.
        
             | jsrcout wrote:
             | That was wondrously great.
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | afavour wrote:
           | > Sure the source can be reused, but you think another
           | collection of individuals will come along and host the
           | project in the same way?
           | 
           | Look at OpenOffice vs LibreOffice. MySQL vs MariaDB. It can
           | happen. At the very least it's more likely than if you're
           | using commercial software.
        
             | davidjgraph wrote:
             | As I recall the majority of the OpenOffice team went to
             | Libre, that isn't the point I'm making here.
        
               | mixmastamyk wrote:
               | The team can take their buy out, work for ~two years then
               | quit. And be more likely to work on the still floss
               | version after that.
               | 
               | VMs are a thing as well. These are not insurmountable
               | issues.
        
           | happimess wrote:
           | I think the difference is that if Figma's website goes
           | offline, you lose all of your figma stuff. If penpot gets
           | acqui-killed, then you can just clone a version that you were
           | comfortable with and keep going.
        
             | davidjgraph wrote:
             | Yes, just like you can clone draw.io and run that forever.
             | Except, until you can't.
             | 
             | Like last week when Safari 16 broke any use of the command
             | key on Macs and we received 5+ reports per hour until it
             | was fixed.
        
               | KMnO4 wrote:
               | The way that I like to view it is this: if I put my
               | laptop in a vault for 15 years and then open it back up,
               | can I use the software?
               | 
               | Of course, I'll be on a 15 year old OS but the answer
               | appears to be "yes".
               | 
               | Not the case with Figma or other hosted tools. Not even
               | the case with Photoshop or tools that require license
               | checks / internet connectivity.
        
               | throw10920 wrote:
               | If you use something like Nix or Guix, then you might be
               | able to continue to _install_ and run that very old
               | software, even decades into the future, until the old
               | repos vanish and the hardware becomes physically
               | incompatible - at which point, if it 's important enough
               | to you, you may have put in the work to port the software
               | forward to new (web) API revisions and browser behaviors.
        
               | Lariscus wrote:
               | I don't think that is a good example, nothing is stopping
               | you from using a different browser or operating system to
               | keep using your preferred application after development
               | is shutdown. If you are self-hosting these avenues are
               | still open to you; a discontinued online service is just
               | gone.
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | specialist wrote:
           | Would you prefer FOSS or commercial abandonware?
        
           | whywhywhywhy wrote:
           | Only solution is a spite company.
        
           | worble wrote:
           | >I'm not quite sure why everyone feels OS means you'll have
           | the app forever. This isn't true in my experience.
           | 
           | It at least gives it a chance, unlike closed source where
           | once it dies it most definitely is gone forever (barring some
           | very dedicated and helpful people reverse engineering the
           | code, this seems to largely happen with video games).
           | 
           | Meanwhile I'm running Strawberry, a fork of Clementime, which
           | is a fork of Amarok, which probably has code from other
           | projects older than me in it.
           | 
           | Will FOSS software always live on after the original
           | maintainers move on? Of course not, but not only does it
           | stand a much better chance, you'll still always have the
           | source available to compile it yourself on newer systems,
           | given the will.
        
         | iudqnolq wrote:
         | Anecdotally it looks like it's impossible to write good graphic
         | design software without serious money for multiple employees.
         | 
         | Penpot seems to be funded by an interesting and unusual Spanish
         | incubator. That's better than I expected, but still not great
         | given there isn't a clear good path to profitability.
         | 
         | Sure it's open source, but there's no way I'm taking over
         | development if they stop. That means them stopping their
         | subsidy of the open source software is as bad for me as Adobe
         | raising Figma prices.
         | 
         | https://kaleidos.net/what-we-do
        
         | that_guy_iain wrote:
         | How did you get burned by Figma? What has Figma done since it
         | announced it's getting acquired by Adobe that has burnt you?
        
           | djbusby wrote:
           | Adobe is the Burn.
        
           | worble wrote:
           | Adobe acquiring Figma is like suddenly realising you're
           | living on a floodplain. Sure your house might not be flooded
           | _right now_ but you better sure have plans in place for when
           | it does, and honestly you 're probably better just looking
           | for a new house so you no longer have the stress of wondering
           | when it will flood.
        
           | HelloNurse wrote:
           | Are you waiting for Figma to get an Adobe-style pricing plan?
           | The general sentiment is that it was a nice house, but now it
           | is burning. Run while you can!
        
             | bin_bash wrote:
             | What does this mean? They're both based on subscriptions.
             | Don't most designers already have CC subscriptions?
             | 
             | Is it the lack of a free tier that's the problem?
        
       | tonybeltramelli wrote:
       | We've been building this design tool (https://uizard.io/) for
       | developers and non-designers alike. Defo not meant to replace
       | Figma -- it's built as an easier / quicker alternative for folks
       | that need to iterate fast.
        
       | d_rc wrote:
       | Hehe, is anyone still using InVision? (honest interest)
        
       | greencore wrote:
       | I don't understand business model of the company behind Penpot
       | (Kaleidos). Their products doesn't offer anything paid but I see
       | a button "Invest in us". For me this tells that their products
       | will eventually become non-free and only open-source in a way
       | that it can export SVG.
        
       | yellowapple wrote:
       | > First and foremost, at this time - Figma will remain an
       | independent (separate from Creative Cloud) company. That much was
       | said in the announcement from the CEO, Dylan Field.
       | 
       | lol yeah right.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | notjustanymike wrote:
       | The number of feature areas where Figma succeeded and Adobe
       | failed is astounding. The closest analogue I can think of is
       | SpaceX and Boeing.
       | 
       | Figma solved online tooling, collaboration, interaction
       | protoyping, design systems, and stakeholder review with a single
       | product. Their renderer can handle hundreds of frames in the same
       | screen with no performance degradation.
       | 
       | Meanwhile Adobe continues to struggle putting together version of
       | photoshop or lightroom on a tablet that people like.
        
         | wly_cdgr wrote:
         | Photoshop is a VASTLY more complicated, sophisticated, and
         | feature rich product than Figma. It's not fair or relevant to
         | compare them directly
        
         | VyseofArcadia wrote:
         | > Meanwhile Adobe continues to struggle putting together
         | version of photoshop or lightroom on a tablet that people like.
         | 
         | I'm sure there's more to it than this, but Figma started with a
         | clean slate. Having a legacy codebase means a few things, and
         | one that doesn't get talked about very often is that there is a
         | lot of pressure to re-use code even if it would be more
         | difficult than a re-implementation.
         | 
         | I've worked on legacy codebases, and it goes something like:
         | you start working on a new feature. You realize you need to
         | implement some extra detail you didn't think of. You mention
         | this in standup, and your manager says something like, "oh, no
         | problem, Steve implemented a function that does that back in
         | '97. You should use that because the old code already handles
         | all these edge cases." So then you spend the next 2-3 sprints
         | struggling to get Steve's code working, because his code and
         | your code both made some assumptions about the data model that
         | are incompatible. It doesn't really help that Steve's code has
         | some subtle reliance on global state, so you have to worry
         | about saving that global state, changing it, calling Steve's
         | code, restoring the saved state, all while praying to various
         | gods that it doesn't break anything on another thread you
         | didn't know about.
         | 
         | Or it would have taken just a couple of days to reimplement it
         | in a way that already plays ball with your data model. Sure,
         | it's not DRY, but dogmatic DRY can be a big source of pain in
         | legacy codebase.
        
           | kyriakos wrote:
           | Adobe XD started with a clean slate but ended up being
           | inferior to Figma. Even simple XD shared prototypes on the
           | web are multiple times slower and less responsive than
           | figmas.
        
           | aikinai wrote:
           | Lightroom and Photoshop for iPad are brand new and nowhere
           | close to their legacy versions.
        
             | oangemangut wrote:
             | that doesn't mean they haven't relied heavily on either re-
             | using Ps code or making an effort to shim between the
             | various OSs and what they already have for Ps.
        
         | adrianomartins wrote:
         | Adobe it's a classic case of Sales-led-development, which
         | started to generate a huge organisation that is very slow and
         | far away from it's users.
         | 
         | On the other hand you have a Figma, product-led, figuring out
         | what's best for users, and kicking ass with a web-based
         | solution that IS what designers/devs need. Legends!
        
       | redocecin wrote:
       | We can try https://www.visily.ai
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | johnla wrote:
       | I've been using Framer.
        
       | anotherrandom wrote:
       | Well, there's still Gimp and Inkscape if you aren't afraid of
       | working outside of a browser
        
       | pelagicAustral wrote:
       | Are we already abandoning ship? I wouldn't think Adobe is going
       | to pull the plug or anything too drastic, Right?
       | 
       | Btw, I've been a happy Affinity [Designer, Photo, Publisher] user
       | for many years now. Can't even believe I'm still getting updates
       | with my years old licences. +1
        
         | whywhywhywhy wrote:
         | It's the principle, this was the first time in 17 years
         | anything threatened Adobe and honestly Figma could have
         | destroyed Adobe within 3 years with the right focus.
         | 
         | Figma threw every single artist and designer in the world that
         | does 2D work under the bus when they could have saved us all
         | and built better tools.
         | 
         | Actually I'd go beyond saying it's the principle, actually now
         | it's personal all the money I spent on Figma, all the hours I
         | spent pushing Figma in organizations and building our workflows
         | around it has just gone to strengthen Adobe's grip on my
         | livelihood.
         | 
         | This might sound dramatic but imagine for a moment how you'd
         | feel if you could only work within your industry if you used
         | VSCode, it was closed source and it cost $60 a month and the
         | only chance of fighting against that had sided with the enemy.
        
           | draw_down wrote:
        
           | parasubvert wrote:
           | But this is the thing, it's not healthy to see Adobe as the
           | permanent enemy. They are a reflection of their people and
           | leadership and this is arguably a sign they are a changing
           | company.
           | 
           | Your analogy once was true with Microsoft and Visual Studio
           | in the 90s. It was the main IDE for Windows development
           | (there was no Linux, not really). And it was expensive. There
           | wasn't much competition until Java took off.
           | 
           | These days Microsoft isn't seen as the enemy as often. Github
           | is doing fine for example. Companies can change.
        
             | ReptileMan wrote:
             | Microsoft actually cared about the developers. They also
             | cared about the right things from business point of view.
             | Their backwards compatibility is and was always insane.
             | 
             | The irony is that Microsoft gave us freedom, Apple gave us
             | lockdowns.
        
             | HelloNurse wrote:
             | Enemies are permanent until they die, not until you get
             | tired.
        
             | whywhywhywhy wrote:
             | > But this is the thing, it's not healthy to see Adobe as
             | the permanent enemy
             | 
             | - I used Fireworks every day in my job, they killed it.
             | 
             | - After Effects was a top 3 digital creative tool ever
             | made, they let it rot till it's a janky shadow of its
             | former self, it can't even the timeline without audio
             | glitches making ANY audio work to animation impossible,
             | same can be said for Photoshop, can't even save an image
             | without it trying to force you onto their dropbox
             | competitor.
             | 
             | - They had the perfect entry point tool for multimedia
             | creation with Flash that a whole generation of teens learnt
             | how to express themselves online with and they let parts of
             | it rot because they saw it as nothing more than a
             | videoplayer and enterprise app Java competitor.
             | 
             | How are they not my enemy, we're talking decades of attacks
             | on my workflow at this point.
        
               | oangemangut wrote:
               | didn't Apple kill flash by never supporting it on iOS?
               | maybe there is more to the story.
        
               | nemothekid wrote:
               | > _Apple kill flash by never supporting it on iOS_
               | 
               | Apple tried very hard to support Flash on the iPhone.
               | Apple flew out Adobe engineers to help them get it work
               | on mobile. It was a tire fire and that's why Apple killed
               | it. The dysfunction with Flash started before the iPhone,
               | and arguably started with the acquisition of Macromedia.
        
               | klabb3 wrote:
               | It was already dying. Every web dev in the world hated
               | it, and so did most of the users. But the worst offense
               | was having proprietary closed source binary that couldn't
               | be audited, running untrusted code on end devices. For
               | instance, if you're on any OS other than Mac or Windows,
               | you'd have a bad time, and often have no option to use
               | flash sites (at the time, it was common to build flash
               | sites even for simple document-style web pages). It was a
               | security nightmare, but it was also a stability
               | nightmare. When I saw Steve Jobs announcement I was so
               | relieved. It was a bold move at the time, iPhone was
               | nowhere near as dominant as it is today.
        
             | BurnerBotje wrote:
             | Maybe the difference between Adobe and Microsoft is that
             | the latter has kind of proven itself now. In the meantime
             | is Adobe very busy trying to separate the Open Source
             | version of Magento from the paid version, called Adobe
             | Commerce now. There is only one mention of Magento left on
             | the homepage, about the name change. And is a link to the
             | free version now where to be found.
        
         | eagsalazar2 wrote:
         | They will almost certainly experience a mass exodus of their
         | top engineering, design, and leadership talent. They'll never
         | come back from that. So it isn't that figma will turn to crap
         | overnight, but over years it is guaranteed to rot, terrible
         | features will start adding up, and adobe will start doing
         | everything they can to pull you into and trap you in their
         | expensive and crappy ecosystem.
         | 
         | So yeah it's sort of like climate change. Probably ok for now,
         | but you should definitely start making moves to live somewhere
         | else in the next few years.
        
         | strict9 wrote:
         | Just about any time a competitive product is swallowed up by a
         | large company that product is left to wither for a year or so
         | before riding off into the sunset.
        
           | parasubvert wrote:
           | That's just not true. Slack is doing fine. Github is doing
           | fine. Red Hat is also doing fine. Etc.
        
         | parasubvert wrote:
         | It's mostly independent designers that feel they can't afford
         | Adobe level subscriptions.
        
           | detritus wrote:
           | Or "Don't want to pay for", which includes me. The feature
           | set that I use in my daily driver - Illustrator - has pretty
           | much remained constant since CS2 or thereabouts, but I have
           | to maintain a subscription solely to ensure that I can load
           | files from clients without any concern about incompatability
           | or breakage.
           | 
           | It's quite annoying paying good money for old rope for years
           | and years on end.
        
             | GlacierFox wrote:
             | You'll hate to admit it but I know for a fact that a lot of
             | the tools introduced after CS2 have become indispensable
             | and allow you to get work done faster and more efficiently
             | than back in the day.
        
               | the_mar wrote:
               | Like what?
        
               | detritus wrote:
               | "For a fact"? Only if you presume to know what I do and
               | how I work, I suppose.
               | 
               | I'd not be so bold, personally.
               | 
               | - ed: I wondered perhaps if Smart Guides were newer than
               | I remembered, but nup, having checked - they were there
               | in CS2.
        
           | cosmodisk wrote:
           | From western world perspective, $85/month for a whole suite
           | of powerful apps is absolute peanuts if they are used in a
           | professional setting. An average carpenter probably spends
           | more on tool upgrades each year.
        
       | webwielder2 wrote:
       | Since 2012, through the eras of Photoshop, Sketch, InVision, XD,
       | Figma, and whatever else, I've been using Antetype:
       | https://www.antetype.com
       | 
       | For me, it's been a 10x tool since it was always the only piece
       | of software that was designed from the ground up as a UI design
       | tool, rather than being some other kind of app that was pressed
       | into service for UI design. Auto-layout, responsiveness, and
       | flexible components that can be edited per instance without
       | breaking their link to the master component are all features that
       | were present from day one rather than being awkwardly bolted on.
        
         | lucideer wrote:
         | Looks great but seems to be competing with Sketch. Figma's
         | appeal was being cross-platform; that's hard to beat.
        
           | yesimahuman wrote:
           | I took this opportunity to look at Sketch again and I'm
           | shocked they still don't have a desktop version for Windows.
           | They are stubbornly wed to their focus on a "truly native"
           | mac app despite Figma proving over and over that cross-
           | platform is what users actually want and need. Seems like
           | another huge opportunity missed with Figma users scrambling
           | for alternatives.
        
             | pjmlp wrote:
             | Better, Figma proves how Web apps can be good enough on the
             | browser by itself, no need for Electron garbage.
        
           | sygma wrote:
           | Not to mention multi-player editing [1]. They nailed the
           | execution and no competitor comes close
           | 
           | [1]: https://www.figma.com/blog/how-figmas-multiplayer-
           | technology...
        
         | gffrd wrote:
         | > it was always the only piece of software that was designed
         | from the ground up as a UI design tool
         | 
         | You sure about this? What about UXPin? XD? Axure?
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | bottlepalm wrote:
         | Do these tools provide the css/js to the developer so they can
         | implement the style these tools generate?
        
           | mrcus wrote:
           | Genuinely asking: Do developers look at these styles as more
           | than helpful tips? Surely these CSS/JS blobs that Figma
           | outputs have to be correctly and carefully merged into the
           | codebase?
        
             | kitsunesoba wrote:
             | I've personally only used the generated code as a starting
             | point or guideline at most, because I usually have an
             | implementation in mind already and it's more work to
             | reorient myself around the generated code.
        
         | psygn89 wrote:
         | I've never heard of them but they seem to host a solid set of
         | features, and being around since is 2012 is impressive. I think
         | part of a products success is its availability on different
         | platforms, I wonder how long they have hosted this page for?
         | https://www.antetype.com/antetype-for-windows-web/
        
       | alistairjallan wrote:
       | Icons8 Lunacy is also quite an impressive and free Figma
       | Alternative. https://icons8.com/lunacy
        
         | geesejuggler wrote:
         | It opens (and saves) Sketch files as well
        
           | kitsunesoba wrote:
           | Might be worth pointing out that this is thanks to Sketch
           | publishing specs[0] for their format, making it easy to write
           | importers/exporters for. As far as I know Figma has yet to do
           | this, so anything that reads Figma files is likely reverse
           | engineered and prone to breakage when Figma inevitably
           | changes their undocumented format.
           | 
           | If I were searching for a Figma alternative, its file format
           | being documented would be a priority because otherwise, one
           | is subjecting themselves to some degree of lock-in.
           | 
           | [0]: https://developer.sketch.com/file-format/
        
         | insane_dreamer wrote:
         | hadn't heard of it before but looks pretty sweet, esp since
         | it's free
        
         | AltruisticGapHN wrote:
         | My first thought is... how is this free if it's similar to
         | FIGMA?
         | 
         | It sounds like they have basically bundled in a lot of their
         | own icons/svg stuff and that's their business model? But even
         | then building such an app seems like a huge investment if it's
         | just a platform to sell your icons. So I must be missing
         | something.
         | 
         | And how does it compare to Penpot?
        
           | mattkevan wrote:
           | I have it installed, and while it's handy for opening Sketch
           | files if you don't have a subscription, basic things like
           | text handling and typography are rough. It's useful, but I
           | wouldn't try and actually design in it.
        
       | silent_cal wrote:
       | This is insane in my opinion. People are acting like Figma is now
       | "unclean" for being associated with Adobe.
        
         | marban wrote:
         | Typical HN -- Anything that goes under the umbrella of big corp
         | gets thrown under the bus, while everyone dreams of selling out
         | one day.
        
           | behnamoh wrote:
           | Agreed. Remember HN's reaction to "I don't care about
           | cookies" extension being bought by Avast? or BitWarden's sale
           | and the many alternatives that people started sharing on HN?
           | These kinda of reactions by HN are actually hypocritical tbh.
        
             | exodust wrote:
             | > Remember HN's reaction
             | 
             | Who is HN? Is you HN?
             | 
             | Did you add your thoughts about Avast and the acquisition
             | of the browser extension?
             | 
             | If you found a common opinion on that topic, perhaps it's
             | because data harvesting and selling user data is a common
             | pattern associated with similar acquisitions. It's not like
             | people latch onto gloomy conspiracies pulled from the
             | nearest echo chamber, repeating them in unison, swaying to
             | the beat of an HN drum. Is that what you're suggesting?
        
               | behnamoh wrote:
               | I'm only part of HN. No I did not write about Avast
               | takeover of the extension; I simply deleted the extension
               | on my own machine.
               | 
               | At the end of the day, "data harvesting and selling user
               | data" is done by programmers. I find it unacceptable that
               | some do it and then come to HN to complain about other
               | people's work.
        
             | mixmastamyk wrote:
             | It's almost like there's more than one person on this site,
             | with differing opinions. :-D
        
           | parasubvert wrote:
           | The classic HN crowd is the one that dreams of building and
           | IPO'ing or selling.
           | 
           | The balance seems to be the "government should own/regulate
           | all businesses I need or hate" crowd. Which feels like
           | younger folks that haven't thought through that endgame.
        
           | mszcz wrote:
           | As an argument for what you're saying can you please offer
           | some examples of small software companies / products that
           | flourished under big corp umbrellas?
        
             | bin_bash wrote:
             | YouTube, Instagram, LinkedIn, GitHub, Pixar, NeXT, Siri,
             | Android
        
               | mszcz wrote:
               | Thanks!
        
           | strangeattractr wrote:
           | This is true, but in this case it's somewhat warranted. Part
           | of what I like about Figma is that it's browser based and
           | pretty simple. This is in stark contrast to Adobe's products.
           | I really hope this isn't absorbed into some bloated CC
           | subscription package.
           | 
           | The reason this anti-corporate stuff appears is because the
           | point of sale is also the best moment Figma competitors who
           | no doubt lurk on here have to throw their name out there and
           | convert users.
        
           | chenmike wrote:
           | I haven't seen anyone saying the founders shouldn't have done
           | this or that they wouldn't have done the same in their shoes.
           | I'm allowed to be happy for the founders and also hate Adobe
           | and worry about the future of a product I use at the same
           | time
        
             | parasubvert wrote:
             | Yes of course, but that's very different from "I am so
             | traumatized that I'm giving up design as a professional
             | interest" which I've seen in a few comments and tweets.
        
               | edgyquant wrote:
               | I don't understand why people pretend a few
               | radical/obscure internet comments is proof of a belief
               | system.
               | 
               | No one is traumatized by this and no one is giving up
               | their profession.
        
             | scarface74 wrote:
             | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32850848
        
           | bin_bash wrote:
           | It may be the case that _some_ individuals on HN dream of
           | selling out but I 'm not convinced those are the _same_
           | individuals that have an issue with products being purchased
           | by big tech.
           | 
           | Is there a logical fallacy for this? I see it a lot online
           | and it drives me nuts. Just because you can point out that
           | the general viewpoint of a group might be hypocritical, that
           | doesn't mean the individuals themselves are necessarily
           | hypocritical.
           | 
           | (personally I have no opinion on figma/adobe, but this class
           | of comment drives me nuts)
        
             | jlokier wrote:
             | _> Is there a logical fallacy for this?_
             | 
             | I call it the "fallacy of the crowd" and I agree it is very
             | common.
             | 
             | I first noticed it enough to give it a name (and then see
             | it everywhere!) about 12 years ago.
             | 
             | Not just online, and it's not always talking about a
             | negative, i.e. apparent hypocrisy or contradiction. It is
             | also used to talk about apparent consequence or
             | implication.
             | 
             | E.g. political campaign speeches often use it. "They" this
             | so "they" that; "they" this and then "they" that; "they"
             | say this yet "they" do that: Different subsets of people
             | referred to by "they" in the same sentence or train of
             | thought.
             | 
             | It's a great rhetorical trick for persuading large numbers
             | of people of something rousing yet wrong.
        
           | resonious wrote:
           | Right. Reminds me of a Dan Luu tweet where he mentioned
           | people who used to be idealogically opposed to Amazon
           | eventually joining Amazon with a nice cushy salary.
        
             | pjmlp wrote:
             | Since I am a bit older, I came to realize this is no
             | different from the hippie movement in the 70's, whose
             | plenty of people ended up joining Wall Street during the
             | 1980's.
        
         | parasubvert wrote:
         | It is a bit extreme. However they have a history of jacking up
         | prices, bundling things that independent users don't want
         | bundled, and slowing improvements.
         | 
         | That said, changing doesn't really make much sense at the
         | moment, it does make sense to think through the point you will
         | change.
        
           | depingus wrote:
           | Changing may not make sense, but those getting started might
           | want to plant roots elsewhere.
        
           | scarface74 wrote:
           | Opposite anecdote. I used CoolEdit before it was acquired by
           | Adobe and became Adobe Audition. It's a much better product
           | now and is not bundled with anything else.
        
         | vagrantJin wrote:
         | If MBAs really are for the intelligent, they'd leave Figma well
         | alone and maybe put an Adobe logo somewhere and keep the team
         | doing as they did, making money and keeping customers genuinely
         | happy.
         | 
         | ...But I have a better chance of finding the 'z' in 'Susan'
        
           | klabb3 wrote:
           | You don't pay $20B for a $400M revenue product with 1200
           | employees to pay if you're planning to keep things as they
           | are. Best case scenario is that they accept that figma is
           | superior and let Xd die instead. That said, they'll
           | definitely change pricing and spend eng resources on
           | integrations with their other crap. Oh, and you'll need an
           | Adobe account for sure.
        
         | moomoo11 wrote:
         | Not at all. Maybe if adobe didn't have such a terrible
         | reputation it would be different.
        
         | insane_dreamer wrote:
         | Creative Cloud -- need I say more?
        
           | silent_cal wrote:
           | The only thing wrong with Creative Cloud is the cancellation
           | fees. Other than that it's an awesome software bundle, and
           | the pricing is really fair for what it is, I think. For
           | example, Adobe After Effects is so powerful that just
           | learning it well can be the start of a career.
        
             | insane_dreamer wrote:
             | The individual Adobe products themselves are quite good;
             | it's CC and all the processes it insists on running that
             | you can't get rid of that I don't like.
        
               | the_mar wrote:
               | For real. Although I do remember how much i hated that
               | "flip horizontally" meant exactly the opposite thing in
               | Ps and Ai
        
         | kmos17 wrote:
         | Adobe has a long history of increased prices with stagnating
         | products, the entire creative suite subscription pricing model
         | is just so user hostile. I am not necessarily against
         | subscriptions, but the complexity of the packages and dark
         | patterns of hiding cancelation fees on monthly plans and
         | offering reductions when someone tries to cancel is just a bad
         | experience. For the vast majority of users core products like
         | photoshop or lightroom have not really added any major new
         | feature justifying ongoing subscription pricing being the only
         | option.
        
         | shabbatt wrote:
         | I believe this attitude is local to HN. I don't see employers
         | ditching Figma, they are locked in.
        
         | 9935c101ab17a66 wrote:
         | On more than one occasion, I've had Adobe customer service reps
         | _outright lie_ in attempts to convince me not to cancel
         | creative cloud.
         | 
         | For example, I wanted to cancel my CC subscription, and when I
         | contacted their terrible chat support (fuck Adobe for not
         | letting me cancel it on my own? and they offered me two months
         | free. I said no. They upped it to four months free, and I
         | specially asked if I could cancel after the four free months if
         | I wanted. The Adobe customer service person said "of course, no
         | proven". Four months later, I try to cancel and guess what?
         | They are saying I agreed to a yearly subscription and I have
         | eight months left. I explain that I specifically asked about
         | that four months ago, and ask him to consult the conversation
         | logs. They insist they don't keep logs and there is nothing
         | they can do. After some back and forth, the rep SENDS ME a
         | excerpt that supports their argument (the excerpt was taken out
         | of context and was meaningless on its own of course).
         | 
         | I immediately pointed out that they had just confirmed the chat
         | log of the previous conversation did exist, that they were
         | lying, and I wanted to speak to a supervisor. The service
         | person quickly agreed to cancel my sub without penalty, said
         | their supervisor wasn't available and disconnected.
         | 
         | Single-handedly one of the most under-handed CS experiences
         | I've ever had, and I've come across countless other stories
         | similar to my own. Adobe is scum.
        
         | yamtaddle wrote:
         | Looking around for a life raft is just common sense when a big
         | tech company acquires a product you use. Even if you don't
         | necessarily jump on it immediately. Odds are _pretty good_ it
         | will one or more of: 1) Stagnate, 2) Be closed down, 3) Become
         | much worse.
        
         | dual_dingo wrote:
         | Adobe has a long, well documented history of screwing their
         | users, e.g. with their switch to this stupid Creative Cloud
         | bullshit.
         | 
         | It's just natural and common sense to look for alternatives if
         | you rely on Figma and don't trust them to be a viable product
         | in the hands of Adobe.
        
           | marban wrote:
           | Adobe changed/is going to change a lot for the better under
           | Scott Belsky.
        
             | psygn89 wrote:
             | Any supporting articles that would ease minds?
        
           | panzagl wrote:
           | So Adobe screwed their users by making them switch to a
           | subscription model like Figma has used from day one?
        
             | the_mar wrote:
             | What? Figma is free for personal use.
             | 
             | I have no problem paying a subscription fee for a corporate
             | account. Having to fork over $100 a month to adobe for
             | personal use is ridiculous. Problem with adobe there was
             | never a free tier
        
               | panzagl wrote:
               | If you're not the customer you're the product. Figma just
               | cashed you out.
        
               | the_mar wrote:
               | Ok cool. Still better than forking over 100s of dollars a
               | month for CC
        
               | TylerE wrote:
               | If you're paying hundreds, you're getting ripped off. The
               | full CC suite is $55/month
        
               | skyyler wrote:
               | But that's not the point.
               | 
               | The point is that we dislike Adobe and we don't want to
               | deal with them in any context.
        
             | psweber wrote:
             | Until you need a team, Figma is free.
        
               | jillesvangurp wrote:
               | For now.
        
             | behnamoh wrote:
             | This is HN, where developers diss companies' decisions
             | while they would do the same. It's actually kinda
             | hypocritical tbh.
        
               | aikinai wrote:
               | It's not hypocritical. Most of the comments I saw in the
               | initial thread clearly supported both angles. "Wow that
               | sucks, but huge congrats to the team!"
               | 
               | Looks to me like most people acknowledge that it's great
               | and natural for the company but just feel distraught by
               | the implication for users.
        
       | scelerat wrote:
       | I really wish OmniGroup had the vision and resources to bring
       | OmniGraffle into some kind of shared collaborative editing world,
       | whether by developing a web app, or incorporating some kind of
       | collaborative, versioned backend for "corporate" users.
       | 
       | It has one of the best overall general diagramming/graph layout
       | engines and UI of anything I've used on the desktop and web. My
       | experience in the diagramming, layout and technical-ish drawing
       | realm includes Figma, as well as Illustrator, Photoshop,
       | Pagemaker, Freehand, Deneba Canvas, Mac Draw Pro.
       | 
       | I still love Omnigraffle for flow charts, presentations, UML
       | diagrams, and UI wireframes. It's not a 1:1 replacement for
       | Figma, but it suits many of the same problems.
       | 
       | But its existence as a solo, mac-only, desktop-only app relegates
       | it to my personal projects and I can never use it fully at work.
        
         | vxNsr wrote:
         | > _mac-only_
         | 
         | I was trying to figure out why I'd never heard of Omnigraffle
         | and then saw this. Makes sense. It's interesting that there are
         | so many Mac-only design tools
        
       | xapata wrote:
       | Maybe it's time to switch to 1.0?
       | 
       | https://0ver.org/
        
       | parasubvert wrote:
       | Not a designer but an engineer that reads designs, and Figma
       | really is a game changer. High quality collaborative designs,
       | great UX, and rather inexpensive to users.
       | 
       | Exactly what Adobe would need to stay relevant because they're
       | usually the opposite on these fronts :-)
       | 
       | I can't see switching being too realistic.
       | 
       | $20 billion is a lot of money. That's worth more than Cloudflare,
       | Snap, Spotify, and just $3b shy of Zoom's current market cap.
        
         | hn_throwaway_99 wrote:
         | Yeah, I think the biggest improvement Figma made is that it
         | made it so much easier to share and collaborate on artifacts
         | from design with the engineering team. The previous process we
         | used for taking Sketch designs and turning then into running
         | apps was much more painful and cumbersome.
        
           | robertoandred wrote:
           | Except getting assets out of Figma is a huge pain. Trying to
           | select the layers you need (if even possible), not being able
           | to flatten layers into an exported image, not being able to
           | compress the exported image...
        
             | the_mar wrote:
             | Uhhh what? Sounds like you just throw everything in figma
             | file without using artboards or components.
             | 
             | What do you mean you can't flatten layers? Isn't it what
             | "exporting an image" is?
             | 
             | You can absolutely compress the exported image, well you
             | can decide whether you want to export it at 1x 2x etc. It's
             | a bit different from changing dpi but honestly using figma
             | for print is rough
        
               | robertoandred wrote:
               | Sometimes the artboards, components, or whatever the
               | structure in use is doesn't match up with dev needs.
               | Sometimes you need things split up, sometimes you need
               | them flattened. It's just not flexible.
               | 
               | And 1x 2x etc isn't compression. I want a quality slider
               | for JPGs, an 8-bit option for PNGs, I want to explicitly
               | set the output resolution, I want to know how large the
               | original source file is, how it's being cropped, etc.
        
         | jayd16 wrote:
         | I found Figma docs thrown over the wall from designers pretty
         | hard to consume.
         | 
         | Perhaps it was just how that particular design team used it but
         | 
         | - they put a huge amount of information in a single document.
         | 
         | - lots of sticky note style additions that were not clearly
         | associated with what they referred to.
         | 
         | - hard to search.
         | 
         | - hard to determine what a single unit of work could be. Again,
         | maybe this was the team but they didn't have a concept of
         | discrete tasking. It was just "here's the giant figma doc with
         | everything from p0s to stuff we might not even want"
         | 
         | What are the upsides?
        
           | kgeist wrote:
           | Interesting, we have a similar situation. A lot of
           | information all at once, hard to navigate, search etc.
           | Usually developers are so confused a figma doc is often used
           | more like a prototype to show during a demo than a spec to
           | share. Instead our designers make screenshots of it and put
           | them in a well-organized Confluence document. I don't know
           | what's the right way.
        
         | The5thElephant wrote:
         | Figma will never be good at dev handoff because it isn't built
         | on HTML/CSS rendering, so its code output is awful. No plugin
         | or interpretation layer can fix this.
         | 
         | CSS is the language of design, yet for some reason every design
         | tool completely ignores it.
         | 
         | Every top feature request on the Figma Forums is for HTML/CSS
         | type features. We need a design tool built from the ground up
         | on HTML/CSS rendering that has a Figma-like interface. Framer
         | and Plasmic are sort of like this except made the mistake of
         | wrapping everything in React code with tons of unnecessary
         | abstractions that make the HTML/CSS output really messy.
         | 
         | I like the attitude relate.app (now Rainbow) has, but I don't
         | see Figma being the final design tool, particularly when
         | working with developers.
        
           | radley wrote:
           | > every design tool completely ignores it
           | 
           | Figma shows CSS code in the Inspect view. It's limited, but
           | not ignored.
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | xyzzyrz wrote:
           | Hi, I work on Plasmic. If not React, how would you encode
           | composition, state, and behavior?
        
           | rosywoozlechan wrote:
           | > CSS is the language of design, yet for some reason every
           | design tool completely ignores it.
           | 
           | Maybe for web development, but people use Figma for mobile
           | app designs too and those do not for the most part use CSS as
           | the language for design.
        
         | ableal wrote:
         | For scale: EV maker Lucid is worth 24 billion, and Apple
         | recently had twice that in cash reserve. (Looked it up because
         | of an unfounded rumor linking both.)
        
         | scarface74 wrote:
         | Snap is losing money and doesn't seem to have any path toward
         | any decent profitability.
         | 
         | Spotify is a low margin business since no matter how much it
         | makes in revenue, it will always have to give 70% to the labels
         | - a company with high marginal costs that scales with revenue
         | is the opposite of a successful tech company.
         | 
         | Cloud flare is also losing money.
         | 
         | Why would any of these companies besides Zoom be considered a
         | successful company that should have a high valuation?
        
       | serverlessmania wrote:
       | Can someone explain to me why Adobe acquisition of Figma is
       | considered bad?
        
         | atarian wrote:
         | Adobe has a history of using dark patterns to keep people
         | subscribed to their products such as hidden fees for
         | cancelling.
        
       | happytiger wrote:
       | So who's up for building a better than it was replacement dual
       | license open source version of Figma?
       | 
       | Ironically, we can design the whole thing in Figma.
        
       | moffkalast wrote:
       | Anyone seen that open source version called Ligma?
        
         | knicholes wrote:
         | Is this a "Ligma balls" joke?
        
           | moffkalast wrote:
           | No, I'm being completely serious
        
         | sergiomattei wrote:
         | What's Ligma?
        
       | pentagrama wrote:
       | Here are some more alternatives with comparisons between them
       | https://uxtools.co/tools/design
       | 
       | Penpot should be added to this list.
        
       | hackzornews wrote:
       | I think the saddest part of the Figma acquisition isn't the
       | possible death of a tool I enjoyed using, it's the death of my
       | interest in learning more about design.
       | 
       | I have been an engineer for many years and started to do more
       | design work with Figma. I even enrolled in a design bootcamp.
       | Figma inspired me a lot and sparked an interest in design.
       | 
       | This acquisition has killed it for me.
        
         | whywhywhywhy wrote:
         | Despite what Adobe wants you to think, design is bigger than
         | them.
         | 
         | Keep at it, maybe read up on physical product design where
         | there is less tool talk.
        
         | redocecin wrote:
         | That's exactly how I feel. I tried to use some Adobe's products
         | but I failed because all of them have a steep learning cure and
         | their UI/UX are complicated too. By contrast, Figma made my
         | life easier.
        
       | marban wrote:
       | Sketch user since day 1, love it. Affinity Designer is great too
       | but feels bloated and less intuitive, esp. when you only create
       | for the Web.
        
         | evv wrote:
         | I really miss the early days of Sketch (DrawIt, anyone?)
         | 
         | As a developer it's been a bittersweet journey to see Sketch
         | grow to be so popular amongst designers.
         | 
         | In 2012 I was excited to "buy" Sketch for $50, but I am less
         | enthused to subscribe at $100/year. At this point I'm looking
         | for a more lightweight and longer-lived solution. Figma is a
         | nice alternative but the price is likely only going up from
         | here.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-09-16 23:01 UTC)