Практика Shadowing: Can AI Replace UX Designers? Claude Ultracode Wins! - Изучайте разговорный английский по видео

Выберите режим практики

Каждый режим открывает полноэкранную комнату практики.

151 предложений

Если предложения слишком короткие или длинные, нажмите Edit, чтобы их изменить.

So let's say you have a working app that solves a real problem, but users are struggling with it.

What do you do?

You either hire a UX designer or you try to fix it yourself with AI.

So you decide to give it a shot with AI.

Now where do you start?

You can't just tell AI to fix the UX and let it figure everything out, right?

Well, I just realized that with Claude, you can actually do that.

Just last week, I made a video where I shared my simplified professional UX process into prompts

that will get your AI to follow the correct methods to identify UX problems and to fix them.

And I specifically said that you can't just tell AI to fix your UX

and expect it to create a coherent user -friendly product.

Well, I was wrong.

The problem with my assumption is that I only tested it with Codex, and I assumed that Codex and Claude were somewhat at the same level,

since that's what the benchmarks are saying.

But that's not the case.

Claude just reached a level where I honestly didn't think would be possible this soon.

And after this video, I'm not going to be using Codex for coding and UI UX anymore.

My name is Jad.

I've been UI UX designer for over 10 years, but now everything is changing

if you want to stay updated on how ai is changing my work make sure

you turn on the notification bell and

if you need any help with ui ux

or coding you can submit your project on ai tooltip .com the example

i'm going to show you is a marketing platform

that i built in a recent video it's for my wife to manage her own marketing clients

and she's been adding features to it based on her usage requirements

so of course now it has a lot of usability issues and it's my turn to improve the UX.

I made two copies of the same platform.

I put one through my own AI UX workflow with the prompts

that I shared in my last video and I gave the other to Claude to fix all on its own.

Then I'll show you how Claude compares to Codex just for fun.

I think you know where this is going, but keep watching till the end because it all comes together.

And I'm going to tell you how I'm going to be approaching UX projects from now on.

Now, for my workflow, I gave AI multiple consecutive prompts to identify UX issues.

And it found 26 problems.

And then I fixed them by priority.

Now, this is not manual UX work.

I'm still using AI to identify the problems and to fix them.

But I'm guiding the AI based on my own process to identify user context issues,

to make sure the user journey is optimized and to fix consistency issues

and states issues and to make sure everything is considered.

Now for the other copy of the platform, I simply gave it to Claude and I said, you are a UX expert,

analyze and optimize the whole platform.

I put it on Opus 5 .5 in UltraCode, which is the maximum effort on the latest model.

It worked for a while on its own.

It ran multiple agent tests and many, many commands.

It found 40 problems and it fixed everything just with that one prompt.

Now I went through the two improved platforms and I compared them.

There's noticeable differences and I'm gonna say it up front.

I liked what Claude did on its own more than what my own workflow produced and that's why I'm making this video.

Now that doesn't mean we don't need you ex -designers anymore.

I'm just comparing AI with AI here.

Whether we need to know how to prompt it or if anyone can just say fix the UX.

Let me show you the results side by side and then I'll show you an analysis of how the two results compare.

On the left side is the result of my own workflow

and on the right side is what Claude did all on its own.

The first thing I noticed here is how Claude moved the client selector to the top bar

and made that bar sticky so it doesn't move when I scroll.

That means I always know which client I am working on.

This is a very good improvement that my workflow did not identify.

Here when you select a client and scroll you won't be able to identify which client you are working on.

But here it adds clarity.

Very much needed.

Claude also consolidated all the text in the top section of the page to have less debt space.

That's also very important because this is a high priority real estate.

What you see on your screen before scrolling should be the high priority stuff.

So more space for content is always better.

Another thing I immediately noticed here is how the navigation is organized.

Originally I had no groups but now both results are improving on that.

They grouped the menu items in different ways and based on my wife's usage she prefers what Claude did.

It makes more sense in terms of usability and user journey.

It's also visually easier to scan because it's more compact.

Even here at the bottom Claude reduced the amount of text and made the whole thing clickable.

As opposed to here where you have just a small target to click, it makes sense.

Another great improvement from Claude.

Now the dashboard itself also got improved in both cases, but Claude is more optimized towards what the user actually needs.

Here on the left side, there's a lot of wasted space just to display the status of the client,

then a long list of to -do items, then you get to the progress tracking.

But what Claude did here on the right side is impressive from my UX perspective.

This to -do list is smaller, more compact, and it grouped the important tasks at the top.

Here on the left, you have to look all the way down to see a task due today.

But Claude surfaced it to the top here.

And even the language is much more helpful.

Needs attention is better than tasks and this see all button is much better than all reminders.

All reminders does not tell me what action I am taking if I click it.

It's a little bit confusing because I don't know

if these are all my reminders or if I click it I see all my reminders.

Cloud also introduced something different here where you can see more items without leaving the page.

That way it can make the list smaller.

Small things like that improve the usability a lot.

Overall much better visibility and interaction in Claude's UX design.

And if you want a copy of this improved marketing platform let me know in a comment

and I'll be happy to share it.

All right let's go deeper and complete a user task.

Let's assess this content performance.

On the left side I'll click write assessment and here this is a new improvement it's telling me what I'm assessing.

It's actually showing me the result here, which is very important info.

It does not show me what I'm assessing here.

And it does not show me the previous result, which is important info to have.

100

So this one is better in my workflow, because I explicitly told it to analyze user intent and context and goals.

101

So for this feature, I get the win.

102

There's also a lot of improvements

103

that Claude did on its own in the campaign strategies page

104

it decided to move my strategies to the top instead of scrolling down to find them here

105

i can see my strategies then how they are doing my wife also preferred claude here

106

now i won't waste your time too much here analyzing

107

but let me know in the comments

108

if you want a more in -depth analysis for ux for complex platforms like this one i would be happy to share.

109

Here's how the two results compare.

110

This is based on my test result and the report that came out of each AI.

111

Now in terms of UI change, Claude did better by considering these areas that I showed you in my review.

112

But on a deeper level, my workflow actually improved things that Claude did not really catch,

113

like helping the user with relevant context for certain actions and failed save recovery.

114

These are things to avoid user frustration and improve user satisfaction.

115

So if you want max optimization, ask Claude to do its thing, and then follow up by using the prompts from my previous video.

116

And just for fun, let me show you what ChatGPT did with Codex on the latest and strongest model.

117

Here I have sold 6 .1 on UltraEffert, and I gave it the same prompt, and the result is not even close to what Claude did.

118

When I used Codex on the strongest model, I thought it would be close to Claude, but the result here is just not good at all.

119

Here, it did not consider any of the usability changes that Claude did.

120

It kept mostly everything the same as it was.

121

Nothing really changed with the main user flow and the context of the user.

122

Claude is much better.

123

So this tells me that we still need to guide the AI to find deeper usability issues,

124

but AI is only getting more powerful from this point.

125

Who knows, maybe with the next update things can become easy for AI to spot.

126

But what surprised me is that Claude didn't just clean up the interface, it made decisions about what the user needs to see,

127

what needs attention first, and where actions belong.

128

And in many of the flows that I showed you, I preferred Claude's version, And so did my wife, who is actually using the platform.

129

My workflow still helped in specific areas.

130

But what Claude did is real independent UX work from just one prompt.

131

And that changes how I would approach UX next time.

132

I would let Claude do the first pass, then test the important journey with real users who are actually using the product.

133

Where do they hesitate?

134

What information is missing?

135

Real user testing will never be eliminated by AI.

136

A week ago I said you couldn't just ask AI to fix your UX

137

and expect it to do the work we do as designers.

138

This experiment proved me wrong.

139

So I'm changing my opinion.

140

AI can now make good UX improvements without expert guidance.

141

It can still miss some things, but I think it produces good enough UX to launch a product.

142

And considering the rate at which AI is improving, I'm sorry to say this, but soon UI UX jobs won't be needed anymore.

143

We would still need UX research and strategy, yes.

144

We would also need to conduct real user testing and analysis.

145

That still takes human experience.

146

So the most important thing I want to leave you with is that everyone should be using AI.

147

Let me know what you think.

148

Do you agree?

149

Do you disagree?

150

I always answer everything down in the comments.

151

Cheers.

Скачать приложение

Всё для свободной речи

ИИ-оценка произношенияОценка каждой фразы

Практика IPAОсвойте каждый звук

СловарьСоберите свой словарный запас

Игра со словамиУчитесь играя

Сканировать QR

Download on theApp Store Get it onGoogle Play

Тот же канал

10 Years Of UX/UI Experience In One Claude Skill

Daily ConversationUniversity StudentsWorking Adults

The Simplest UI/UX Workflow With AI

Daily ConversationWorking Adults

FOR YOU

Лексика и советы по произношению к этому уроку

Этот урок разговорной практики построен на видео «Can AI Replace UX Designers? Claude Ultracode Wins!». Чаще всего повторяются слова: claude, user, result, fix, workflow. В этом видео 151 предложений и 1903 слов для шедоуинга. Речь длится 10:46. Говорящий говорит в естественном темпе, около 177 слов в минуту, близком к повседневной речи. 83% слов входят в 3000 самых частых слов английского языка; остальные стоит разобрать перед занятием.

Ключевая лексика этого видео

15 слов из видео, которые стоит выучить, с произношением и значением:

Слово	Произношение	Значение
prompt глагол	/pɹɑmpt/	побужда́ть, внуша́ть
compare глагол	/kəmˈpɛɚ/	сра́внивать, сравни́ть
designer существительное	/dɪˈzaɪnɚ/	диза́йнер
reminder существительное	/ɹɪˈmaɪndə(ɹ)/	напомина́ние
scroll существительное	/skɹoʊl/	сви́ток
priority существительное	/pɹaɪˈɒɹɪti/	приорите́т
assess глагол	/əˈsɛs/	определя́ть, определи́ть
analyze глагол	/ˈæn.əˌlaɪz/	анализи́ровать, проанализи́ровать
usage существительное	/ˈjuːsɪd͡ʒ/	испо́льзование, примене́ние
compact прилагательное	/kəmˈpækt/	компа́ктный, пло́тный
impressive прилагательное	/ɪmˈpɹɛsɪv/	впечатля́ющий, внуши́тельный
assessment существительное	/əˈsɛsmənt/	оце́нка налогообложе́ния
cloud существительное	/ˈklaʊ̯d/	о́блако, ту́ча
select глагол	/sɪˈlɛkt/	отбира́ть
helpful прилагательное	/ˈhɛlp.fl̩/	поле́зный, любе́зный

Фразовые глаголы, которые вы услышите

Слово	Значение
clean up глагол	убира́ться, прибираться

Грамматика в этом видео

Конструкции, которые говорящий использует чаще всего, с точными словами из видео:

Конструкция	В видео
Пассивный залог be + причастие прошедшего времени — важно, что происходит, а не кто это делает	is optimized · is considered · is organized
Придаточные определительные who / which + предложение — уточнение о человеке или предмете	UltraCode, which is · here, which is · result, which is
Present Perfect have/has + причастие прошедшего времени — прошлое действие, важное сейчас	I've been · have sold

Произношение, на которое стоит обратить внимание

Говорящий использует 31 сокращённых и редуцированных форм, например I'm, I'll, won't. Произносите их коротко, так, как слышите.

Звуки «sh» и «zh»: interaction /ˌɪn.təˈɹæk.ʃən/, satisfaction /sætɪsˈfækʃən/, assumption /əˈsʌm(p).ʃ(ə)n/, navigation /nævɪˈɡeɪʃən/, frustration /fɹʌsˈtɹeɪ.ʃən/
Длинные слова — следите за ударением: priority /pɹaɪˈɒɹɪti/, experiment /ɪkˈspɛɹ.ə.mənt/, interaction /ˌɪn.təˈɹæk.ʃən/, consecutive /kənˈsɛkjʊtɪv/, satisfaction /sætɪsˈfækʃən/

Звуки, трудные для русскоязычных:

/w/ — губы округлены, это не /v/: requirement /ɹɪˈkwaɪɹmənt/, workflow /ˈwɝkfloʊ/
/h/ — лёгкий выдох, а не русское «х»: helpful /ˈhɛlp.fl̩/, hire /ˈhaɪɹ/, hesitate /ˈhɛz.ə.teɪt/, coherent /koʊˈhɛɹ.ənt/
Звонкие согласные в конце слова — не оглушайте их: analyze /ˈæn.əˌlaɪz/, usage /ˈjuːsɪd͡ʒ/, impressive /ɪmˈpɹɛsɪv/, cloud /ˈklaʊ̯d/, solve /sɒlv/

Как заниматься с этим видео

Прослушайте всё видео один раз молча и выпишите незнакомые слова.
Начните со скорости 0,75×, повторяйте предложение за предложением и вернитесь к обычной скорости, когда станет легко.
Запишите себя и сравните с оригиналом, обращая внимание на такие слова, как prompt, compare, designer.

Что такое техника Shadowing?

Shadowing — это научно обоснованная техника изучения языка, изначально разработанная для подготовки профессиональных переводчиков и популяризированная полиглотом доктором Александром Аргуэльесом. Метод прост, но эффективен: вы слушаете аудио на английском от носителей языка и немедленно повторяете вслух — как тень, следующая за говорящим с задержкой в 1–2 секунды. В отличие от пассивного прослушивания или грамматических упражнений, Shadowing заставляет мозг и мышцы рта одновременно обрабатывать и воспроизводить реальные речевые паттерны. Исследования показывают, что это значительно улучшает точность произношения, интонацию, ритм, связную речь, понимание на слух и беглость речи — что делает его одним из самых эффективных методов для подготовки к IELTS Speaking и реального общения на английском.

Техника шедоуинга: читать полное пошаговое руководство →

Практика Shadowing: Can AI Replace UX Designers? Claude Ultracode Wins! - Изучайте разговорный английский по видео

Выберите режим практики

Скачать приложение

Тот же канал

10 Years Of UX/UI Experience In One Claude Skill

The Simplest UI/UX Workflow With AI

Рекомендуемое видео

AI Destroyed My Profession

Rethinking Claude Code Best Practices — Lydia Hallie, Anthropic

Is AI Killing Human Fashion Design? Who Will Shape the Future of Design? Fashion Tea #6

I knew AI + Notion would be good, but this... wow.

I Tested The Viral Reverse Engineering Repo

The UX Psychology Behind Apps People Can’t Stop Using

How to Edit VIRAL Talking Head Videos Using ONLY Claude! (New Minimal Style)

I Looked Into How Devs Are Actually Using AI

LangChain in 5 Minutes (Explained Clearly)

Jack Dorsey’s New Dessa AI Voice Sounds Scary Human

My 4.9-Star iOS App Is Actually a Website: Here’s How I Built It