A v0 alternative for whole sites rather than single components
v0 is a well-known AI tool for generating React user interface code, and it is very good at what it is aimed at: you describe a piece of interface and get back code you can paste into a project you already have.
The gap people run into is upstream and downstream of that. Upstream, you need a project for the component to live in. Downstream, you need routing, real content, images, metadata, a build that works, and a place to put it. Assembling twenty good components is not the same job as having a site.
Siteglade generates the whole project instead — a complete Next.js or Vite React codebase with pages, sections, assets and configuration — and then keeps giving you component-level control inside it.
Component-level generation versus project-level generation
These are different problems and it is worth being precise about why. A component generator optimizes for one artifact in isolation: it does not need to know your routing, your design tokens, where your images live or how the page is composed. That isolation is exactly what makes it fast and pasteable.
A project generator has to hold all of that at once. It decides the file layout, keeps a shared visual language across pages, wires navigation, places generated media, and has to produce something that builds. The failure modes are different too — a component either looks right or it does not, whereas a project can look right and still not compile.
Which one you want depends on what you already have. If there is an existing codebase and a design system, component generation slots into it cleanly. If you are starting from nothing, project generation is the shorter path, and pasting components into a project you do not have yet is the long way around.
You still get component-level control
Choosing whole-project generation does not mean giving up granularity. Siteglade ships browsable section and component libraries in the chat panel: pick a hero, a pricing block, a testimonial layout or a feature grid and insert it with one click. It lands in the project source under the components directory, and from that point it is an ordinary file the agent can restyle, rewrite or delete like anything else.
That is the practical middle ground. The library gives you a known-good starting structure for a section, and the agent adapts it to the rest of the site instead of you reconciling a pasted component with a design that has moved on.
For visual work there is a click-to-edit style editor over the live preview: select an element, adjust spacing, type, imagery or motion. For structural work there is chat. For anything else there is the code.
A real editor, not a black box
Monaco — the editor that powers VS Code in the browser — is lazy-loaded into the chat view next to a file explorer. You can open any file in the generated project, read it, and edit it directly. The agent works on the same tree, so a change you make by hand is simply part of the project on the next turn.
This matters for the exact case where AI generation tends to stall: the last five percent. The agent got a section almost right, and describing the remaining fix in prose is slower than changing two lines. Being able to drop into the file, fix it, and go back to chat keeps you moving instead of arguing with a prompt.
It also means you can read what was generated before you ship it, which is a reasonable thing to want from any tool that writes code on your behalf.
Twenty-eight templates you can fork, with live previews
Alongside prompt-from-scratch generation, Siteglade ships twenty-eight curated full-project templates: ten multi-section sites covering things like a scrollytelling real-estate showcase, a vineyard estate site and an AI SaaS product page, plus eighteen single-screen animated hero pages rebuilt from Figma designs. Each one is a complete project, not a screenshot: there is a live public preview deployment behind the picker so you can click through the real thing before forking.
Forking gives you the whole codebase as your starting point, at which point every other tool in the product applies — chat edits, the visual style editor, the section libraries, the file tree. Templates carry a plan tier: some fork on Free, others need Pro or Max, and the previews are public regardless.
For a lot of projects this beats generating from zero. Starting from a coherent design and describing changes to it is a faster path to something good than describing a design that does not exist yet.
Media is generated in the same place
Generated sites need images, and placeholder rectangles are what makes an otherwise decent build look unfinished. Media Studio produces real images through Gemini Nano Banana and OpenAI GPT Image, and video through fal using Gemini Omni Flash and Grok Imagine 1.5.
It runs in two modes. Agent mode plans the shot and picks the model for you before spending any credits, which is what you want when you just need a hero image and do not have opinions. Manual mode exposes the model, format, count and start and end frames for video, which is what you want when you do.
Image generation is included on every plan including Free. Video generation is a paid capability on Pro and Max.
When v0 is honestly the better pick
If you already have a production codebase with an established design system, a component generator is the right shape of tool and a whole-project builder is not. Nobody wants a second project tree to reconcile against the one they maintain.
The same applies when you are working inside an app rather than a site — dashboards, settings screens, data tables. That is component work in an existing shell, and it is a good fit for tools built for exactly that.
Siteglade is the better fit when the deliverable is the site itself and it does not exist yet.
Frequently asked questions
What framework does Siteglade actually generate?
Standard Next.js or Vite plus React projects, depending on what the build calls for. There is no proprietary format in between, which is why the code is readable in the built-in editor and portable once exported.
Can I paste in components I generated elsewhere?
Yes. Open the file explorer, create a file, paste the code in. The agent treats it as part of the project from that point and will wire it into a page if you ask. Reference images can also be dropped straight into the prompt by picker, paste or drag and drop.
How is the section library different from generating a section?
The library inserts a prebuilt, known-good section in one click, so you skip the generation round trip and the credits it would cost. Generating is better when you want something the library does not have. Either way the result is a normal file in your project that the agent can restyle later.
Are the templates just landing pages?
They are complete projects across several categories — full websites, landing pages and scrollytelling builds — each with a live public preview deployment. Forking copies the whole source into a new project of yours, not a locked theme.
Can I build something that is not a website?
Partly. The builder supports app, workflow, presentation and general project types alongside websites, with a dedicated presentation module. Sites remain the center of gravity, so calibrate expectations accordingly if your project is mostly backend logic.