The more that I look into Builder vs. Plasmic, the more I want to rewrite or possibly take down my article.
I think that a lot of the use cases covered by Plasmic are actually covered by Builder, I just didn’t realize. Plasmic’s docs are on a different level for such a small startup. Builder’s docs are OK but aren’t nearly as systematic, and advanced knowledge seems to be spread across multiple videos, tutorials, etc. That’s probably why I underestimated Builder.
In contrast, I did the Plasmic getting started tutorial and I read the docs section by section, and I came away with a very full understanding of what that tool is capable of within about four hours of messing around. I have been using Builder for a week and I still have a fuzzy understanding of some of its features.
Plasmic seems to be the more flexible platform, and as @steve said, they seem to be catering to a different audience. You could use Plasmic as a no-code tool, but its functionality would be limited. For example, there’s no way baked into Plasmic’s editor a la Builder’s “data tab” to fetch external API’s; you have to write a code component to do it. That’s very normal for web devs to do and it’s the most flexible way, but it kinda defeats the purpose of having a no-code editor.
(Builder also supports custom code components, and I assume that one could write fetching code there, just like Plasmic. So the additional flexibility is there if you need it.)
I still think that the fit and finish of Plasmic is better. Everything feels so crisp and precise…hard to describe and admittedly subjective.
Anyway, having dug more into Builder, I will probably stick with Builder rather than switching to Plasmic.