Where the design community meets.
Helsinki, Finland Lead UI/UX Designer Joined over 9 years ago via an invitation from Sir K.
To me the main thing is the lack of multiple artboards in components. I thought this was the big thing that was supposed to be different. Is V1 going to go out with the popup that says it will come later?
This is all pretty cool stuff! Great to see all this progress. There are still a couple of things missing from this, for me to be able to switch over to XD, but I can certainly see this happening in the near future.
Artboard states is something that would naturally go with auto-animate, since you wouldn't have to duplicate the layers, and makes it obvious which layer should transition to a new position and which should fade-in and out. To that end, having a timeline tool that lets you manually adjust the timings would be great as well.
Is it a bug that Responsive Resize doesn't work with Symbols? I'm on the Windows version.
The annoying part for me is that I have to use search in order to go to my own profile on mobile. Due to there not being any way to quickly go to your profile on mobile.
I feel that browser vendors need to step up to the plate to clean up this mess. Specifically, consent screens need to go into the browser, with APIs to request consent per category. This would allow users to choose what kind of tracking they allow and won't allow globally, so we don't need to do this per website (although having an option to do it per website would probably make sense still).
While we're at it, can we make sure the desktop notification popup can't just be triggered by JS, and would require an interaction from the user. I'm generally not in favor of creating weird limitations like this, but the abuse has been so wide spread that unfortunately it seems to be necessary at this point.
"It works for Pinterest and Dribbble!" Does it? These are sites where the primary information is the image, yet most of the page's pixels are made out of everything but the images. Pinterest seems to have gotten a lot better recently. Dribbble on the other hand still clutters the screen with UI, rather embracing the images.
I'm all for listening the community and asking user directly what they want. I think it's great that you guys are doing this. I also want to prefix this by saying that I think there's a lot of great stuff in XD. Good performance being one thing that I really appreciate, for example.
On the other hand, it seems to me that prioritising based on community voting breaks down in some cases. Either that, or my priorities for a design tool are just totally different?
What I would like to see first are what I view as basic functionality for a design tool. These are (in a very rough order of priority):
There are probably a few more that I can't recall now, but these are the primary reasons why I cannot switch from Sketch for example. I always get a bit excited when I see when you guys posting the updates here, but every time I check the list of features, I get disappointed. I would really love to use your tool, it just doesn't have the basics that I need yet.
I know that some of the items in the list you guys are already working on, or at least they have been flagged as started. Perhaps we could get a little more visibility into what your roadmap looks like? I would really hope to be able to switch to XD within a year.
'2. No one cares about animation.'
Useless animations are useless. If you think of animations as simply adding a bit of visual flair, then absolutely, your time is much better spent elsewhere.
However, there are also 'world class' products that work great in big part because of their animations. The best example of this is iOS and macOS.
The animations in iOS add context and create a sense of spatial awareness within the environment. Things don't simply appear and disappear out of nowhere. They come from somewhere and they go somewhere. Just like the world we live in.
Take as an example the simple interaction of opening an app from the home screen and going back to the home screen. It might seem obvious that the app icon actually expands to fill the screen and becomes the app, and goes back into its place in the home screen. As if it's really the same object. It's as if you're picking up an item and bringing it closer to your eyes. This is an extremely deliberate design choice.
These interactions make intuitive sense to humans, because it is consistent with how the rest of the world around us works.
I do understand your point, that without a product in the first place it's hard to be successful. At the same time, I don't think that adding in animations that help the user understand the context of your application should actually take that much time to do in the first place. And it is exactly the type of thinking that "animations add no real value to our product" that also holds us back from achieving that with better tools. When was the last time you used a web app that had anywhere close to the same fidelity of animations as iOS?
As an example, I've seen few (if any) web apps that animated items entering and leaving a list. This has been standard in iOS for years. If you delete an email from your inbox, it doesn't instantly reload the list. This would mean that the user now has to reorient themselves. This increases cognitive load. I don't believe that is the best use of your users energy.
If Apple replaced that with an instant reload of the list or some sort of fade-in and fade-out of the list, I think most of us would be a little bit confused as to why.
So if we can accept that this is bad user experience, why are we fine with the same, or worse, happening on the web or anywhere else really?
It's true that good user experience doesn't always correlate with business success, and yes, some products are successful despite their bad user experience patterns. But surely as designers and engineers, we should strive to provide a better experience and push our craft forward? And yes that is hard now, because we don't really have great tools for it. Building User Interfaces still takes too much time in my opinion. Adding sensible animations should also not require that much effort (especially looking at you, ReactJS).
The right approach in my view is not to say 'this is hard, and lets not do it.' My strong belief is that we should strive to push our craft forward and strive to build better user experiences.
This is going in a really cool direction. The only problem I have with it is that it's based on artboards, rather than states. This creates unnecessary problems like having to name your layers the same and not being able to have duplicate layer names, etc.
What about having a list of states that you can trigger within an artboard? Something akin to http://states.design/
Where the design community meets.
Designer News is a large, global community of people working or interested in design and technology.
This is looking pretty cool so far. I've long been waiting for someone to take a stab at simplifying 3D modeling and rendering. Unfortunately I couldn't get very far with this tool because I found the transform gizmo to be somewhat confusing. https://imgur.com/a/eY2lil0
Without 3D depth I have trouble discerning where any of the arrows are actually pointing in 3D space. This would probably work fine while editing in AR or VR, but it's tricky on a 2D screen. If there was even just some shading based on the angle that would probably help with discerning the position of each handle a bit better too.
I'm also struggling to find a reason for a diagonal transform handle. It seems to just add to the clutter and make it seem more complicated than this really is.