Why It's Better to Hire a Studio Over a Solo Designer

The digital environment is constantly changing. Design evolves and adapts to new needs and new users. However, some solutions do not go out of fashion. People from all generations know them and changing them could introduce chaos or at least frustration.

All of you know it very well and see it every day while typing on any of your devices. It helps you by indicating the spot for your future text and does follow new letters as you type. It also specifies the location in the text where you want to paste something that you previously copied. You might have seen it as an underscore or a block but usually, it takes the form of a blinking vertical line. As we found out while researching for this article - it also has a lot of names

• caret
• blinking cursor
• text cursor
• text insertion point

Where did the blinking cursor even come from?

In the last century, along with technological development, the possibility of creating and editing texts on the first computers appeared. However, writers struggled with the problem of the lack of a quick and intuitive possibility of changing or removing a selected fragment of the text.

Charles Kiesling was one of the engineers interested in advancing the capabilities of computers in the 1950s. He worked on improving the logic circuitry of computers such as the IBM 650. In 1967, Kiesling filed a patent for a new typing solution - a blinking cursor. However, this solution became widely known and used in 1977 with the premiere of Apple II and a year later with the premiere of the first commercially popular word processor WordStar.

Today, anyone who has had a computer in their hands at least once knows what a cursor means. Designers and developers working on products and adding new features can’t disregard  solutions users are already used to.

So what should we do if we need to point two spots at once?

We’ve recently asked ourselves this question for the first time. We came across a case that made us think about it while designing a tool similar to code creator. The user was supposed to add a few elements in the line, which together created a whole code. Each of the elements could have been selected from a code completion list that also had a search function. First caret: the user needed to be able to see the location of a new element added in the "code". Second caret: if the user wanted to search for an element, the caret must have appeared in the active textfield.

What now? Should we delete one cursor? Gray it out? How about leaving both of them and ignoring the problem? We’ve decided to check some popular apps - desktop and mobile and find out how they solve this problem.

Gmail on Mac - Adding emoji to a new email

One caret follows the text entered in the search box. The other indicates the place in the email where the selected emoji will appear. It's worth noticing that they are both blinking and have the same color.

Google Docs - Searching an element in the doc

In that case, the first cursor follows the text typed in the finder tool. The second one points to the last active text location. Both of the cursors have the same color, but just the one in the finder is blinking. The second cursor starts to blink again after closing the finder.

iOS Notes - Adding emoji to the note

iPhone users can experience a double text cursor creating a new note on their phones. The cursors are very different from each other - they have different colors and only the one in the search box is blinking.

WhatsApp for Android - Adding emoji to the new message

In that case, we can see only one caret and it’s in a search box. The one in the textfield is invisible but the selected emoji appears in the place where a caret was active the last time.

Which one is the best?

After testing a few apps, it's time to summarize the pros and cons of each solution.

Visibility of both cursors at once

In our opinion, the user should always be able to see where the result of their action will appear. Making one of the carets invisible takes away some part of the user's control. So we stand for keeping both cursors visible to the user. What is important here is creating a hierarchy for them. So now let's take care of…

Colors

Let's pay attention to a good idea that appeared in one of the inspirations we found: the cursor that is not responsible for the main action on the screen is grayed out. To highlight the importance of the main cursor, we can also choose colors other than black. Blue for example will call attention to the active status of the textfield.

Blinking

Last but not least - blinking of the cursor. It is obvious that this function helps a lot in finding our current location in the text. But aren't two elements blinking on the screen too much? In our opinion, yes. In the case of a double cursor, we would definitely choose to animate only one of them, the main action one.

Conclusions

Adding a blinking cursor to the interfaces was undoubtedly necessary to facilitate many people's daily work. This invention has stood the test of time and is still widely used today. However, sometimes even the most reliable solutions need an adaptation to more complex features. Yet, as designers, we have to remember that if the user already knows the action of a component, we shouldn’t change it.

In our opinion, in this task, we should focus on designing the hierarchy of elements. We have the ability to work on the visibility, color, and movement of elements. This essential UX designer skill will keep the interface transparent and let the user stay in control. 

And you? How would you design a tool that requires two cursors? And as a user, have you noticed this problem in the apps you use?

In a world where every sprint is a race and every pixel matters, the idea of artificial intelligence stepping in to support UX work is no longer theoretical. Zeplin -long trusted by product teams for streamlining design-to-dev handoffs - is entering new territory with its latest feature: AI Design Review.

But is it a true productivity boost or just another buzzword?

At UX GIRL, we took a deep dive into how this feature works, who benefits from it, and whether it's ready for real-world product workflows.

What Is Zeplin’s AI Design Review?

Zeplin’s AI Design Review uses a combination of large language models (LLMs) and visual analysis algorithms to automatically evaluate design screens uploaded to the platform. With one click, the tool can assess:

• Adherence to UI/UX best practices (contrast, visual hierarchy, spacing),
• Alignment with your design system,
• Text readability,
• Accessibility issues,
• Element alignment and padding.

The result? Designers and teams receive instant feedback before development even starts - saving time, reducing rework, and improving consistency.

Note: The feature is currently in Beta and available for Team and Organization plans

How It Works in a Real Sprint

Let’s say a designer finalizes a set of screens. Normally, they’d hand it over to the team for manual review, often leading to rounds of feedback, corrections, and delays.

With AI Review, here’s how it looks:

1. The designer uploads the file to Zeplin.
2. They trigger AI Design Review, which instantly scans layout, color, type, spacing, and accessibility.
3. The AI suggests corrections like:
   • “Low contrast between button and background.”
   • “Heading typography breaks consistency with subheaders.”
4. The designer adjusts accordingly.
5. PMs and developers receive a cleaner, more polished file with fewer errors.

Zeplin claims the feature can reduce design-related issues passed to development by up to 30%

Why Product Teams Should Care

For Product Owners, Project Managers, and CTOs, AI Design Review can:

• Accelerate iteration cycles by catching issues early,
• Improve design consistency across large or fast-changing UI systems,
• Help non-designers (like PMs) understand design quality without relying solely on design reviews.

Future updates will allow teams to customize review rules based on internal design systems, making the tool even more relevant for enterprise environments.

Limitations to Watch Out For

Despite its promise, Zeplin’s AI Review isn’t a silver bullet - and it shouldn’t be treated as one. Key caveats include:

• Lack of design intent: The AI can't understand why a designer made a specific decision.
• No user context: It doesn’t analyze user goals, flows, or emotions behind the interface.
• No support for non-English reviews (as of now).
• Risk of over-automation: Teams may over-rely on AI and deliver “technically correct but uninspired” UI.

This makes it a great supporting tool, but not a replacement for thoughtful human review.

How to Integrate It Into Your Workflow

To make the most of AI Design Review, we recommend the following integration model:

1. Designer finishes a screen and uploads it to Zeplin.
2. AI Review is triggered, and suggestions are considered.
3. Project Manager reviews AI feedback before sprint planning or handoff.
4. Developers get cleaner, AI-reviewed designs, reducing back-and-forth and rework.

This model works best when combined with traditional team review sessions and design QA.

Is It Worth It? Our Verdict

If your team:

• Moves fast (Agile, CI/CD),
• Uses a design system,
• Delivers at scale or across multiple platforms,

...then AI Design Review can help reduce errors, align expectations, and deliver better experiences faster.

Smaller teams may find it a "nice to have," but even then - testing it in one sprint can offer real insights.

Conclusion: So, Should You Use It?

Zeplin’s AI Design Review isn’t about replacing designers - it’s about giving them better tools to work smarter. It acts as a second pair of eyes, offering clear, structured feedback before handoff.

At UX GIRL, we help teams like yours build processes that combine AI-powered tools with UX strategy, research, and design expertise. If you’re curious about bringing AI into your workflow, let’s talk - we’ll show you how to make it work without losing the human touch.

‍

Artificial intelligence is no longer a distant promise for design teams-it is already reshaping how designers think, collaborate, and create. This shift was the focus of a talk delivered by Magdalena Ostoja‑Chyżyńska, CEO & Founder of UX GIRL, during Data Science Summit, one of the key events bringing together experts from data, technology, and digital innovation.

In her presentation, “How AI and Enhanced Data Access are Transforming Today’s Design,” Magdalena explored how artificial intelligence is influencing modern design practice-not as a replacement for human creativity, but as a force that is redefining how design teams work with data, insights, and complex business requirements

Design at the Intersection of AI and Data

The talk addressed a challenge many organizations currently face: how to integrate AI into design processes without reducing originality or oversimplifying complex user problems. As Magdalena explained, the growing accessibility of data and AI models has fundamentally changed how designers approach tasks such as briefing, user research, insight synthesis, requirements definition, and asset creation.

Rather than treating AI as a purely visual or generative tool, the presentation positioned it as a broader design accelerator-one that influences decision-making long before the first interface is drawn.

Insights from Real Client Projects

A key strength of the session was its grounding in real business practice. Drawing from ongoing client work at UX GIRL, Magdalena shared observations from testing different AI tools and models across multiple stages of the design process. These experiments focused on understanding where AI genuinely supports creative and analytical work, and where its limitations become visible in real-world conditions.

During the talk, she referenced commonly used tools such as Midjourney, ChatGPT, Claude, and Recraft, explaining how they were evaluated not in isolation, but in combination with different types of data and project constraints. The emphasis was not on novelty, but on effectiveness-how these tools behave when confronted with incomplete data, ambiguous requirements, or complex stakeholder expectations.

Creativity, Control, and the Role of Data

One of the central themes of the presentation was the relationship between AI output and data quality. Magdalena highlighted that AI-driven design outcomes are only as strong as the data and context provided to the models. Enhanced access to data can dramatically improve speed and clarity, but it also increases the responsibility of design teams to curate, interpret, and challenge that data rather than accept AI-generated results at face value.

The session made it clear that AI does not remove the need for designers’ judgment. On the contrary, it amplifies the importance of critical thinking, domain knowledge, and ethical responsibility in design decisions.

Why This Talk Resonated at Data Science Summit

Presenting this topic at a data-focused conference was intentional. The session connected two worlds that often operate separately: design and data science. By showing how AI is already embedded in everyday design workflows, Magdalena demonstrated that design maturity today increasingly depends on data literacy and cross‑disciplinary collaboration.

For many attendees, the talk offered a rare perspective-AI discussed not from a purely technical standpoint, but through the lens of practical design leadership and real client constraints.

Looking Ahead

The presentation reinforced UX GIRL’s position at the intersection of design, data, and emerging technology. Rather than following trends, the studio actively tests and evaluates new tools in live projects, translating experimentation into informed design decisions.

As AI continues to evolve, the questions raised during this session remain highly relevant: how to preserve originality, how to use data responsibly, and how to ensure that technology strengthens-not flattens-the impact of design.

For those interested in how AI is shaping the future of design beyond surface-level automation, the work and insights shared by UX GIRL offer a grounded and experience-driven perspective.