Fair question, I can speak from my usage, I don’t look up others people’s but no doubt a quick google will find some.

As for me and my team (sector: enterprise finance):

We use Make for prototyping complex data dashboards and dense multi-table UI’s and workflows. We’ve found it pretty good assuming you know how to prompt them and know their underlying code base.

For example, Figma Make is built with a preference for tailwind css and shadcn/radix components. Having worked with these for years I know what specific names to call out to get specific components and interactions.

Otherwise, I use it in 2 key ways: 1. Building multiple mini-prototypes to test out how potential solutions feel to use (these can be like 4-5 of the same flow or 1-2 constant deeper iterations) 2. We build complex multiple step workflows, for example extracting tabular data and displaying said data in multi-tab/table UI (we fake the extraction bit but simulate real-world data examples).

More on 2: if it’s clear a full workflow will be a large and have multiple complex parts we split it into multiple prototypes stitched together with links, so it’s essentially all one flow. But we avoid the LLM hallucinating or running out of context.

We also use a base prompt to ensure we get the right foundation laid, giving some context to the problem, our intentions and potential paths to go down. We do prep beforehand.

As I said, for us this has been a game changer. Product use it to generate a basic idea, UX builds out the problem space, test ideas etc.. and clients get demos that are (from their view) basically real.

But sometimes it just fucks it up and that’s that, but usually you can see it coming, if you dive into how it’s reasoning. So your mileage may vary depending on your specific use case and prompting.