Most designers use Macs, sure. But just giving a link to product owners, QA, clients, and developers is a whole lot easier than trying to get them to successfully use Zeplin or manually keep track of what static images I've copy/pasted in tickets etc.
Also: I use Mac at work and PC at home. So now you know one designer who uses Figma on PC.
I've never used Sketch Runner, but you can search assets in Figma which appears to be 90% of what you're looking for.
1 minute of searching also reveals a plugin called "Figma Walker" which, as the name implies, is an attempt to copy the exact functionality of Sketch Runner.
> “Maine's decision to impose unique burdens on ISPs' speech—while ignoring the online and offline businesses that have and use the very same information and for the same and similar purposes as ISPs—represents discrimination between similarly situated speakers that is impermissible under the First Amendment,” the lawsuit claimed.
I agree. The law should apply to everyone, not just ISPs.
In general I feel that developers are very poor clients. Designers are better off finding freelance work or donating time to a non-profit they care about imo.
I agree, Slack replies are awful. The only chat reply feature I've ever enjoyed was Flowdock's. It doesn't create threads it just connects replies with colors. It's great.
Your hypothetical either assumes that machines will never be able to be plumbers/doctors/yoga instructors, OR just takes a snapshot of some point in time between now and the eventual future when machines are superior at all work currently done by humans.
The former is incredibly short sighted and the latter doesn't seem super productive to me.
In 2010 this was a reasonable position. Predicting the current absurdity that is Facebook data collection and sales would have been quite the hot take in 2010.
Question for you though: why would you want product/marketing people feebly attempting to create new pages/layouts with some tool when you could just have a React engineer code up whatever they design with ease? I mean I get it, graphic designers and business analysts are cheaper than engineers, but if it takes them 2-3x as long (or more) to do the same job are you really saving any money?
Yea there's plenty of benefits using a truncation library (we're currently using react-lines-ellipsis) over just css truncation. More control over how the truncation happens, callback so you can do more stuff on the condition that truncation has occurred, multi-line truncation as you mentioned, etc etc.
I get the feeling that most of the time when people are complaining about unnecessary libraries they simply haven't personally run into the problem that the library solves yet.
I could nitpick the authors points, but honestly this article just boils down to "Design tools need more features!" which I generally agree with. We're living in nice times for design tools though - Figma/Sketch are leading the pack and moving extremely fast.
We're no longer in the dark ages of waiting 5+ years for Adobe to implement some basic feature (like being able to round corners on a rectangle). Well, I guess if you're for some reason using xD you're still waiting a comically long amount of time between significant releases, but that's your own fault.
I was in design until recently, and I too have done my share of "design challenges". They're fine if they're late in the interview process imo. I did interview a couple places that tried to lead with a design challenge (HR screen -> design challenge), even before I spoke with the hiring manager at all. That's just not very respectful of my time, so I didn't pursue those.
It sounds like the vendor is lazy and relatively bad at SEO, but mass-creating blog networks to build backlinks still very much works in 2019 (though its morality is up for debate).
Where it sounds like they might be messing up and potentially setting the company up to get nuked is by directly linking from their spam sites to their main site. That's a big no-no.
If you want more information you should search "tiered link-building".
We've got some semi-automated documentation for our React component library. It's broken down into Assemblies, Components, and Elements with each variation having it's own SKU which makes going back and forth from design to documentation pretty simple.
When I first started it helped me a ton with getting up to speed (especially as a designer turned developer). One of the neat things about it is that it uses our flow types to pull out required/optional props and their types.
The main negative is that there's no simple way for designers to directly contribute to it at the moment.