Here's my direct feedback, as a member of your target audience:
The call to action says "Copy prompt", not "Unlock prompt", "Sign in to copy", or "Get Creative to access prompts". I didn't even go past the signup to see if the prompts themselves are actually free and work without a subscription to your hosted MCP server. There's a GitHub link in the header suggesting an OSS tier, at the least. That repo may include "prompts" folders, but no prompts are there. The README doesn't even hint that this is a paid library of assets/prompts until the very end, with the misspelled "enhanched" sentence under the "Pro" header. The only prompts that appear to be in the repo (other than those that configure an agent how to use the paid and hosted MCP) are basic design guidelines.
Getting back to the website: your hero text directly invites users to "Try each example and copy its implementation prompt." Which immediately demands the aforementioned signup flow that I didn't bother completing.
All of that just turned me right off.
Your examples are nice, if a bit generic. But if you intended this to be a loss-leader for the more "enhanched" UI/UX skills, it isn't doing that job.
I have deep appreciation for well crafted vanilla front-end and for the value micro interactions bring to the table, but I really struggle to reconcile the value of this now that we have LLMs that do a phenomenal job at solving these UI/UX problems.
Tailwind UI is a perfect example of this where when I used to use Tailwind UI religiously and paid for it, I can just tell Claude Code “make it much prettier and bring it to life with really well designed micro interactions to create an excellent and enjoyable end-user experience” and it will get me 90% there which is easily more than good enough.
I really hope I’m wrong and that there is still a market for hand crafted components like this but honestly I think the free components exposed here plus the images of the paid components is enough for any LLM to pick this up and run with it likely without the LLM user even knowing that’s what has happened and therefore I can’t see a path to sustainable ARR for you guys.
Some of these are genuinely nice. I really like the action slide-out, the wall reveal, and the slide-off reveal.
Unfortunately for a thing whose core job is polished UI, there's still quite a lot of polish needed before I would be willing to implement any of this in my UI
To name a few :
- the swap icon state theme preview switcher cascades the element brightness rather than fading them together.
- The confirm reveal has something wrong with the spring every third or fourth click, which is strange
- Cards: the stacked deck cycle. When you click Next, it doesn't draw the top card.
- The shared element expand option: when you minimize, the spring dampening pushes the components outside of the container.
- Swipe to dismiss causes the container to temporarily show a scroll bar.
I've seen you all on Twitter and have been confused on why people like this product. A lot of these are fairly unpolished and don't seem to have been designed with much consistency. I think if I gave Opus 5.5 instructions to make pretty much any of these components it could produce these 1-shot.
Take the verification code UI for example. We have animations on switching between the numbers, but not on updating the check icon. I also don't have the option to see other states. What happens on Error? For example.
On your Bio fill, the better pattern for text character limits is not to stop allowing typing after the limit has been hit, but instead to allow overfill and start counting onwards with an obvious red state. You do this, but cap at 20 more. Why? The whole point is to allow people to enter their full text and synthesize to the character limit. Is this a configurable setting? I can't tell if there's a customization because I have to create an account to copy the prompt and there's no obvious path to learn more about it.
These were literally the first two components I looked at. At that rate I feel like I can find an issue with all of them.
Feels unpolished and I can't imagine paying for it. Much less at a minimum of $10/mo when soooo many other free component websites do the same. For a design-focused product, the experience feels cheap and more like AI slop to me than a polished solution.
Love these but curious: they sell access to this UI but can't I point an agent at this and have it copy these? Or is it better quality outputs to use the MCP?
Thanks! Me and the co-founder of the project built Flowbite previously so we have some experience in the UI/UX field. I think that as with anything you can copy it, but your agent will be pointed to an HTML+CSS structure, rather than the natural language structure of our prompts/MCP context. Plus, you can support the work of two fellow humans.
as fancy as your buttons are, if you use your frontal lobe for more than 0.1 picoseconds you can realize quite simply anyone can just think "hmm... this is a upload button. if i say make me a modern white upload button and tell it to have the progress update in percents while the file uploads, then have it fade out and have a green done text with a checkmark to the left" and your natural language structure of your prompts is quite useless now!
or "make me a verification code button, with four numbers. the highlight box should move naturally between the numbers, and once all four numbers are placed, replace the email icon with a checkmark that is green"
or "make a black box that grows once it can't fit the text inside it"
or "make a theme switcher, that represents light mode with the sun and dark mode with the moon, and quickly fades colors to the selected theme when the theme switcher indicator is pressed"
or "make me a password prompt that hides the characters and replaces them with circles, unless you click the eye button that shows your password, which will then be crossed out with a line until you press it again to hide your password"
also if i wanted to be really woke with you the inline validation example having the name NEED to be 3 letters long at least minimum is very very VERY bad of an idea. dudes named bo or ed, for example. or chinese people who can be named things like yu. or japanese people named ao.
i can't see any situation where this would be worth paying for. this nonsense absolutely stumps me, why would anyone pay for... skills and prompts, brand kits, sound effects, site auditing (by ai, not even humans), ui animations, and design rules. things we could easily prompt for free, i'm sorry
this looks like it's made to bait people into thinking "so this is free" then hitting you with a login gate. especially the audit page (https://www.typeui.sh/audit), i think it's the most blatant example, and i think the 'unlock design skill', 'unlock prompt', et cetera should be made even clearer it's a login wall. like 'unlock design skill by signing up', 'unlock prompt by signing up' etc. the audit page has no clear within 2 seconds of looking at it warning that you know THIS IS A MASSIVE LOGIN WALL. all your design skills (https://www.typeui.sh/design-skills), while good looking to the eye at first, are quite clearly vibecoded and don't provide anything new that makes ai handle design in an actually unique way. the ones i would say are the only ones even somewhat salvagable are 'immersive', 'sketch', 'cypherpunk' (the best one imo and closest to not looking like ai slop), and maybe the color scheme of organic.
i don't want to be rude but your website really really sucks and i have no clue who this is supposed to target when people have eyes and brains and can just prompt what your website does... or simply just put the design skill things into their ai like this
'hi claude
Cypherpunk is a stark retro-tech design system with one electric-lime surface, near-black ink typography, raised beige components, and pixel-edged UI structure.
make me a website like that'
or
'hi claude make me a web kit'
as respectfully as i can say it, your business idea sucks and arguably is making the problem of bad ui worse given how so many of those design skill prompts look like ai slop
if you look at this, https://www.typeui.sh/design-skills/fantasy, and tell me it isn't slop, you've lost your mind. this is like the worst of the worst offenders on the design skills part... no one wants their ai to make sites like this, it's literally the definition of ai slop once you take away that one quirky font.
the only part of your site i can see even being slightly worthwhile is the ui foundations part (https://www.typeui.sh/ui-foundations), and even then it would be much better if done by a hobbyist who was interested in covering more than things just above "don't put your website pink, your text lime green, and make it all in comic sans". like take this for instance, (https://www.typeui.sh/ui-foundations/configurator?category=i...) this nonsense. you're targeting literal developers using ai here by... telling them high quality png is better than low quality jpg or well... (https://www.typeui.sh/ui-foundations/configurator?category=c...) don't have unreadable text. I NOTICED ANOTHER LOGIN WALL THAT ISN'T CLEARLY DISCLOSED, on the download all rules button it brings you into a login wall.
it's like the things you'd teach a 10 year old doing ui design in a coding class lol.
i have no clue who this is actually for, besides being a site for fools to part their money with. i'm being serious, i can't tell WHAT your site does that a prompt can't easily do in five minutes. i'm so sorry to be mean here, but your whole website is glorified snake oil to trap newbies into relying on your service, either that or YOU think this is a good product and this will help DEVELOPERS and their ai learn and make their ai sites better (which is arguably MUCH MUCH scarier).
it seems you're trying to market for developers, yet you're making things for noobs. any developer could copy your prompts in 1 minute. arguably they wouldn't WANT TO, they'd just write that shit themselves... this site is just a bunch of predatory login walls and tutorials that would only be useful to 10 year olds, where you deceptively market it as if your glorified bundle of prompts is literally worth 120/300/360 so people can think 'this is a tool for senior devs' and you can waste their money
'unlock prompt' .. err, ok. straight to signup. Smells like I'll need to pay for it, and I'm just curious to see one prompt from the front page. aand I'm done.
You get quite a bit more than that, including access to the MCP server. We are boostraped, no VC to back us so it's the only way we can make this project sustainable.
In the era of LLMs, the value of code is very low. I don't think most people, especially here, can justify $30 per month. It's more expensive than a Claude Pro sub.
Good front-end code is still expensive. Do you think ChatGPT/Anthropic/Meta/etc. can claim industry leading front-ends on their webapps or desktop apps? Why have they not reached parity with all their smaller competitors if it's all just code.
There's also new serverless platforms constantly being funded nowadays; if code is so cheap why doesn't everyone just whip an LLM to go build their own version? Only bad code is low value.
In fairness, Claude subscriptions are heavily subsidized for now. If you paid thousands of dollars for their API rates, $30 month would not be outrageous. A lot of software costs more than that. Not that I'd be paying for this one...
I can see the incremental value this adds to agentic coding. I do think what you've built has value. I don't think it's worth a 30$ montly subscription. Maybe 30$ for a year.
I think I'd target companies and provide customized solutions. "Hey, everybody in your company connects their agents to this, and boom, they all produce consistent output that matches your company's CI."
Nice examples, definitely lots I'll be copying. I do wish there was an option to set the number grid columns on the page though: a sort of zoom-out feature with added column counts.
I feel having a lot more items visible without scrolling would be perfect for a site like this. Especially with the focus being entirely on the rendered components (and not typical UI library docs).
I really enjoy seeing showcases like this. From a user’s perspective, when I need a micro-interaction, my requirements are usually quite clear. I tried using the text search, but I didn’t get good results for the keywords I expected. I hope the search experience will be improved.
spdustin 2 days ago
The call to action says "Copy prompt", not "Unlock prompt", "Sign in to copy", or "Get Creative to access prompts". I didn't even go past the signup to see if the prompts themselves are actually free and work without a subscription to your hosted MCP server. There's a GitHub link in the header suggesting an OSS tier, at the least. That repo may include "prompts" folders, but no prompts are there. The README doesn't even hint that this is a paid library of assets/prompts until the very end, with the misspelled "enhanched" sentence under the "Pro" header. The only prompts that appear to be in the repo (other than those that configure an agent how to use the paid and hosted MCP) are basic design guidelines.
Getting back to the website: your hero text directly invites users to "Try each example and copy its implementation prompt." Which immediately demands the aforementioned signup flow that I didn't bother completing.
All of that just turned me right off.
Your examples are nice, if a bit generic. But if you intended this to be a loss-leader for the more "enhanched" UI/UX skills, it isn't doing that job.
hmartin 2 days ago
That said, some nifty ideas that aren't hard to prompt / reference oneself. Thanks from a swe who's terrible at design but does care about it!
tptacek 2 days ago
https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...
ben-gy 2 days ago
Tailwind UI is a perfect example of this where when I used to use Tailwind UI religiously and paid for it, I can just tell Claude Code “make it much prettier and bring it to life with really well designed micro interactions to create an excellent and enjoyable end-user experience” and it will get me 90% there which is easily more than good enough.
I really hope I’m wrong and that there is still a market for hand crafted components like this but honestly I think the free components exposed here plus the images of the paid components is enough for any LLM to pick this up and run with it likely without the LLM user even knowing that’s what has happened and therefore I can’t see a path to sustainable ARR for you guys.
pftburger 2 days ago
Unfortunately for a thing whose core job is polished UI, there's still quite a lot of polish needed before I would be willing to implement any of this in my UI To name a few : - the swap icon state theme preview switcher cascades the element brightness rather than fading them together. - The confirm reveal has something wrong with the spring every third or fourth click, which is strange - Cards: the stacked deck cycle. When you click Next, it doesn't draw the top card. - The shared element expand option: when you minimize, the spring dampening pushes the components outside of the container. - Swipe to dismiss causes the container to temporarily show a scroll bar.
tonic_note 2 days ago
elwingo1 2 days ago
techscruggs 2 days ago
triyambakam 2 days ago
ivanjermakov 2 days ago
grey-area 2 days ago
elxr 2 days ago
Running claude yourself to replicate UI is an actual time investment and takes some setup.
xhayden 2 days ago
I've seen you all on Twitter and have been confused on why people like this product. A lot of these are fairly unpolished and don't seem to have been designed with much consistency. I think if I gave Opus 5.5 instructions to make pretty much any of these components it could produce these 1-shot.
Take the verification code UI for example. We have animations on switching between the numbers, but not on updating the check icon. I also don't have the option to see other states. What happens on Error? For example.
On your Bio fill, the better pattern for text character limits is not to stop allowing typing after the limit has been hit, but instead to allow overfill and start counting onwards with an obvious red state. You do this, but cap at 20 more. Why? The whole point is to allow people to enter their full text and synthesize to the character limit. Is this a configurable setting? I can't tell if there's a customization because I have to create an account to copy the prompt and there's no obvious path to learn more about it.
These were literally the first two components I looked at. At that rate I feel like I can find an issue with all of them.
Feels unpolished and I can't imagine paying for it. Much less at a minimum of $10/mo when soooo many other free component websites do the same. For a design-focused product, the experience feels cheap and more like AI slop to me than a polished solution.
matsemann 2 days ago
cosmotic 2 days ago
* toggle animation on the heart moves the same direction for add and subtract (confusing)
* hold-to-trigger indicator is covered by finger on touch screen
* remove button confirmation can be accidentally confirmed by double click
(I stopped looking after this)
elwingo1 2 days ago
jonshariat 2 days ago
elwingo1 2 days ago
ilovenikobellic 2 days ago
timothyduong 2 days ago
ilovenikobellic 2 days ago
alienbaby 2 days ago
oh I wonder if I can point claude at it...
tintor 2 days ago
elwingo1 2 days ago
bossyTeacher 2 days ago
elxr 2 days ago
Good front-end code is still expensive. Do you think ChatGPT/Anthropic/Meta/etc. can claim industry leading front-ends on their webapps or desktop apps? Why have they not reached parity with all their smaller competitors if it's all just code.
There's also new serverless platforms constantly being funded nowadays; if code is so cheap why doesn't everyone just whip an LLM to go build their own version? Only bad code is low value.
But that aside, $30 per month is questionable.
bossyTeacher 8 hours ago
esafak 2 days ago
InsideOutSanta 1 day ago
I think I'd target companies and provide customized solutions. "Hey, everybody in your company connects their agents to this, and boom, they all produce consistent output that matches your company's CI."
grey-area 2 days ago
Fe2O3 2 days ago
I do love some of these examples, but, and as others noticed, they do lack polish.
elwingo1 2 days ago
elxr 2 days ago
I feel having a lot more items visible without scrolling would be perfect for a site like this. Especially with the focus being entirely on the rendered components (and not typical UI library docs).
searice 2 days ago
mas42 2 days ago
dangoodmanUT 1 day ago
but the animations are nice
sebastianconcpt 2 days ago
Only problem is that now I want all things to have this level of UI
j45 2 days ago
At each stage it's all about the poster wanting their attention and outcome.
If I can't see a few and see the value of them and what the library then represents, I'll just have to pass.