Nico M. ten Hoor

Interested in design, visual identity, typography and graphic novels

[Figma @figma]

FIGMA MOTION IS HERE
FIGMA MOTION IS HERE
FIGMA MOTION IS HERE

Live from Config 2026

[Nico M. ten Hoor @Nicoooooooon]

Gemini AI Visual Design | 
Explore how Google designers use gradients, motion, and foundational shapes to build trust and intuition within the evolving Gemini AI assistant experience.
https://t.co/fhfmbrfija

[Nico M. ten Hoor @Nicoooooooon]

The Mechanics of Neurobranding: Brand Strategy That Starts In the Feels https://t.co/Vm82rts54y

[Nico M. ten Hoor @Nicoooooooon]

Blank Street has launched a major rebrand with help of @WolffOlins ⸺
https://t.co/jpBN3NJxeJ

[Brian Chesky @bchesky]

Thanks for all the feedback on our design work in the Summer Release. Here’s a little preview of everything we worked on for our new design system—new font, navigation, layout system, colors, cards, and of course, icons. Much more to come…

[Nico M. ten Hoor @Nicoooooooon]

Ben Thompson reads into Apple’s presentation of its annual software updates: https://t.co/VJELxIYsV3 via @stratechery

[Nico M. ten Hoor @Nicoooooooon]

Sebastiaan de With imagines what could be next for the design of iPhones, Macs and iPads. https://t.co/1p3dLRhWKr

[Nico M. ten Hoor @Nicoooooooon]

Google announce major update Material 3 Expressive: Design with emotion. The new design language introduces bolder colors, new motion physics, updated components, and more expressive, emotionally resonant UI elements.
https://t.co/E4Zzc1SerF

[DANN© @DannPetty]

Photoshop wasn’t efficient enough at “product” design so Sketch came and took that market share.

Sketch wasn’t available to everyone and lacked the Silicon Valley connections so Figma came along.

With Figma’s collaboration, in-browser tool and its well connected bright smart founder—it was perfect for Silicon Valley.

XD and Studio were just too late to the game as everyone was transition tired and it was clear InVision was on its way out with lack of innovation and XD was still just an Adobe product that should have existed years prior but they move like dinosaurs.

So Figma had zero competition besides late leavers of Photoshop.

There’s been a sleeper company come along like Canva, they took the everyday graphic designer route away from Adobe, however, many pro designers now also use Canva for social media things with clients as it’s easier for anyone to manage—not just the pros.

And there lies one of the many issues with Figma. It’s become too featured where not anyone can just take your file and figure it out. In Photoshop, the layers were even hard for people. So imagine how someone feels on Figma.

This allowed Canva to take that market share and soon, I think someone will be able to create a simplified design tool for product designers and web designers that focuses on the designer and will take even more market share away from Figma.

So a once easy to use tool is becoming bloated like Photoshop did and losing focus on its main user, the designer, and moving focus to developers which is confusing it’s number 1 user. This on top of some horrific pricing schemes just like Adobe did, the pattern is becoming clear. Competition is needed to refocus them and kick them in gear.

I’m rooting for anyone here, even Figma. They all allow us to make money and we should all be grateful they exist. I just noticed a trend happening with Figma and want to bring it up for anyone out there considering working on a product for designers—because now is the time.

I’d even argue that if someone like Webflow thought more like a designers process, they could take a majority of web design market share away.

Good luck to everyone! Especially Figma because I do not want to switch tools again. But it is about to be exciting times again like the previous battle of the tools.

[Nico M. ten Hoor @Nicoooooooon]

Great episode of the Design Better podcast where co-hosts Eli Woolery and Aarron Walter talk to Jake Knapp
https://t.co/nKiIhn4zVS

[Nico M. ten Hoor @Nicoooooooon]

@sdw ‘The Dream Machine’ by M. Mitchell Waldrop https://t.co/SGMktrVBFx

[Andy Budd @andybudd]

Here's a really good article from @rorysutherland .

This (edited) section is something I think a lot of designers will resonate with.

"What would’ve happened if you hadn’t given the brief to a load of engineering firms who immediately focused on speed, time, distance, capacity? What if you’d given the brief to Disney instead? Why does that question never get asked? Because it’s an open-ended question. And businesspeople, governments, and politicians aren’t looking to solve problems; they’re looking to win arguments. And the way you win an argument is by pretending that what should be an open-ended question with many possible right answers isn’t one. What you do is pretend this is a high school math problem with a single right answer, you solve for the right answer using high school math, and then nobody can argue with you because apparently you haven’t made a decision. You’ve simply followed the data. This is a massive problem in decision-making. We try to close down the solution space of any problem in order to arrive at a single right answer that is difficult to argue with."

https://t.co/uhQJHYJkI0

[Nico M. ten Hoor @Nicoooooooon]

“Compliance to design systems pushes from one side and product needs push from the other. There needs to be a balance but currently the gap between the two is growing...” https://t.co/L8aPHzUo03 HT @BogieZero

[Sebastiaan de With @sdw]

My theory is that the designers making all these slick marketing graphics are kept away from the people making the software at all costs. Armed guards are involved. Whatever happens, this joy and whimsy cannot touch the actual software

[Andy Budd @andybudd]

Good design seems inefficient to people with an accountancy mindset.

Bad design seems like an efficient process, but in reality it pushes inefficiency to production

[Cameron Moll @cameronmoll]

"Delight" often gets a bad rap when mistaken as animations, sound effects, and confetti.

Here's how I think about delight and its sibling, utility:

Utility is the VALUE a user derives from interacting with your product. Much like profitability makes a business sustainable, utility makes a product sustainable.

↳ Utility creates loyalty.

Delight is the SATISFACTION a user derives from interacting with your product.

Whereas utility is “I need to use this product”, delight is “I want to use this product”, and in the best cases “I want others to use this product too.” Maximizing delight translates to higher app ratings, increased NPS, stronger brand affinity, and increased virality.

↳ Delight creates advocacy.

Design, Product, Engineering must work closely to put utility first. But each of these — Design in particular — must also advocate for delight to transform product value from “need to” to “want to.”

Prioritizing delight is another form of slowing down to speed up. Small investments in delight now can translate to exponential gains in 'free' advocacy later.

[Nico M. ten Hoor @Nicoooooooon]

The Design Better Podcast with Eric Snowden, Head of Adobe Design, on AI + Design
https://t.co/S66vsKWMap

[Nico M. ten Hoor @Nicoooooooon]

Type as a tool, in stead of a toy — https://t.co/ZQGeSQTLll with @JonathanHoefler

[Nico M. ten Hoor @Nicoooooooon]

A change of typeface: Microsoft’s new default font has arrived by @MicrosoftDesign https://t.co/UVyplHO9AB

[Nico M. ten Hoor @Nicoooooooon]

“New Type for New Philosophy” by erik spiekermann
https://t.co/vqexwjW9FD