Perhaps you did a poor job explaining what you wanted or expected? Contrary to popular belief, the client isn't always right, we just have to make it seem that way most of the time.

"...with flexbox and CSS grid you can build these layouts so quickly."

You can also watch as people flock to other sites because they might not be on the most current browsers that support CSS Grid and flex to its fullest.

Also, even though these make some complex layouts much simpler to create, they are neither easy to develop with and both have relatively steep learning curves.

Good to hear. I'll keep an eye on this. I want a web flow like app not tied to a browser, and preferably not yet another online account either.

I want to like this but I remember what happened to Macaw and Subform seems to have gone quite again (not in the beta is perhaps it's still quite active, just no public info of late). Also, I'm not sure I want a tool that is so tied to one form of output, in this case React, as web tools change frequently.

How the hell do you evened the article to decide if his arguments even sound in the first place? Someone needs to take a refresher course on when to use trendy designs and when to just use Medium and publish the article in a clear, concise manner.

It's $36 for plug-ins that work in, so far, Photoshop, Illustrator, and XD. Think of it as $12 per app. This plug-in has saved me countless hours creating solid layout grids that can't be made through normal guides in ANY app, not just Adobe's.

I wish you guys would hire the Guide Guide developer or buy out his code and bake his plug-in into the core of EVERY product Adobe makes.

Could just make them srcset, jpg and lazyload...even for people who are not developers this sort of thing should be at least considered on a basic level.

There is nothing basic about that approach to setting up images on the web. I have been designing and coding web pages since Netscape 0.9b and I need to reference my notes when using srcset. Frank Chimero wrote a great article about the problems with "modern" web design. You should read it.

update: Here's another great article about the complexity of the web that not only references Frank's article, it quotes many other leading web industry veterans and their struggle keeping up with technology.

I disagree. The change as I see it is more of a getting used to inverted colors on each and every app. There is NOTHING anyone could have done to prepare and massage the UI for that level of change. The biggest problem I run across is that tone of section dividers. The background changes but the color used to divide a sidebar or info column stayed the same gray as before and while it might have looked fine in the light mode, in dark mode it's too bright and sticks out like a sore thumb. It's still a mixed bag with some Apple apps and some third party apps doing this but I'm sure this will get smoothed out over time and app developers will learn to better prepare their code to work with a shifting UI instead of hardcoding every little thing (or they'll hard code it twice; one for light and one for dark).

• the list of options is not very small, you force the user to go from a "selecting / taping" action to a "keyboard input" action.

Actually, they go to a tap/swipe/focus to ensure right location in menu/swipe some more/repeat/tap action.

• the person is forced into your phrasing or understanding of concepts. If your label doesn't describe the invisible list of contents accurately and appropriately enough, your users might search for something that they can never find

This is why the argument was made that this is to be used with known input selections (i.e. states/countries, car manufacturers, etc.). If there is a hint of the unknown to the user then don't use this select option, use a proper, prefilled dropdown.

• the person might have troubles typing but might be fine just taping a few options selects input

If the dropdown is that small, then yes, that would be a better option. I think the inference from this article was that the list was long but known (i.e. states/countries, car manufacturers, etc.) and typing the first two or three character would trim the menu options down to a handful that are easier to then tap.

• types are treated differently by the OS. Whereas there is no native autocomplete that behaves consistently throughout OS' or that we as developers have enough control over.

This is a developer/designer problem that needs to be sorted out earlier in the process. If they know the data will support an autocomplete method then they need to design/develop the solution with this in mind. Sure, it might make some choices harder or impossible but that's not necessarily a bad thing.