Learn how Grida and OpenPencil differ in their key features, development activity, technology stack and community adoption, so you can decide which of these ui/ux design tools is best for you.
Last 30 days
Last commit
5 days agoRepository age
6 yearsVersion
v0.0.24License
Apache-2.0Repository
gridaco/grida
Last 30 days
Last commit
11 hours agoRepository age
8 monthsVersion
v0.16.0License
MITRepository
open-pencil
OpenPencil appears to have several advantages over Grida, particularly in popularity, growth and licensing. Consider your specific needs regarding popularity, growth, activity, technology, maturity, licensing and features when making your decision.
OpenPencil significantly outpaces Grida in community adoption with 9,221 stars compared to 2,688 stars on GitHub. This 3.4x difference suggests OpenPencil has a much larger and more active community. In terms of developer contributions, OpenPencil has 951 forks, indicating moderate developer engagement.
OpenPencil is growing faster, adding 641 stars in the last 30 days (+7.5%) against adding 36 stars for Grida (+1.4%). OpenPencil is both larger and pulling further ahead.
Both projects show recent activity, with Grida last updated 5 days ago and OpenPencil 11 hours ago.
Both tools share common technology foundations, being built with JavaScript, CSS, Typescript, Rust. However, they differ in their additional technology choices: Grida uses JSX, Python, Next.js while OpenPencil leverages Vue, Tauri.
Grida has been in development longer, starting 6 years ago, compared to OpenPencil which began 8 months ago. This 5.1-year head start suggests Grida may have more mature features and established processes.
OpenPencil uses the MIT license, which is more permissive than Grida's Apache-2.0 license, potentially offering greater flexibility for commercial use and integration.
Both tools serve similar use cases in UI/UX Design. However, they also have distinct specializations: Grida also focuses on Low-Code/No-Code.