"Design roundup" is a curated collection of links I've gathered in the past related all aspects of design. I've added a brief summary (mostly for myself) next to the links so I have some memory what was the reason I collected the link in the first place. Consider these roundups as public bookmarks.
Work on preventing security issues by moving left in development by creating hostile personas and journeys.
https://www.dzone.com/articles/bring-security-to-digital-product-design
This is from 2021: Adam Silver points out why basic form input without extra tricks, such as floating or disappearing labels are better.
Even though Google aimed for balance, in the end they inadvertently sacrificed usability for ‘minimalism’ and ‘a beautiful experience’.
https://adamsilver.io/blog/material-design-text-fields-are-badly-designed
Many of our conversations are complaints about organizations, their dysfunctional or foolish leaders, or about feeling ignored and misunderstood. It’s mostly a waste of time.
The easy popularity of complaining also explains professional complainers who benefit from the problem never being solved, and earn more popularity than the people actually working to fix the problems everyone is complaining about.
Instead of repeating the same ineffective habit, maybe learn to be a better, more effective complainer?
In order to be better complainer, focus on:
https://whydesignishard.substack.com/p/why-you-should-stop-complaining
At some point I had an idea of node based tool editor. React Flow could be used to build the editor itself.
I think I love neobrutalism.
Neobrutalism’s rebellious aesthetic can grab attention, but its success hinges on balancing boldness with usability. By grounding the style in accessibility principles and testing with users, designers can create interfaces that are both striking and functional.
https://www.nngroup.com/articles/neobrutalism
I have designed and built quite a few views that has somehow addressed the challenges with both approaches. This is a good reminder to check the next time I am working on the topic.
List view allows for easy sorting and is space efficient, while card view is visually engaging and creates effective groupings.
https://www.nngroup.com/videos/card-view-vs-list-view
According to the post research might lead to relying on studies to justify decisions instead of owning outcomes. Over-focusing on research might lead to weak solutions, and traps teams in endless validation loops. Not sure I have actually witnessed just like that in real-life, but I can see the truth in the statement, especially when teams are narrow-focused.
https://uxdesign.cc/the-main-problem-with-research-4660ec57531b
AI advances make UX generalists valuable, reversing the trend toward specialization. Understanding multiple disciplines is increasingly important.
https://www.nngroup.com/articles/return-ux-generalist
I think simple design often refers to a focused product. A product that does a specific task can sometimes do that task really well. Products that try to do many things can offer a lot of value, but rarely do all the things well.
I like the idea of replacing "simple" with "focused". It still have the conceptual freedom to be wide, but focused. Like in photography, the area of focus can be wide, but with intention and purpose it becomes meaningful.
https://charliedeets.com/writings/simpledesign.html
Apple's Liquid Glass took rounds after Apple did their presentation this summer. I agree with the following take:
There is no doubt that the Liquid Glass style makes for extremely cool demos, as shown in several videos that have been circulating on social media. Those animations look good when you lean back and admire them. However, a “lean-back” experience is not what user interface design is about. UX is “lean-forward” — it’s interaction design, where users have to engage with the UI to achieve their goals, not to admire it.
Demonstrations are the enemy of usability assessment. They present a flawless, curated path through a user interface, a spectacle completely divorced from the messy reality of genuine user interaction. Judging usability by watching a demo is to misunderstand how people fundamentally use systems.
https://www.uxtigers.com/post/ux-roundup-20250616
Hackernews was also – understandably – critical: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44226612
For the record: some of the example views in the Apple's presentation were horrible looking, especially when it comes to contrast and basic visual design fundamentals. I think Apple has dropped the ball when it comes to taste in design. Advertising is not going well either.
If we’re all remixing the same things, how do we develop actual taste in design? How do we find a voice that sounds authentically ours?
We’re told to stay consistent, follow patterns and build systems, though the outcome of our production should bring innovation, surprise and delight.
We study what’s already out there, hoping it will help us grow our eye for good design. We dutifully study patterns and flows on websites like Mobbin and Pageflows. We read the 2049604th take on Apple’s liquid glass or Airbnb’s new icons.
https://thecursormag.substack.com/p/refine-your-design-taste
Use cases for AI in the UX Research Process
https://www.loop11.com/how-to-integrate-ai-agents-into-your-ux-research-process/
A free collection of different editable SVGs to spice up your designs.
A design system is a matter of agreement. It’s what the organization collectively agrees should be the overall strategy when it comes to design. However, what happens when that agreement is objectively wrong? This can be compounded by larger organizations proudly displaying poor choices. Those choices are replicated and then defended by the bandwagon effect. This results in a component library. They’re just components based on feelings. People want components, so they get components.
https://blog.damato.design/posts/done-with-components
Andrew Martin (UXPin) outlines common issues with design system docs:
https://www.uxpin.com/studio/blog/common-design-system-documentation-mistakes
Key strategies:
https://questdb.com/blog/design-by-decision-fatigue
This experimental agile tool lights the way ahead for developers.
Reading this made ask ChatGPT to clarify the difference between the three: prototype, MVP, tracer bullet and proof-of-concept.
To me, prototype, tracer bullet and proof-of-concept servers the similar kind of purpose. MVP can be considered more business-driven approach.
https://builtin.com/software-engineering-perspectives/what-are-tracer-bullets