Been designing the last few weeks and realized how simple but effective the @linear design system is. There is no design system team, no councils, no meetings about what we should call it or if it’s “atomic" or not. We have a system which has colors, type, icons and components
We have had the system from the beginning which helped to speed up both design and development, and even allow supporting dark, light and custom user themes in the app. We have one file in Figma which describes it and also built in to the code.
Colors. So we have basic groups like Bg, Label, Control. So when I’m designing I just draw a shape, then write "bg base" to get the default background color, and label base to get the default text color. Then there is variations like Shade, Muted, Faint etc.
Same for text. We have to groups Body and Title, which has Large, Regular, Small and Mini type with "+" variations which means it's heavier weight. Default text size is Regular, lot of attributes and secondary stuff is Small and titles are Large.
Then we have Elevation which set of standard shadows for dark and light modes. shadowLow is for small things like buttons, shadowMedium/High is for slightly larger boxes that are elevated and Float is for larger boxes that float over everything else.
Then we have Icons as components and they can be pulled in to the designs or components like buttons.
We don't have all the components Figma, but they exist in the code. We have common ones like Buttons or List items or Status things that you need often. We try to use existing components when can but it's usually faster to redraw the component than trying to maintain a library
It feels very simple and light but still useful. Like a good tool. There is no drama or complex ideas. Just the things we need. I don't feel constrained by it but feel like it speeds me up.
Like it should be but seems there is this tendency to complicate things uncessarily
This kind of mirrors the philosophy we have for @linear and Linear Method:
Focus your efforts on the actual task on hand (building software), not on side quests (building process or management systems).
While we don’t have a “design system team”, everyone contributes to the system. It’s a natural part of the tool chain and we improve as we go
Start the company with the goal to be the best for something (@linear is the best tool for software teams to plan and build). Each market can only support 1-2 winners, so if you are not going to be the best, you probably have already lost.
To me “best” also means being quality & fitting solution for the need. This means quality and finding the fit should be paramount. Everything should be evaluated from that perspective (does it increase the quality & fit?
You hire slowly and with each hire for each role in the company look for their interest in craft (do they want to be better what they do, do they care about doing things well), then their taste & judgment (do they know what good looks like), then skills (do they have the skills or close enough skills to create something great)
This might be the end of @cartainc as the trusted platform for startups.
As a founder it feels kind shitty that Carta, who I trust to manage our cap table, is now doing cold outreach to our angel investors about selling Linear shares to their buyers.
Btw "the buyer" would buy the shares exactly at our Series B share price. Not that this information is not unobtainable secret but makes me paranoid Carta's is playing both sides here.
- Carta knows who have shares and how much.
- At what price they bought it and when
- What other transactions have happened and when.
- Legal docs, compliance docs
- Headcount, revenue & other information if you have connected it
People asking what taste is, or is there a framework ––
It's knowing what good looks like. Person who has taste in certain things, can find good things, create good things and point out how something needs to change to make it good.
When Microsoft leadership feels like GitHub layoffs are not bad enough, they have to increase the pain by forcing people to use MS Teams on their 4y old laptops.
And why does something like switch to Teams matter?
Top down decisions on minor things like this signal about a culture change.
2019 when we got started with Linear, most SaaS websites at the time seemed to be these "Corporate Memphis" sites with vague benefit statements and weird colorful illustrations. No screenshots of the product and dark sites were very rare in B2B SaaS.
With @linear, the brand was about the hope for the future. Tools exist to do a job. It’s about precision and taking the work seriously and getting out of the way.
I was inspired by GMUNK's work on Tron UI and Apple's Pro line products and wanted to bring that style to B2B SaaS.
Design wise, we really wanted to talk people like us and who to build things well. Dark mode and dark website for was that we are not part of the "Corporate Memphis" and we care about crafting a product that works and fits needs.
I’ve seen a lot of takes on the Figma Adobe deal in past week and think most VCs/finance folks misses the point since they don’t really understand the market or tools Adobe and Figma makes. Figma is not a Photoshop killer and Figma didn't put "Photoshop in the cloud".
First, Adobe business is making tools for specific creative fields like photographers, illustrators, magazine editors, videographers etc. The talk about some kind of “Adobe” bundle doesn’t make sense since most people only have a need and proficiency in 1-3 of the Adobe tools.
This is very different from the "MS Office bundle" where regular office worker might use all of most of the tools on their day job and the integrations. But what Adobe makes are tools for completely different creative fields and professionals.