Be nice. Or else.
Product Designer Joined over 3 years ago
i agree. the problem is features that bring value to the company but hurts the user. which is 90% of booking.com's "features".
I liked your work. Seems like you understand how things work and how new features can be validated.
About Booking.com: Isn't their entire strategy is just adding more tricks to make users feel FOMO and book? I highly doubt they ever think about what can benefit the user, but mostly what can benefit the company's revenue.
You should've went for this:
to make them more fomo and spend more $$$
Show users results that they missed with a red disappointing box
number of bookings
(DEFINITELY NOT) their negative emotions after their session to book a hotel
The designer job is here to stay. Although design systems make a designer’s job much more efficient
You said it yourself. Efficiency = less people are needed to achieve the same results.
While in the past a 'UI Designer' was needed to make wireframes come to life and look good, today a UI designer without product thinking skills is not a very important asset inside a team that uses a design system. New opportunities were opened as well - Illustrators, 3d artists are in a higher demand, and i believe there are more jobs for most types of designers and thinkers.
found myself disagreeing with many of your comments.
the fact that 'we have a very short time to grab the attention or the person browsing our website' is not always correct. for example, sometimes a portfolio is a way to present your best works to a potential client, and help seal the deal. they will probably spend a while in your website.
for the same reason - the story is not necessarily the most important thing. the audience could be people who know me, someone i met during a meetup and chatted with me, an old friend, etc...
too much text in the homepage could be a distraction from the works.
you've mentioned the fact that a headshot is needed - it reaaaally depends. sometimes it's not very good for branding. example - you're a super talented 15 years old.
Your website is wonderful and demonstrates your value and how it works really well.
A different team in Apple accepted him (Marcom), so you can't really tell what the apple music team was thinking. I'm sure he's very talented nevertheless.
oh, sorry. i thought your question was what should he have done differently as part of the redesign. in my opinion, redesigning the project of the company who rejected you and sharing it with the world is disrespectful. it harms the company as well, the 8K applauses he got are basically 8K people saying his version of the app is better, and apple made a mistake.
instead of the redesign, i would just release a general case study, with no names, or redesign a different company, which i have no relation with.
He mentioned his qualitative research a few time but never talks about how it was actually conducted.
He never talks about the entire information architecture of the app (which IMO should be the first thing to think about when redesigning or conducting research). Is it good enough as is?
His user personas of Nomads vs. Hoarders is interesting and cool, but are these the actual personas apple music sees? Also - they're not being addressed when he talks about the rest of the features.
Am I the only one who thinks this approach of 'I got rejected so I showed them how good I am!' is pretty lame? I can see it worked for him, his story succeeded and he scored the internship later, great. But I think redesigning an entire product currently used by hundreds of millions with 'cool ideas' and UI tweaks, without first breaking down the current problems + backing it up with data or interviews, and without having the entire team involved - from PMs to dev or the rest of the design team, is exactly the dribbblisation of design. Making pretty and cool things that are not connected to the real world.
You had no idea flickr existed?
Be nice. Or else.
Designer News is a large, global community of people working or interested in design and technology.