[HN Gopher] Show HN: We built Lovable for Mobile Apps (uses Flut...
___________________________________________________________________
Show HN: We built Lovable for Mobile Apps (uses Flutter)
Hey HN. We built an AI agent, Avid, that creates beautiful Flutter
Apps, much like v0 or Lovable. The agent carefully makes UI UX
considerations, generates Flutter code, and you get a preview on
your browser. I've gone through lots and lots of iterations to
help the agent produce beautiful results. Would love your feedback.
Ability to download App files and flutter code should be ready this
coming week. Have a look and let me know what you think!
Author : wcynthia
Score : 29 points
Date : 2025-03-12 11:29 UTC (11 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.getavid.dev)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.getavid.dev)
| skillwee wrote:
| Sounds promising. What Lovable or Bolt is missing is ability to
| visually customize the output (like a no-code tool). Imagine if
| you could combine your AI agent + Flutterflow like No Code
| abilities? That would be magical.
| wcynthia wrote:
| That was the idea from day one. Can't wait to ship that feature
| echelon wrote:
| Are Lovable, Bolt, or V0 good? I haven't tried them yet.
|
| Are these tools going to replace application designers? How
| much work can they do, and how much remains to be done by
| engineers? Can they engineer complicated apps, or do they
| reproduce simple apps from a training set? (TODO list apps,
| etc.)
|
| Is the code these systems output any good? Maintainable and
| extensible?
| BJones12 wrote:
| You may want to change the name. Avid is also a _very_ well
| recognized brand, and you won 't rank highly for it either in
| search or in people's brains.
| bilalq wrote:
| I feel like these concerns are often overstated. Gemini was a
| well-known crypto exchange. Outside of their niche, I don't
| think Avid is something the average person is familiar with.
| Even the average software engineer.
| Oras wrote:
| You can't compare Google to a service just started
| hodorwang wrote:
| It seems to be using Vercel to preview the app effect, which is
| quite interesting.
| wcynthia wrote:
| Yes, it provides pretty quick deployments. We just hit the
| limit a few minutes ago. Had to upgrade
| jbirer wrote:
| It's been some time that I worked with React Native, but I
| think you can use react-native-web to create web previews of
| the mobile app.
| horsawlarway wrote:
| You don't accept a signup that isn't Google or Microsoft. So I
| guess I won't sign up...
|
| You also don't tell me this until I've already written a prompt,
| which is frustrating.
| uncomplexity_ wrote:
| shitiest ux pattern ever
| ilrwbwrkhv wrote:
| What all these ai apps have is a certain look. it's like the
| bootstrap look from the early days. you know the app is being
| made by somebody who doesn't really care about quality.
|
| I think there is going to be a counter reaction towards artisanal
| apps which will come out of all of this.
|
| Just how WordPress runs 70% of the web but it's 70% of the crap
| web.
|
| Similarly AI will maybe create 70% of the apps but it will be 70%
| of the crap apps.
|
| And this is not some sort of reflection on AI. AI is actually
| great tech, but it's more about the person making the app and the
| proof of work required to show how much they care about the
| product. Or in this case these apps will be associated with shady
| fly-by-night companies trying to sell something.
| tracker1 wrote:
| I'm going to have to completely disagree on Bootstrap. The use
| of Bootstrap isn't an indication on a lack of quality, it's an
| indication on a desire for a decent UI from the start. The fact
| that it was widely used isn't necessarily reflective of a given
| app.
|
| Bootstrap, Material, etc. are all just established tools in
| terms of visual usability and consistency. Many people are far
| more concerned about having something functional over something
| that looks completely unique or different.
|
| Personally, I tend to dislike most UI/UX experiments in terms
| of usability. Not all, but definitely most are just bad
| compared to what most people are used to.
| BoorishBears wrote:
| I'm like AI and I still agree.
|
| It's because models struggle with design, period.
|
| They're not great at getting things like margins right and
| consistent across an entire app while they're trying to follow
| instructions for a complex design.
|
| Similarly they understand contrast if prompted directly, but
| while they're implementing a complex design they'll tend to
| still end up making poor contrast choices with tons of default
| fonts everywhere.
|
| -
|
| If you iterate more and provide images back to the model, you
| can start to get something better, but that's tedious and the
| opposite of what most people using these tools are trying to
| do.
|
| And V0 defaults to the absolutely awful ui/shadcn which is the
| worst possible idea as AI driven development becomes popular
| (let's create a UI library with minimal design tokens, no
| package name, no guarantees on consistency or versioning
| because you literally cut and paste it and update it by
| applying diffs.)
|
| I'm personally excited to see if larger models with multimodal
| output will be able to generate detailed coherent UIs, that I
| can then implement using a copilot for tedious parts.
|
| To me that's the ideal flow to get something that doesn't have
| the "V0 Look"
| Oras wrote:
| How about showing some samples created by this app? The landing
| page is not appealing for an app builder service.
| andrewstuart wrote:
| Whenever I check out a new way of making stuff I want lots of
| working examples that I can actually use - a gallery/showcase.
|
| I'm not going to use a new technology just to find out what it
| looks like.
|
| IMO your front page should be minimum 10 examples apps to
| download.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2025-03-12 23:01 UTC)