Amir Afroozan
The initiative to redesign the Snapp iOS app stemmed from the realization that its user interface was significantly outdated compared to our recently improved Android version. While a full redesign wasn’t feasible given our limited timeframe, we identified key enhancements that would align the iOS app with Apple’s Human Interface Guidelines (HIG) to provide a more seamless and intuitive experience for our users.
This "Soft Redesign" was an experience optimization effort — a strategic attempt to make impactful improvements without overhauling the entire interface. As the design owner, I led a team of three designers and one UX writer, collaborating with a design system designer and a product owner to implement these changes effectively.
Client:
Snapp
My Role:
Product Design Owner
Year:
2021
Service Provided:
Product Design
gesture
Core Problems
Snapp’s ride-hailing service has over 60 million users across all platforms (iOS, Android, and PWA), with x% of them on iOS. When the opportunity presented itself, a series of meetings with stakeholders and designers revealed the following problems we could address within the short timeframe.
Outdated and inconsistent visuals: The UI had visibly aged, with many screens and components no longer aligned with modern standards or each other. Design Process /October 10th
An incomplete and abandoned design system: The existing system had been partially implemented and then left behind, leading to duplicated patterns and visual inconsistencies.
Lack of documentation and a single source of truth: There were no unified design files, documentation, or centralized flows, making collaboration and iteration inefficient.
Poor alignment with Apple’s Human Interface Guidelines (HIG): Many interaction and visual design patterns felt unfamiliar to iOS users, decreasing platform-native usability.
Accessibility gaps across the experience: Issues ranged from poor navigation and inconsistent screen scaling to unclear error states, outdated UX writing, and a tone of voice that didn’t match with what we had in other platforms.
Approach
To address the inconsistent, outdated UI and abandoned design system, we took two actions:
. Using our Android design system structure to speed up the process — but kept it in a separate file so we could make changes specifically based on iOS HIG.
. Started adapting patterns and components selectively to match iOS expectations.For better documentation, we began taking notes and creating MoMs (minutes of meetings) early in the process. We also migrated our old design files from Sketch — an outdated tool that was no longer used by our team — to Figma, where our Android design files already lived.
To better align with iOS user needs and behaviors, we had to change certain patterns and components. However, we didn’t have time to redesign all assets and screens. Instead, we identified high-impact, low-risk opportunities to lay the foundation for a more intuitive iOS experience — which we’ll cover in detail later.
To address some of the accessibility issues we encountered, we adopted a QA-driven approach. This allowed us to identify and fix problems incrementally throughout the design phase. One early decision was to adjust screen ratios based on our iOS user base so we could design more exclusively for them. We also reused navigation patterns familiar to iOS users — including gestures and micro-interactions — to make the app feel more native and accessible.
Coming soon
Objectives /October 10th
Design Process /October 10th
Key Design Decisions /October 20th
Rationale Behind Key Decisions/October 20th
Challenges/October 20th
Reflections/October 20th
Conclusion/October 20th