Is your style guide being ignored? It’s not just a branding issue — it’s a usability problem. Learn why consistency is core, not optional — and how to get teams on board.
From 2015 to 2024: how real estate websites have evolved
In 2015, I embarked on the journey of buying my first home. At that time, I wrote a blog post critiquing the UX of real estate websites through a, somewhat sarcastic, persona named ‘Kayla’ and listed out ‘her’ (my) user needs and how they weren’t being met. Discover how real estate websites have evolved from 2015 to 2024 through a personal lens. Spoiler alert – it still sucks, but it sucks a little less.
In this blog post, I evaluate how current real estate platforms address user needs such as viewing new properties, staying within budget, accessing accurate information, and managing inspection schedules. It suggests key improvements and practical recommendations for improving real estate website UX.
The different types of messages UXers need to remember to design
Communicating a Rebrand to Your Users
Rebranding? There’s a lot online about why to rebrand, how to decide new colours, how to get people on board etc. But how should we alert users to the change? These 4 principles should help you guide your choices
https://medium.com/seer-medical/communicating-a-rebrand-to-your-users-eba127a19e0e
Using the 30–60–90 Framework for Design Critique
8 things designers wish they could tell their younger selves
Skeuomorphic design is dead, long live skeuomorphism
I know, I know — skeuomorphism ? What is it, 2012?
But, I’m not talking about Skeuomorphic design (where digital things look like real-world things e.g. your bin icon looking like a ... well… bin), I’m talking about skeuomorphism in the way users think about your product in relation to other products in the marketplace.
Iconography. Good or bad? As always, it depends
Warping the space-time continuum with design
Ghost Buttons — Not as bad as we thought?
Are ghost buttons really as bad as they've been made out to be? Ghost buttons are often touted as low-affordance, and it’s true of many of the examples we see — buttons with poor contrast placed over images making them difficult to use and confounds A/B tests. We say we are comparing ghost buttons and ‘normal’ buttons but we are really testing accessible vs inaccessible buttons, high vs low contrast designs, high affordance vs low affordance designs (and it’s not a surprise that ghost buttons lose). What happens when we test an accessible ghost button against an accessible solid button?