UX

zennsunni

Lol. I see you browse the Internet. I use one every day professionally. It's an endless train of unexplainable UX bugs and bad design. They don't even support multiple monitors on a flagship laptop. Even their terminal has alert bugs I've just learned to live with. Same for my colleagues, all of us are mid career devs. But enjoy your koolaid.

Whole-Reserve-4773

Their products are the best on the market. They work seamlessly. Innovation is low, but perfecting features and UX is their game.

CrazyTrades247

AUDJPY Positional Short.. [https://www.tradingview.com/chart/AUDJPY/kT4847UX-AUDJPY-bearish-reversal-confirmed/](https://www.tradingview.com/chart/AUDJPY/kT4847UX-AUDJPY-bearish-reversal-confirmed/)

charlescgc77

Some perspective here, I'm a business owner spending about 7 figures on the platform annually (we are literally their supposed 'target' customer) and we used to derive about 80% of our marketing spending ROAs from Meta because they have been undisputedly the best marketing platform for targeted ads hands down. Since they started investing heavily in their 'AI' engines and Andromeda last year, performance for their 'business customers (golden goose)' have become extremely volatile, completely ignoring their original 'targeting' capabilities from their decade long rich data collection in favor of their new AI GEM powered algorithm that has gone haywire (they let AI logic decide who to target, we often get baby ads shown to seniors, women apparel shown to men etc..). Performance hasn't gotten better, it's gotten worse. If anything, they now have these 'glitches' where they would 'accelerate' spend user's entire daily budgets within minutes. They also forced AI slop on many brand creatives, causing legal issues in some cases as businesses no longer have control over their own creatives, they have pushed back a bit after serious backlash. Their ads manager UX is now full of bugs. Right now, I wouldn't touch Meta stocks until they fix these things: 1. Their ROAs and 'tests' shown in their reports are based on '4 day studies' on limited pilot tests showing justification that their AI is 'increasing ROAs' for their business customers, but in reality it can't be further from the truth. Many long established small to medium enterprise brands have been bleeding money, spending more for fewer results since they rolled out their AI Slop and Andromeda (supposedly to make it easier for new businesses to launch ads, but now you need a PHD just to figure out what each new AI slop feature does). Moreover if you look more closely to their results, most of their revenue increases have come from 'increase price per impression' and 'more impressions', meaning it's artificially jacked up to cover their excessive spending. No one is asking the question 'is it actually delivering the results their main customer base is looking for?'. This is not a sustainable business model. 2. Zuck is known for project excess spending on failed projects, we've seen it with metaverse and other ideas already, however this is the first time it's been so widespread that they've touched their own golden goose, their advertising business. They replaced their old algorithm completely with an unproven AI powered model that's wrecked havoc, and these changes have come on so quickly overnight that very few businesses have had a chance to adapt. They are aware of this internally I'm sure, but just 'sweeping' it under the rug at the moment, and covering it up with increased impressions and jacking up their impression costs. (Cost per impression CPM, is like the product unit they're selling. If you jackup the price of eggs by 20%, then increase the number of eggs in carton, then of course your revenue increases. The problem is their customers are getting worse quality eggs than before, some rotten, at a much higher cost) Until they actually address the elephant in the room, focusing on actually delivering a better product for their business customers and not compromising their customer's own 'bottom line', I don't see this business model sustainable. At the moment, they're no longer 'customer' focused. I see an exodus of long standing brands that advertise with them, pulling their budgets if this continues.

charlescgc77

Some perspective here, I'm a business owner spending about 7 figures on the platform annually (we are literally their supposed 'target' customer) and we used to derive about 80% of our marketing spending ROAs from Meta because they have been undisputedly the best marketing platform for targeted ads hands down. Since they started investing heavily in their 'AI' engines and Andromeda last year, performance for their 'business customers (golden goose)' have become extremely volatile, completely ignoring their original 'targeting' capabilities from their decade long rich data collection in favor of their new AI GEM powered algorithm that has gone haywire (they let AI logic decide who to target, we often get baby ads shown to seniors, women apparel shown to men etc..). Performance hasn't gotten better, it's gotten worse. If anything, they now have these 'glitches' where they would 'accelerate' spend user's entire daily budgets within minutes. They also forced AI slop on many brand creatives, causing legal issues in some cases as businesses no longer have control over their own creatives, they have pushed back a bit after serious backlash. Their ads manager UX is now full of bugs. Right now, I wouldn't touch Meta stocks until they fix these things: 1. Their ROAs and 'tests' shown in their reports are based on '4 day studies' on limited pilot tests showing justification that their AI is 'increasing ROAs' for their business customers, but in reality it can't be further from the truth. Many long established small to medium enterprise brands have been bleeding money, spending more for fewer results since they rolled out their AI Slop and Andromeda (supposedly to make it easier for new businesses to launch ads, but now you need a PHD just to figure out what each new AI slop feature does). Moreover if you look more closely to their results, most of their revenue increases have come from 'increase price per impression' and 'more impressions', meaning it's artificially jacked up to cover their excessive spending. No one is asking the question 'is it actually delivering the results their main customer base is looking for?'. This is not a sustainable business model. 2. Zuck is known for project excess spending on failed projects, we've seen it with metaverse and other ideas already, however this is the first time it's been so widespread that they've touched their own golden goose, their advertising business. They replaced their old algorithm completely with an unproven AI powered model that's wrecked havoc, and these changes have come on so quickly overnight that very few businesses have had a chance to adapt. They are aware of this internally I'm sure, but just 'sweeping' it under the rug at the moment, and covering it up with increased impressions and jacking up their impression costs. (Cost per impression CPM, is like the product unit they're selling. If you jackup the price of eggs by 20%, then increase the number of eggs in carton, then of course your revenue increases. The problem is their customers are getting worse quality eggs than before, some rotten, at a much higher cost) Until they actually address the elephant in the room, focusing on actually delivering a better product for their business customers and not compromising their customer's own 'bottom line', I don't see this business model sustainable. At the moment, they're no longer 'customer' focused. I see an exodus of long standing brands that advertise with them, pulling their budgets if this continues.

Jadeclone1

The future is a PM with UX skills. The pure ux role is obsolete.

Jadeclone1

I feel bad for all the UX people as PM becomes the new UX with claude

Tax_Life

I mean that's very subjective. Apples hardware and software quality is still the best across the industry. Design and coherence of the UI and UX is very important to many people but it isn't as measurable as specs are, so it's often ignored in these arguments. You can say you're paying more for less but the broad market appeal of things like the Macbook Neo or the iPhone doesn't really support that. You can claim the average consumer is dumb for valuing what they do but maybe they aren't and you're just in a bubble. Especially for laptops Apple isn't any more expensive than competitors if you actually compare equal products.

A0LC12

I think it's just she stocks crashing mate, not the UX

Loightsout

Almost every major software surface is designed in figma. Every UX designers main tool is figma. Figma uses AI pretty well in its workflow.

ConfidentlyNeurotic

This a simplified comment, and slightly off topic since it's focuses on AI - not hardware microprocessors: The Nasdaq and S&P 500 incdeces are currently heavily weighed on AI expextations, that this surely has an impact on volatility. The Magnificent Seven (largest US tech companies) currently represent an estimated 32% of the whole S&P 500 index. Combine: 1 High P/E ratios (essentially the time it takes to receive a return on investment) 2. Lowering liquidity in the market 3. Increasing amount of Chinese open source and free LLM models with near frontier specs (today's Kimi K3 modem release https://www.reddit.com/r/LocalLLaMA/s/tUhnULf4UX) This really begs for the question, what is the competitive moat that private sector US AI companies can build that will return the astronomical capex investments. Thought experiment: I'm old enough to remember the dot com bubble bust. Imagine if besides the wild capital deployment and valuations there would have been free, open source competition? Many financial analysts are increasingly stating that OpenAI will plan a (partial) US public bailout. We may be seeing signs of this as OpenAI promised 5% equity to the US government. How this links to OP's original post: AI is probably the biggest current driver for not only GPU's, but essentially all microprocessor products (RAM, NVME etc.)

lazercats1

Check out the chief product officer’s post today announcing major UI/UX overhauls. Bullish af https://www.linkedin.com/posts/marie-havlíčková-5538aa10\_productleadership-ai-personalization-share-7483213523544608769-fMgC/?utm\_source=social\_share\_send&utm\_medium=ios\_app&rcm=ACoAABmzY\_oBY3V\_r1j5LySs4s79ocSLB4TuHe0&utm\_campaign=copy\_link

A-Money-Lover

😂 yea ibkr has its strong points but at this rate it will take 30 years to catch up with other apps like Moomoo or Robinhood in terms of UI/UX

KuyaJester

As a consumer, adobe seems to be falling behind when it comes to features and UX on their photography products. For example, when it comes to retouching in photoshop, a simple skin smoothening would require multiple layers and a bunch of high pass / blur and manual touches. While there are iphone apps that can do it in 2 clicks. Firefly and generative fill has been 50/50 for me.

Sad-Group5464

Google says "Figma is a cloud-based digital design platform used primarily to create websites, mobile apps, and user interfaces (UI/UX)." So you can safely assume that any company that does use them isn't clamoring for more licenses since this is a specialized tool for the UX team. And if they already have 95% penetration rate in fortune 500 companies, it means its own remaining growth is hoping that smaller companies don't choose to use better FOSS alternatives. So a 12 billion dollar valuation for a UX design tool is complete nonsense.

ImminentDingo

Even if the UX is a net negative because of ads, Google will be offering Gemini for free and built into your phone and browser even after the VC dries up and OpenAI and Claude are forced to charge subscription or token prices.

Good_Roll

Yeah no shit, if we were all immune to ads they wouldnt be so annoying. Im not saying ads dont work, im saying that users dont want ads. Because users dont want ads and dont trust platforms to serve them recommendations for products that would align with their interests, the consumer demand for marketing spend driven product recommendation within AI chat bots is net negative. Sure it works and you can shoehorn it into a product but you will detract from the UX by doing so.

valenvm

Research ABEO that is a solid company, has outperforming XBI, Q2 earnings expect profits and september 19 is the FDA PDUFA date for UX111 (Ultragenyx/RARE), the approval decision for their gene therapy for Sanfilippo syndrome type A.

-_-Ikarus-_-

yeah i had help on the coding side from AI tho the vision and the UI/UX part came from me AI just helped me realize the vision into an actual codework, it took me quite a bunch of hours to make this

seobrien

Should they hire me? What kind of execs are these?! This isn't rocket science... 1. Seasons are only 8 shows long, that's a day of binge 2. You wait years for the next season; I forgot about it or thought it was canceled 3. Your show UX sucks. You promote tons of things no one wants and don't let us remove shows or categories we don't want. I can't even find the stuff I like to watch! 4. Frankly, a lot of the shows suck 5. You produce a season like a movie, not different shows. Sitting through an entire season to get the plot and conclusion is not convenient entertainment, it's dedication. Bring back stand-alone shows with a subtle overarching narrative.

SpicyElixer

They’re kind of the iPhone of cars still. Other western manufacturers simply have not caught up. Stock is way overpriced, but they’re decent cars with decent batteries and UX.

zona2011

I didn’t defend the UI/UX or saying they’re wrong about that, did I? I “defended” the performance. Commercial growth rate suggests they are wrong about the performance piece. Obviously there is something very good about Foundry, commercial growth shows that, and if it’s not the UI/UX then what is it? The performance.

SuperBearPut

Because regards like not having a single screen to show all open orders / partial fills.  They also love having to click and navigate through several laggy screens during volatile times for simple actions, yet claiming the UI/UX is the best. 

LSTNYER

Easy to use app, UX isn't complicated or slow, and my trades get in quickly. I have a Roth with fidelity and for a noob like me it's a bit confusing.

callsonreddit

Technicals aside, I hate Samsung UI / UX tho

TechTuna1200

Product / UX design. I have around 9 years of experience. What I have noticed is that I'm much better at directing Claude to produce good UX than my peers e.g. in sales

peterpeer9

Figma should just whore itself out to the press "Data centers have a UX problem. We're using our years of design expertise to build the next generation of data centers that are totally cute and easy to use"

Top-Equivalent-5816

I think the point being there will be fewer licences. A UX designer won’t need after effects if an open source model can help with the interaction motion design in comfy Ui for example. Or small generations for things that they used to open heavy software for. On the other hand, to stand out the professionals will need to get a lot better than your avg prompt engineer So personally idk which side is correct. But if I had to bet, adobe is simply going to incorporate whatever is winning or buy them out.

shrek-is-real

I built a very complex web app in a span of days in Claude using NextJs that would have easily taken an entire team of 5 frontend devs and a UX guy at least 3 months to even come up with a v1 for. It built the db layer, connected to Neon, setup auth layer with a 3rd party, added migration scripts, UI unit and integration tests etc etc all with just plain English-speaking prompts. So it's definitely scary AF. The entire cost was $20 for the pro plan. The only blocker was waiting for my token quotas to reset.

magpietribe

Amazon Ptime is far worse than Netflix. The Amazon UX is deliberately frustrating so you end up buying something you didn't even want.

Vivid_Astronaut4665

“Harness” bruh come on it’s an ide with some special UX to handle multiple LLMs

Vivid_Astronaut4665

Idk pay 30 engineers a million each and crank it out in a year for 30 million? The Composer model is really the only valuable thing and google/anthropic will probably unveil their own cheap coding focused models in no time. All this “harness” talk is literally just some simple UX and extra prompting around LLM iterations.

visualizethis

Just suck it up and buy an AppleTV people. Sometimes things that cost more are worth it. Their business model is a helluva a lot more respectful to our data and their UX design is refined whether people want to admit it or not.

pragmojo

It's more like a DVD player than a tablet or game console. For a tablet or phone or game console, performance matters a lot. I.e. if you can't play the latest games, you need a new console. If you can already play all your content with a good UX, why do you care about the chip in your streaming box? > It might not lag right now but in 3-4 years how well is a ~10 year old phone chip going to be performing? Probably totally fine. A phone feels slow, because the software gets more and more complex and full of features. A streaming box is just menus and a video decoder.

Moist_Grade5942

I used to do UX at in “finance” in a midtown uniform… probably wasnt qualified 😂

ging3r_gin3r

I know lol. As a UX designer who describes my work as pushing pixels, this fucking killed me 😂

LaZeR_Strike

CMS stands for Content Management System which is the UX/UI of the front end on your website. Significantly doubt that you've built a native CMS with chat gpt. You were also most likely talking about Customer Relationship Management (CRM) system like HubSpot. That I am also quite convinved you did not build in 5 minutes.

Initial_Ad_9250

The board is why we need UI/UX designers in tech

maffoobristol

Well if I'm to be honest, I didn't like the old one either, I preferred it before any integrated app. I haven't used either, but at least the old one was a bit more ignorable and easier to understand if I \_did\_ look at it. This one is just a UX nightmare!

TeslaSubmarine

Figma’s AI product blows and their main users (UX / designers) are becoming redundant by the day when you can get faster results by tech vibe designing

SangerGRBY

$FIG feels really cheap here, im not sure if claude design can actually replace figma. I work in tech, if i treat FIG as a software solely to design UI/UX then yes, AI generated code destroys it. But Figma is alot more than a design tool, i cant find an alternative where non-technical and technical stakeholders can collaborate on design tokens and EASILY amend / add / create components.

Reddits_For_NBA

Anthropic has compliance and performance moat. Anyone using it for coding or implementing in business likely has real understanding. Anyone using the chat function has no real concept of what AI is capable of. Value is real, actualized today. Anyone saying otherwise just isn’t using it. I have a bunch of fresh grads with no coding experience writing lightweight apps and reports. Prefer these guys to coders / data analysts because they spend time learning the business context. Then it’s a matter of telling the bot what to do. Best use cases so far are data and reporting-based, but it’s only a matter of time before it translates robustly to full stack engineering. Because data and reporting basically underpin software functionality, and the gap is UI/UX and backend infra reqs — which I’m noticing Claude is gettin better and better at with each iteration.0

ucsbaway

Some dude killed himself over a very similar situation even though he was actually barely in the red. It prompted significant changes at Robinhood for the UX of a credit spread, or at least they say. https://www.forbes.com/sites/sergeiklebnikov/2020/06/17/20-year-old-robinhood-customer-dies-by-suicide-after-seeing-a-730000-negative-balance/

dankielab

You can do all the designing later getting the functionality comes first and yes I use the web design all the time but it's class UX design to make it easy for the The average user.

ShortHabit606

15YoE (though not as a dev but have a masters in CS) I wrote what would have been an entire SaaS with payments, accounts, database, UI/UX, testing etc etc. What would've been a team working on it for months entirely by myself in nights and weekends.

Dapper_Aioli7399

Sabre started its AI investment journey in 2020..timing was unfortunate...but necessary...so today, almost 100% cloud and nimble, AI infused...it was a great preparation for what is unfolding right now..any LLM is just as good as the data..and Sabre spent last 50 years doing this heavy lifting..the age of paid placements and redirecting is over..plumbing is the key..funnel is collapsing..GDS is the king , solving L2B and being the marketplace..efficient and very cheap, cca 1.5% cost of distribution! So even if you choose to bypass this and -try- to do it for much higher cost( while you do not have expertise and 50 petabytes of highly mission critical proprietary data sabre accumulated last 50 years) why would any buyer connect with you if he can use sabre and be connected to 500 airlines in a single API/MCP. this way he gets transparency, price discovery etc...you not gonna get that on airline direct...Why would amazon exist? why amazon sells nike sneakers? bcs of price discovery, transparency, that is the power of any marketplace...and from UX just use mindtrip flights and UX is so much better, faster servicing..It is new market for Sabre after almost 25 years of B2c loss from OTA websites and others..so with rising ebitda, falling cost of debt, very strong moat it is very compelling opportunity

pancak3d

Fair enough. My point is that for 80% of teams Figma Make is more than good enough to eliminate a significant portion of their UX/UI dollars. I have no doubt that for some enterprises, they emphasize design so much that Figma Make has no role.

pancak3d

I mean I don't know what your job is but we ended our contract with a UX/UI firm because Figma does their work 10000x faster at and 1% of the cost, albeit 75% of the quality.

Fluffy-Discussion166

The UX team in my company are downsized. Many companies doing the same. Downsizing and not hiring Devs and UX. The seat based model will be redundant soon

Basic-Union-5003

Your assessment of Robinhood is spot on. For HOOD, options aren't just a bigger bucket; they are the high-margin engine driving transaction revenue. When you compare this dynamic to **Webull**, the fundamental mechanics of their revenue models are incredibly similar, but their user demographics and structural layout create a different operational leverage. Here is how Webull stacks up against the Robinhood breakdown you highlighted. # 1. The Core Similarity: Heavy Reliance on Options PFOF Just like Robinhood, Webull’s primary transaction-based revenue engine is **Payment for Order Flow (PFOF)**, and the broad economics of the retail brokerage industry dictate that options are vastly more lucrative than equities (Bryzgalova et al., 2023). * **The Spread Disadvantage/Broker Advantage:** Wholesalers pay retail brokerages significantly higher PFOF rates for options because the bid-ask spreads on retail options (especially highly active, short-term weekly contracts) are substantially wider than those of standard equities (Bryzgalova et al., 2023). * **The Revenue Mix:** Academic and industry reviews of retail PFOF data show that across platforms reliant on this model (including Robinhood and Webull), options order flow routinely accounts for the lion's share of total transaction-based intake, even if the absolute number of accounts trading equities is higher (Bryzgalova et al., 2023). # 2. Strategic Divergences: Robinhood vs. Webull While both rely heavily on options to monetize trading activity, the way a Pattern Day Trader (PDT) regulatory change waves through their financial statements differs due to how each platform is positioned: |**Feature / Revenue Driver**|**Robinhood (HOOD)**|**Webull**| |:-|:-|:-| |**User Demographics & Behavior**|Broad retail base; historically heavily skewed toward simpler UX, though expanding aggressively into advanced tools.|Attracts a more intermediate-to-advanced technical retail trader who demands advanced charting, indicators, and short-selling capabilities.| |**Sensitivity to PDT Changes**|High explosive potential. Because Robinhood has a massive total user base, lifting or modifying PDT restrictions mobilizes a large cohort of latent day traders.|Exceptionally high velocity. Webull’s existing user base is already primed for high-turnover active trading; relaxing PDT rules directly scales their existing core user habits.| |**Margin & Cash Movement (Second-Order)**|Massive driver via **Robinhood Gold** subscriptions and competitive net interest income (NII) on uninvested cash.|Driven heavily by **Margin Interest Rates** and short-selling fees (stock lending), catering to traders utilizing leverage.| |**Alternative Transaction Mix**|Heavily exposed to Crypto volatility and a growing "Other" bucket driven by prediction markets/event contracts.|Focuses strictly on core multi-asset class trading (equities, options, futures) with historically less emphasis on domestic event contracts.| # 3. The Second-Order Effects: Margin vs. Subscriptions If a regulatory shift or a product change drives highly active trading, the second-order benefits manifest differently on each balance sheet: * **Webull’s Leverage Engine:** Webull's platform structure inherently nudges users toward margin accounts to execute complex option spreads and short equity positions. Therefore, increased trading velocity for them translates immediately into **margin interest revenue** and borrowing fees. * **Robinhood’s Sticky Subscriptions:** While Robinhood also captures massive net interest income on margin, they have successfully monetized the *readiness* to trade via premium tiers (Robinhood Gold). Active traders on HOOD feed into a subscription ecosystem that stabilizes their revenue even when market volumes temporarily dip. # The Takeaway If a regulatory change allows retail investors to trade more actively without hitting the PDT wall, **options remain the critical battleground for both companies**. However, while Robinhood relies on its massive scale, gamified simplicity, and diversified "other" revenues (like event contracts) to monetize that activity, Webull represents a concentrated bet on pure trading velocity, technical charting engagement, and margin utilization.

vanceraa

Yeah I mean IBKR is excellent for charting and executing more complex orders, the mobile app UX/UI is just awful compared to RH. Most of my trades are monthlies or more so I don’t usually look past MAs/VWAP/RSI I’m back at 24k rn so hopefully i’ll be moving back when I hit 30 for some buffer

Geoff_Dawmer

Fidelity UX is garbage.

zashiki_warashi_x

UI/UX is awful.

zzoomann

Microsoft UX is trash. They’ve outsourced everything to Indians and now the product sucks. Imagine that

AutomaticDot

I get the consumer UX frustration, but this massively undersells Microsoft’s actual moat. MSFT isn’t winning because Windows settings are beautiful, its winning because Entra ID, M365, Intune, Defender, Azure, Purview, Teams and Power Platform are deeply embedded in enterprise IT workflows. In real companies, identity, device compliance, Conditional Access, SSO, endpoint management, email , security and governance all tie together. That ecosystem is incredibly hard to replace. Microsoft definitely ships messy UX and half-finished products sometimes, but “Outlook is annoying” is not really the core investment thesis. The enterprise platform lock-in is.

TheSeaShadow

Yeah no, love it or hate it Tesla sets the high bar for UI/UX for a "tech car". But for something trying to preserve the automotive spirit this isn't it. The Luca is better grouped with the Sony/Honda Afeela than masquerading as an Italian supercar.

Retired-Yam8988

It’s been game changing for our business. We have a school but since i used to be a software engineer in FAANG, im hyper focused on efficiency and having software that fits our operations. We had a friend code up our backend software about a decade ago and we’ve decided to rev it finally so been doing that with in the last year. We didn’t really start using AI until maybe 6 or so months ago. Before that I had one of our teachers doing UX/UI design and he would code up features. Generally took a month per major feature. Now I just stick what I want in figma make or Claude or something and it generates a credible prototype in about 30 mins. He takes that and builds and entire feature or two every week and releases it to our team to use. We’ve like 5-6x output while adding only a couple hundred bucks in AI fees a month (I’m saving thousands on UI anyway since I no longer need to give that teacher extra hours for design work).

account-names

I read your other reply. Is it only about the UX being bad? Or something else pissing you about Fidelity?

Informal-Lime6396

There are many competitors in the ITSM space like Salesforce, BMC Helix (Remedy), Jira, Zendesk. I don't have anything to compare it with because I haven't worked on those tools and can only speak for ServiceNow. If you've ever used ServiceNow, even a personal developer instance (free), you kinda accept that the UX is slow. Everything is done through their API, so database operations are done row by row which is painfully slow. Page loads are slow. It's especially embarrassing when you're demoing something to customers and it hangs (running transaction popup message). ServiceNow, the platform, admittedly can do a lot of things, but I don't think it excels at anyone of them. They tried to appeal non-programmers with their "Flow Designer" and tried to introduce "ServiceNow IDE" for programmers. Basically pivoting towards 2 extremes and failing to execute either well. I extend that towards their AI endeavors and don't have high hopes. They are first and foremost an IT Service Management platform, not an AI company.

twotokers

Claude can still spin up documents, do basic research, create powerpoints, organize data from a csv, draft UX copy, etc. I think my company first gave us access in like early 2024? I don’t know why you’re being so defensive, just telling you how it is, at least at the tech companies I’ve worked at.

Tazmanian_Ninja

People who think "Ai will just build all software" have clearly never developed real, comprehensive, feature-rich software – nor ever been involved in such development. Software does NOT "build itself". There's a lot of UX considerations. It requires humans to steer the AI. Also: ALL software vendors have LOOOOOOOONG backlogs/lists of feature requests and bug fixes to do. AI can finally help get on top of that. It's not like "oh, now there's no more code to write, cos we're done. Let's go home now"...

sally-sourpuss

As someone who works in UX at an enterprise level, Figma is here to stay. The general public has no idea how Figma is utilized at this scale and how irreplaceable it actually is. And the AI integration is consistently improving. People trying to claim that Canva, Penpot, Miro, Claude Design, etc. are legitimate competitors fundamentally misunderstand what Figma does for large orgs.

GrokM14232

buy the rumor, sell the news is part of it, but the real signal is that the guidance does not address the replacement risk question. 17% headcount reduction plus software-disruption narrative in the accounting space is the market pricing a regime change, not just a cost cut. Intuit's moat is distribution and UX habit, not accounting complexity, so the question is how fast habits change when alternatives get genuinely good

i_need_a_nap

I went to ChatGPT for a full answer. Personally, I've worked on Figma for specific features, but have found other tools that do that same thing. I'll name my favorites, but then ill post ChatGPT answer: Best competitors: Bluescape and Miro. For my quick diagrams and whiteboarding, I use Zoom and Obsidian plugin Excalidraw. # Collaborative UI/UX Design (closest to Figma) * [Sketch](https://www.sketch.com?utm_source=chatgpt.com) \- Mac-focused UI design tool with a strong plugin ecosystem. Longtime favorite before Figma became dominant. * [Adobe XD](https://www.adobe.com/products/xd.html?utm_source=chatgpt.com) \- Adobe’s UI/UX design tool. Adoption slowed after Adobe attempted to acquire Figma, but some teams still use it. * [Penpot](https://penpot.app?utm_source=chatgpt.com) \- Open-source, browser-based design platform. Very appealing for startups or teams wanting ownership/self-hosting. * [Framer](https://www.framer.com?utm_source=chatgpt.com) \- Blends design and live website publishing. Strong for modern landing pages and startup marketing sites. * [UXPin](https://www.uxpin.com?utm_source=chatgpt.com) \- More engineering-focused; supports design systems and advanced prototyping. * [Lunacy](https://icons8.com/lunacy?utm_source=chatgpt.com) \- Free desktop design tool compatible with Sketch/Figma-style workflows. # Whiteboarding / Product Collaboration * [Miro](https://miro.com?utm_source=chatgpt.com) \- Excellent for brainstorming, flowcharts, user journeys, and team workshops. * [Whimsical](https://whimsical.com?utm_source=chatgpt.com) \- Lightweight diagrams, wireframes, and product thinking. # Design + No-Code Website Builders * [Webflow](https://webflow.com?utm_source=chatgpt.com) \- More production-oriented. Lets designers create and publish real websites visually. * [Canva](https://www.canva.com?utm_source=chatgpt.com) \- Easier and more template-driven; ideal for social graphics, presentations, and lightweight marketing work. * [Relume](https://www.relume.io?utm_source=chatgpt.com) \- AI-assisted website wireframing and component generation for web designers. # Developer-Friendly / Product-Oriented Tools * [Zeplin](https://zeplin.io?utm_source=chatgpt.com) \- Focuses on design handoff between designers and developers. * [Locofy.ai](https://www.locofy.ai?utm_source=chatgpt.com) \- Converts Figma-style designs into frontend code. * [Anima](https://www.animaapp.com?utm_source=chatgpt.com) \- Turns designs into responsive React/HTML prototypes.

AdventurousFinish681

Out of curiosity what type of design work- UI/UX or more traditional brand work?

Background_Ranger917

The problem is, envision a person who is running a pet grooming business full time or something, i wouldnt expect them to figure out how to create this whole custom setup for 25 when they could just pay 30 to QB. I do agree that AI Can replace QB in the near future. I think there will be alternatives that are essentially free (like Xero or Wave), which can make QB worse. That being said, it has to be a clean UX experience, all the features gotta be in there, and it has to be proven. getting it to be proven takes time cuz no one wants to be the first, nor does anyone wanna get out after a year if there setup fails. it'll take time, for now, bullish.

MC-Howell

Everyone here is missing the very important detail on this: this is a 3% match on CONTRIBUTIONS. Unless you're over 50, that means if you max out the $7,500 limit, they'll give you $210. But you have to pay for Robinhood Gold to get 3%, which is $50/yr I think. So you're looking at a maximum of $160/yr and you've just locked your IRA with Robinhood for 5 years minimum. Move to Robinhood if you're inclined, but definitely not worth it for this offer alone. FWIW I'm a Robinhood user and I second the other comments saying that trading on Robinhood is infinitely easier than on other platforms. Why Robinhood is the only one to make simple and easy to understand UX for this stuff baffles me, but whatever.

VariationAgreeable29

What’s their strategy as a company? What’s the White space that they hope to occupy? They’ve long given up being a consumer facing products company like Apple. What they should do is spin off Xbox and just become a pure enterprise play. Windows needs to be refocused into a kick ass OS with native apps that actually talk and work with each other with a common interface and consistent UX/UI

clckwrxz

My company was headed down the same route until I showed them why that was a mistake. I’m lucky though because I have pull with executives, so this might not be easy to prove if you aren’t a part of the purchase decision making. I recently went to Agents conference in NYC and so much AI slop-ware was on display. Tools that a quality engineer empowered by AI could rebuild in a week. That goes for legacy enterprises trying to put AI into everything. Figma didn’t need AI. Companies just need to realize that a design.md file, an agent, and html output with skills highly curated by our UX dept completely replaced the need for Figma and now teams are getting actual working prototypes and not having to translate from some design tool. Businesses need to realize that AI introduces the ability to rethink how you should work instead of just putting AI into tools that simply don’t need to exist anymore. There is a reason it’s called AI theater.

Lyrick_

They probably have you spin your finger "Tune in Tokyo" style to adjust audio volume and in traditional Apple UX fashion The tablet interface is still reversed so scrolling up navigates down will also be applied to the accelerator as pulling up on the accelerator will make you go faster and to pop the trunk the user is required to drag the trunk logo on the display panel to the trash can. just Apple things.

vitorhugods

I am calling it. Companies fired people and this might have caused fear of seat-based revenue being lower. But developers build ugly shit without designers. AI only helps developers to build ugly shit faster. We still need proper collaboration tools to drive better UI/UX to implementation, and Figma is still crucial for it. It just needs to be seen enough as an "AI-compatible" tool to justify spending and there we go. If anything, now more developers and bots are logging into Figma to check them designs and iterate faster.

Fair_Industry_4539

The UI/UX designers that use figma got deleted from my organisation last year, developers do all the designing now, using other AI tools. But yes you're right could be a little longer before that flows through the rest of the industry.

Drug_enduced_coma


BoringContribution7

A lot of finance apps still somehow feel like tax software from 2011 lol. That’s probably why apps with cleaner UX stand out so much now. For budgeting/personal finance specifically, quicken smplifi seems to get recommended a lot by people who want something modern looking without the super overwhelming spreadsheet energy.

skynetcoder

I think they first do a Risk Based Authentication using all the input parameters included in the http request (ip address, browser details, os details, resolution, installed browser extensions etc) sent by your browser. it helps to calculate the initial risk score of the http request, before moving to the next step.  then the mouse click = such mechanisms normally track the mouse movement to see whether it moves randomly like a human moving the mouse, instead of just checking whether you checked a check box. so good user experience for the end user, but lots of things happening behind to provide good UX and good security.

Practical_Bridge7287

The real thread is another UX/UI Tool like Paper or [Pencil.dev](http://Pencil.dev) replacing the Figma Canvas/Dev Mode with a canvas where you can design and explore in code. Paper is fantastic in my experience using it so far.

Gibraldi

As a designer and very long term Figma user. There’s still money to be made here but Claude will overtake them for UX/UI within about a year.

deesea

Figma may not be able to catch up. Hearing from UI/UX designers that claude design is working well for them.

NewSanDiegean

I read your post history and you were warning people about NVDA last year. I read some of your comments and it seems like you have been wrong often. I lost a bunch of money on QCOM puts and I have learned my lesson. This ticket is flying to the moon at least until June end. Also, your comparison of mac vs snapdragon is debatable. I have used both the devices at Costco and the although Mac has a feel good factor, snapdragon laptops are far better technically. iPhones vs android, look up some of the comparisons with latest iPhones with Apple modems and android flagships. Apple gives their users a feel good factor but when the devices are put to competitive tests, iPhone are beat. The advantage Apple has is that as they use in house chips, integration becomes easier and that contributes to overall UX. I have been an iPhone user for a long time now but using latest Samsung devices feel like they could capture entire Apple phone market if only they made a better looking/feeling phone.

Mibsty

Market's kinda saturated rn tbh. For some IBKR is strong if ur serious about trading stocks/options long term but personaly, Id also look at Plus500 if u want something with a really clean mobile/web interface. Its more execution-focused than community-focused, but the UX is pretty straightforward cmopared to some other platforms

geelinz

Force them to move to micro-lofts in walkable downtowns, train them to become UX engineers and SAAS salesmen.

ok-confusion19

Great UX? They change where stuff is located on their site every week. They're still learning

alteraltissimo

NET is absolutely grabbing developer mind share by great UX and generous free tiers. Whenever you ask Claude wherr to set up shop they'll be like "just use cloud flare lol". However I think it will be a while before this properly filters into earnings.

SangerGRBY

Figma bear case: Companies stop using Figma as handoff / design documents. Figma bull case: MCP / API / Token based pricing. Claude / Codex can very quickly generate both Frontend Code AND also Figma pages. Figma has a huge moat in terms of the amount of design elements, "Github for developers, UX, UI teams". Seems like a good buy at this price.

Fe-vulture

No, they are not front-running your orders, that is highly regulated and illegal. RobinHood gets paid (via PFOF) to route the orders to market makers (Citadel, etc) where they will fill your order out of their own inventory. They are required by law to fill you within the NBBO bid/ask, but that is it. The MM's profit nearly the full bid/ask spread. In that case, there is no incentive for them to fill better than they need to. If the broker does not use PFOF, they are capable of sending your order to multiple lit/dark pools and MMs, and then get the best price. This is a case where the broker is incentivized to actually give you real price improvement. I believe only Vanguard(horrible UX, and I don't think they do price improvement), Fidelity(better) and IBKRpro(best) are in this category for equities. When you turn to options, I believe there is only one that does not use PFOF. Yes, Fidelity uses PFOF for options and I don't care what Vanguard does here, so IBKRpro stands alone as the only non-PFOF options broker. However, even among the PFOF options brokers, they are not the same. The lower tier brokers will route you to their best price while the better brokers (Fidelity, Schwab, TT) have routing engines that will fight for midpoint fills.

maraluke

Figma screwed up by letting Google define the concept of Design.md, also should bug move into the (agentic) white board business beyond just UX design, Figjam doesn’t feel like it’s really taking off. It start to feel like another Adobe/Autodesk

knawlejj

If Uber keeps their costs low, provides a great driver+user UX, and doesn't add too much margin tax, they will do well. It's a very careful balance that Steam has executed in the games distribution space.

corner

Reddit is savvy enough to know that their user base is savvier than the average platform, so they have to be selective about how dickish they are with their UX. I have no doubt though that they’re always going to be trying to ride that line and pushing for more optimizations/revenue generators, but it’ll be more of a boiling frog technique.

onehedgeman

And they did it while butchering the UI/UX and content every week. RIP [r/all](r/all)

Zephyruos

It seems to be the default app for beginner retail traders, great UI and UX too.

WSBnoobxor

Hmm, fig might be worth it. Work with a lot of UI and UX developers in consulting at enterprise level. We build clients digital products and it's very sticky. I think this is gonna pop.

dom_eden

Spotify UX is much better than YouTube Music UX in my opinion, and I have both.

MiakiCho

Well. I have done a lot with AI assisted UX, some of which as I said, I only say as Beta (needed more revisions and review before I can make it production ready). But it was still mich faster and better workflow than using Figma. In fact most of UX design for us just happens on white board or tablets (with hand drawing). 

MiakiCho

Not sure what you are referring to. I am a software engineer (not a UX designer). Our UX designers don't touch any production code. They only update the Figma designs and we take the design and update code accordingly. There are some easy export/import flows for certain attributes but a lot of it still needs manual development before I can have a beta available for others to play with. In the recent flows, we are eliminating the design phase completely, where product leads can just prompt to get multiple versions of the UX (with real production data) when few prompts. I don't see how and why Figma will even fit this workflow anymore. 

MiakiCho

TBH, we are now moving to dynamic UI/UX for our product where UIs are written on the fly by AI based on end devices, screen size, user preferences, language, light/dark preference etc. And design for such systems needs a very different flow that what Figma offers right now. In a year or so, I can see AI coming up with 100s of demos for any projects with full UX code (not just design as you see in Figma), which can be updated on the fly with simple promoting. I don't really see why anyone will use Figma in a year. 

Dragongeek

Oh, I'm not arguing that. There's a lot of corporate software that's absolutely entrenched in business, and will never change. What I'm actually talking about is growth. Even if your software has absolutely locked down a couple of companies, even if those are very big companies, the moneymaking that can be done boils down to a back-and-forth dance where the software vendor can try to squeeze as much value out of the company as the company is willing to stomach before they arduously go through switching to a competitor. True moneymaking in software comes from, like with basically all other businesses, more customers. Here, you can uniquely leverage the advantage of software which is that production is essentially free (copy paste). That means, a software company needs to offer investors a clear roadmap as to how they will, for example, conquer the market to get more customers or expand to new markets to get more customers. While Figma may be big, they are still a niche software which is too complex for a layperson to even conceptualize, and this means the growth/expansion value proposition is a difficult sell. There's no roadmap for putting Figma in the hands of everyday people and Figma already being so dominant in it's niche (afaik it is *the* software for the UI/UX design use case) means that even the investor pitch of conquering the existing market is a bit weak because there's not that much further to grow.

Lemondroplet123

agree, I don’t get it. I dabbled in UX a couple of years ago and Figma fluency was a must. Adobe XD gave me a headache. Not sure what the new design tools are now. But the value of the product doesn’t match the stock price.

I_HopeThat_WasFart

my brother in christ, does your broker UX give you a signal to know you "did a good job" with a badge like that?

taiyab-raja

You have to more clearly distinguish between pure software plays and more integrated software/service/governance layer style solutions. Pure software like Figma is definitely under threat (I’m a UX designer of 15 years who made the early switch to Sketch and then Figma). Not to say I think Figma will sink, but there are much better options for trading against the Saaspocalypse story.

Stoked7666

I was honestly surprised by this as well, and just bought like 10 shares the other day. My company started using the MCP integrations, and it works really well. The UI/UX designer on our team has started using some AI tools to write code; however, management will always like to micromanage the interface it seems. Feels more like the frontend HTML/CSS work will be obsolete before the Figma frontend designs