I’ve tried and it sucks. Even using templates, it just doesn’t understand what the design needs to do.
Has anyone found a workflow to go from chat to PowerPoint presentation
If a dev alters a component in GitHub, does Code Connect tell the designer and dev that the ‘contract’ has broken?
It would be amazing if production code fails QA because the component has failed the json contract (especially with AI tools)
Has anyone set up a json contract? How are you using and managing it?
I love the concept, but unsure of the implementation
Has anyone tried to branch from main and work on a project locally with Figma Make?
It’s very new but I’m trying to understand how I should create back end data to get things to work.
I also want to create a prototype so I’ve got two challenges; create fake data for prototype/design purposes but still keep the file in a good place ready for a pull request back into production.
If anyone has any insight, it would be really helpful.
When you’re building your prototype. Add a markdown skill that lists out all the data your users will need to provide to use the app. This really helps when mocking up realistic scenarios and edge cases.
At the start of the prototype, I now have a set of personas that I use to walk through different use cases (first time user, multi product user, power user, missing data user). All with their own data sets.
Creating these into skills helps with building out fake databases but I also find using fake user types helps solution ideation, especially with scaling.
Thought I’d share as ‘skills’ still seems a bit of an art more than a science at the moment.
In no way do I want the role of a designer or engineer but I’ve been having a much better relationship with my designers and engineers by bringing rough prototypes.
I think part of the success is my honesty about my the quality and rough nature of it. It looks like an unbranded wireframe…and I think it helps.
I really see this as a new golden age of collaboration. We’re on the same page faster and ideate as a collective more.
With that said, I have found writing is becoming more painful. Has anyone else had this issue? It’s like we’ve agreed and worked on the requirements as we’ve built concepts.
I’m a UX designer and I’ve been quite worried by the sentiment of my fellow designers in our team (particularly with AI tools)
In a nut shell, I think many of them have a view of front end from 10+ years ago, where they probably worked on some landing pages.
I’ve been lucky in that I have a good network of enterprise FE devs and I don’t think most designers (and business leaders) understand what’s involved in FE engineering as a discipline today.
System design, security, API performance, CI/CD workflows. And just working within a complex, multi dependency organisation.
My question is how can I help them understand front end has far more aspects than just UI code?
There seems to be a growing pattern (in the age of AI and digital) where British businesses are outsourcing each department to Indian locations. This started years ago with call centres but over time, brands realised that it was negative for customer experience and reputation.
Now, I hear from everyone I know that whole operational departments are being made redundant while moving the operation to India.
I haven’t heard unions talk about this uncomfortable truth.
What are people’s thoughts? I feel long term, it’s terrible for the country to not be building skills and knowledge.
I’ve found the engineering department hold the ownership of a lot of the tools I want to explore. Design has never had a requirement to gain access to repos, IDEs and business user group access for specific tools and data.
I can’t help but thing engineering are dragging their feet on purpose as a method of protection.
If the design team cannot experiment, they cannot show the business that the majority of Front end resource isn’t needed.
Anyone else had a similar situation?
As I’ve walked through how Figma files work for hand off. One of the devs said something I hadn’t considered. Components don’t work like their components do in an IDE. They said that there’s no central component space for them to inspect components and all the states.
It got me thinking, right click go to main component is a bit of an odd and not obvious place to see on file components. In Axure, I remember that you could double click and it open up a components panel with variants.
Has anyone found a good way to make components easier for devs to consume for hand off?
We’re trying to automate accessibility standards in our org as part of design QA.
One of the ways we’ve considered is an automated accessibility checker on our team space. This would run at intervals and pick up any flags (low contrast, content rules etc).
Is this even possible?
There are numerous patterns that get used over and over.
Upload documents
Address look up
Confirmation screens
Login
Do you treat these as simply components or do you define them as something more complex and call them specifically patterns instead of components?
I’m wondering about how to build these patterns and whether each state is a variant of the component.
If anyone has a view on this it would be great to hear.
Anyone been in this situation?
How do you communicate effectively that they’re not delivering a better UX by the use of their words?
It’s not a one-time situation, I don’t think many of them in the team have a UX writing background.
Hot take: People bang on about craft as being the part they love and don’t want AI to take over. Users don’t care about ‘delight’ they want to get something done, feel safe and not get ripped off.
If a tool can help with better customer outcomes, who really cares. Yes, it may have generated a screen you would have loved to craft, but the role is to get them to complete as easy as possible.
The more I hear designers moan about AI doing craft. The more I hear an artist, who is in the wrong game.
Welcome to capitalism.
In numerous orgs, I’ve seen two scenarios:
Strong product vision and management which leads to clear customer and business objectives. Service design focus more on working with UX and Research on transforming the backstage internal mess, while UX solve the customer facing experience.
Weak product vision and management which leads to Service design stepping in and having this strange mix of ownership and undefined remit.
Do you think the issue lies in how product is conducting in an org or service design doesn’t feel well defined.
Thoughts?
This was a fascinating read. The more you dig into it, the more it appears like a move to impact education in the UK.
Thoughts?
I don’t understand why the rationale is to be in Team pricing plans. As a professional, all my code is in GitHub. Why can’t I link it up?
As the years have gone on, I’ve seen primary education put more and more hours of screen time onto our children. There’s a mix of:
We’re noticing fundamental skills aren’t being taught, or the content isn’t being absorbed. We are supplementing with additional learning at home to make up.
I’ve tried to speak with the school but they don’t understand this angle. They just see it as modern education.
Has anyone been able to opt their child out of using screens in the classroom? Thoughts?
Since our team has fully embraced AI design tools for prototyping. Our customer research has been awesome. The old way now feels like a fake PowerPoint presentation we gave customers Vs today.
We have gained so much gold from giving the user fully functional prototypes. Our researchers are enjoying as well, they feel more empowered to observe instead of coaching them through our janky clickable demos.
Even for our more advanced Axure prototypes, we can spin the same thing up in a day with ease.
It feels like a golden age of UX testing.