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
19 hours agoRepository age
6 yearsVersion
v0.0.25License
Apache-2.0Repository
gridaco/grida
Last 30 days
Last commit
16 hours agoRepository age
9 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 9,817 stars compared to 2,706 stars on GitHub. This 3.6x difference suggests OpenPencil has a much larger and more active community. In terms of developer contributions, OpenPencil has 1,063 forks, indicating strong developer engagement.
OpenPencil is growing faster, adding 864 stars in the last 30 days (+9.7%) against adding 33 stars for Grida (+1.2%). OpenPencil is both larger and pulling further ahead.
Both projects show recent activity, with Grida last updated 19 hours ago and OpenPencil 16 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 9 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.