Where the design community meets.
London http://meet-cristian.com Joined over 4 years ago
So far I found those tools to require more work and management than the time they save you + I lose the flexibility to organise things exactly how I want.
Hey Josh, I've been using http://thenounproject.com for 80% of my icons over the past couple of years and the same icon libraries that come in one AI file for the other 20%. This means I never really needed a solution like IconJar, but from what I know there are icon library makers that are releasing libraries that are friendly with IconJar. In terms of alternatives, I know the noun project have their own asset manager called Lingo, but I never used that either.
You mean like this, which was requested 7 years ago: https://feedback.photoshop.com/photoshop_family/topics/arrange_customize_save_as_file_formats_so_popular_formats_are_at_the_top
Well there are a lot of companies here that try to do that (dr.link and lantum come to mind but have a look on google and angel).
+1 for angel, you'll find a lot of cool startups in many fields that would fit your criteria (such as edtech, politics, healthcare, etc.). You could do some research into what fields you think you'd be interested in and seeing which are most interesting. Here in the UK I know healthcare startups are pretty big because the NHS is leaving a lot of holes to be filled and some companies (like babylon, offering an on demand doctor via FaceTime) even signed contracts with the NHS so now you can use their tech to get an NHS doctor any time.
+1 for that, I switched to HTML/CSS/JS recently and it's so much more realistic and flexible than any other tool on the market.
Do you guys have a reason for focusing on fancy animations other than everyone else is doing it? Have you actually spoken to designers and realised this was the most pressing concern - am I missing something?
The way I see it, since repeat grids, there was no notable feature introduced, nothing competitors can't already do.
While that’s not how most people learn it, I think you can get methodical with it. There are certain principles that if followed will make a design look aestheticslly pleasing, concepts like hierarchy, reading patterns, gestalt principles, colour theory, typography (for these last two I suggest focusing more on these psychology, i.e. what emotional reaction each colour or type of font elicits, rather than the actual theory about why the way we perceive colours is influenced by the colours around them).
Then the ‘design eye’ will simply be a matter of learning to recognise whether a layout has solid hierarchy or not, whether the colour scheme chosen communicates the appropriate message or not.
I hope this helps. Edit: I will send some articles when I get home from work.
I answered the survey, I think this could give you a shot at the market if you could create prototypes inside it and use it for lower fidelity stuff. Otherwise, I am growing weary of using third party tools (InVision failed on us two days ago and it consistently has problems), so I would be more open to native solutions (like the built in tools in Sketch or XD). So a third party tool would have an uphill battle going against the many existing ones doing the same thing.
I'll be curious to see if enough people can justify a monthly subscription to a Gmail wrapper. Don't get me wrong, the apps look great and I understand it probably took a lot of work (I won't actually try them out because you are asking for my card details), but from the standpoint of a user evaluating the value they are getting for a recurring payment, it's just a pretty Gmail wrapper that they loose the minute they cancel.
If the main differentiator of your apps is superior performance compared to the dozens of Electron / web wrapper apps that do the same thing for free or for a very reasonable one off fee, I think you should reconsider asking people to commit and hand over their payment details before they can even try the apps.
Where the design community meets.
Designer News is a large, global community of people working or interested in design and technology.