Where the design community meets.
This house, this street, Chicago! Principal Designer (nee Design Director), Lextech Joined over 5 years ago
So to answer your question, is it wrong … that's up to you to decide.
For me, it becomes problematic because now you have two things that are "breaking" your design grid: the 1 px line and the 33 px tall group.
That said, you can fix this easily by making your line 2px or putting it inside a container box. Additional details here
Interesting read, good to see the focus on user research.
If the intent was to reduce the icon footprint, I'm curious what research they had around:
a) using the chevrons instead of arrows for pagination
b) why the red x wasn't a circle with a slash through it (to avoid confusion with the close icon)
c) why some icons have dark fill (e.g. plus and minus) rather than hollow fill
I'm also curious how the arrow right circle, how well that tested positioned left vs. right of the CTA text (unless it is just a style thing to keep it on the left).
Ben Cullimore, if you happen to read this, would love to get your advice on this!
OK, here's how I've done it.
The goal is not to get everything done in two weeks, but to get everyone to agree on a component roadmap and timeline, which will likely be more than two weeks.
FWIW we use Figma too and we build components way ahead of the developer roadmap, to explore, refine and get early feedback. Good luck!
From the company that brought you Comic Sans Pro…
Ha! Sorry, couldn't resist.
Seriously, as a fan of Vignelli's type restraint, this is an awesome recalibration of a classic font, with a lot more flexibility built in. Looking forward to using it.
I have some ideas but depends on the answer to this question: Is your DLS backed by a code library or would everything new in your DLS get coded from scratch no matter what?
No attribution needed or desired. My comment is now MIT License open source. =)
Arun, enjoyed reading this! Regarding titanium, the other benefit is (I'm guessing) that the card can be more easily recycled vs. plastic. In addition, because there is no expiration date, the card is designed to last longer, compared to plastic cards that are typically tossed and replaced every few years because of expiration dates. It might be nothing more than perception, but the switch away from disposable plastic is consistent with Apple's stance on the environment and use of renewable materials.
I deleted my original comment after reading this much better one. None of these tools can fix bad feedback.
This is a good approach, and I'd like to suggest another approach. Define the desired outcome(s) prior to development and hold any candidate release to that standard. What's the probability that the product in its current state can achieve those outcomes?
Note the focus on probability: The goal isn't to achieve a consensus on release vs. don't release. It's to agree on the likelihood of success if it is released. It's a subtle but important distinction IMO. If you can agree on probability of success, then you can have a much more fluid conversation around shipping, rather than being forced to choose an extreme.
The challenge of using good vs. great as a metric is that those terms are very subjective and susceptible to change depending on circumstances, roles, motives and personalities. While you can agree to define those terms in advance, do those definitions then become too constrictive? With outcomes, you can focus less on what you're shipping and more on the effects of shipping the product.
Of course, I could be wrong on this approach. Thanks to your article, it helped me think through it a bit more, so I appreciate you sharing it.
As long as you're sure it's coming certified from Apple, it's a good deal. Have gotten multiple laptops, tablets and phones without a problem, and you can add on AppleCare for peace of mind.
Where the design community meets.
Designer News is a large, global community of people working or interested in design and technology.