Lessons in TV Platform Design from a Streaming Industry Insider

2025/08/28 14:43

Hey everyone who is reading the article! I am Kristina Misko, product design team lead and product designer at streaming service. I’ve been working at it for the last three years, and it’s time tp share my experience and cases my team and I went through designing for TV platform.

I have decided to start from a very common, yet necessary basis which product designers will need at their practice when they just start working with TV platform. In this article I will share all the guidelines I personally studied when I just became a product designer for a streaming service.

Why TV Design Matters

There are a lot of dribble designs for web&mobile and a majority of courses for these platforms, yet there is the other platform which users are also very sticky to and to which we have less materials and design cases in the community. As a streaming service product designer, I personally adore TV platform for its peculiarities, technical issues and UX patterns which we build every day. The article reveals peculiarities and facts about designing for TV which we experience while creating design for the platform, but let’s start with numbers. According to the studies of Nielsen, streaming is more popular than either cable or broadcast, demanding 38.1% of total TV usage, and I’m sure the numbers will raise year by year. So, let’s observe, what’s it like to create the product for TV.

The main difference between TV and other platforms which influences all other aspects of product design for the platform is context. The context of when and why people turn on TV, whether they are alone, had a stressful day or there is a company of friends. The context creates special conditions which we must pay attention to. For example, we shouldn’t ask our user to go through a long flow of authorization on TV because a person had a long day full of work, stress, so let’s navigate them to the mobile app where the process will be faster, yet the result will be successful — a complete authorization on TV + a retention to the mobile app.

Another difference is remote control as a way to navigate through the device. It implies its own rules which I will cover later in the article. But taking theses two issues into consideration, you can already say that TV Design has its own hacks.

Start with the Official Guidelines… and Then Go Beyond

Your first stop should be the platform guidelines. Apple, Google and TV manufacturers all publish recommended interface patterns and technical constraints. Here are a few I keep bookmarked:

  • Apple tvOS Human Interface Guidelines — Apple emphasises motion, depth and focus for a cohesive TV experience.
  • Android TV Design Guidelines — Google offers advice on scaling mobile patterns to TV and warns against effects (like blur) that low‑end devices can’t handle.
  • Smart TV Guides (webOS) — LG and Samsung explain how to leverage features such as parallax, gradients and rounded corners on their platforms.

These documents will tell you what’s possible on each platform. They won’t, however, tell you how to make your app delightful across many different devices. That’s where hard‑won experience comes in.

Lessons Learned Designing for TV

Hardware Diversity Is Real

Not all TVs are created equal. Some stuffed with the Voice Assistant, navigated by Air Mouse and powerful enough to maintain animations and gradients, and there is a plenty of devices whose capabilities are less fascinating . The last ones are not technically capable of other corner radius than 0, animations, gradients and parallax.

The decision we stick at our streaming service is design for the lowest common TV set and add enhancements only when you can detect that the hardware can handle them. How to do that? Test the devices, be in a close chain with TV developing stream and always ask for the feedback from them.

“The Ten‑Foot Rule”

Everything on TV needs to be legible from about three metres away. I learned to bump up font sizes (20-24 px and above), increase contrast and limit dense blocks of text. Onboarding screens, tutorials and payment flows deserve extra attention because they often contain instructions or sensitive data.

A perfect example of such rule is a communicative screen, a screen where we sold a user a subscription or give offers. It usually has not many text, but it should be readable from the distance because if not, we’ll lose users’ attention.

Focus Is the New Tap

On mobile, users tap to indicate intent. On TV, they navigate using arrows and rely on a focus state to see where they are. I experimented with several focus indicators — colour changes, borders, scaling and shadows. In the end, a combination of subtle scaling and colour change felt the most consistent across devices. Shadows look great on a flagship OLED, but many budget TVs simply drop them.

Remote‑Control Navigation Forces Simplicity

Navigation is limited to up/down/left/right and an OK button. So, the basic rule here is to simplify information architecture and develop it for the TVs with a good Voice assistant or Magic Remote. For example, I added such option in one of my recent designs for Search — you may search for the content AND for the Purchases, Continue watching list, etc. as well.

Less Is More

Most viewers turn on the TV after work, so cognitive load is low. My team deliberately reduced the number of steps needed to find something to watch. We prioritised personal recommendations and a prominent Continue Watching section. Complex tasks like account creation or entering payment details were handed off to mobile or web flows via QR codes.

One Design, Many Operating Systems

TVs run a handful of operating systems: Apple’s tvOS, Android TV/Google TV, LG webOS, Samsung’s Tizen and even gaming consoles. Capabilities vary widely. To avoid maintaining multiple codebases, we built a design system that could degrade gracefully. Here are some tips about each platform:

  • TVOS (Apple). There are no design limitations that I personally know. Since it is the same code base for Apple TV and iOS, restrictions for mobile and tv platforms will be the same.
  • ATV (Android TV). Android TV is represented with Smart aTV like Xiaomi and Sony, and common aTVs. Designing for aTV, remember that there are TVs that do not maintain blur (for example, Xiaomi Stick). However, corner cases aside, if the design works perfectly for the mobile platform, it would probably work for the aTV as well. \n Here are some links that may help you understand aTV more:
  • Design for Android TV;
  • More guidelines about designing for Android TV.
  • SmartTV (WebOS). SmartTVs with webOS are manifactured by such companies as LG and Samsung. I’d say this platform is on the top among others because of its design capabilities — blur, gradients, radius corners and even shadows may be implemented there. Also, you may include slight animations from screen to screen. However, from my personal experience, SmartTV has more limitations than ATV because of the load the app takes to maintain all the design, so I usually stick to simplifying design for SmartTV and let the app not to crush.

Putting It All Together

Designing for TV is like designing a living‑room appliance. It requires empathy for the viewer’s context and respect for the hardware’s limits. My process looks something like this:

  1. Research — Review platform guidelines, watch people use existing TV apps and identify pain points.
  2. Design for the worst case — Start with a basic layout and visual style that works on the weakest hardware.
  3. Layer on polish — Add motion, blur, depth and other enhancements for devices that can support them.
  4. Test on real TVs — Emulators are helpful but cannot replicate remote lag or subtle rendering differences.
  5. Iterate based on feedback — Collect data from real users and the developers. A small change in navigation can drastically affect engagement, and less Lottie may significantly affect the app’s lifetime per session.

Welllllll, thank you for reading till the end, hope the article was useful for you. If you find it interesting, don’t hesitate and share it with your colleagues. In case you want to know more about TV platforms or designing tips for TV platform — let me know, I’ll cover the cases where I got stumbled on.

\

Clause de non-responsabilité : les articles republiés sur ce site proviennent de plateformes publiques et sont fournis à titre informatif uniquement. Ils ne reflètent pas nécessairement les opinions de MEXC. Tous les droits restent la propriété des auteurs d'origine. Si vous estimez qu'un contenu porte atteinte aux droits d'un tiers, veuillez contacter service@support.mexc.com pour demander sa suppression. MEXC ne garantit ni l'exactitude, ni l'exhaustivité, ni l'actualité des contenus, et décline toute responsabilité quant aux actions entreprises sur la base des informations fournies. Ces contenus ne constituent pas des conseils financiers, juridiques ou professionnels, et ne doivent pas être interprétés comme une recommandation ou une approbation de la part de MEXC.
Partager des idées

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi

What if an AI agent signs transactions on your behalf?

What if an AI agent signs transactions on your behalf?

Imagine opening your wallet app, but instead of approving every swap, bridge, or stake, an AI agent does it for you. It reads the contract, checks risks, compares options, and signs the “best” choice in seconds. No more gas anxiety. No more decoding cryptic approvals. Your AI assistant just “handles it.” Sounds like freedom. But what’s really happening when we hand over that power? Delegating trust to a machine Web3 today is built on explicit user consent. Every transaction needs a signature, and every signature implies: I understand what’s happening. But let’s be honest — most people don’t. They click “approve” on unreadable prompts. If an AI agent takes over, that gap widens. Instead of you not understanding, now you don’t even see. This shifts the trust model from: The agent becomes a new layer of abstraction. And with abstraction comes both safety and danger. The upside Speed & convenience AI can parse contracts instantly, catching risks humans would miss. Approvals could become frictionless, without sacrificing security. Context-aware decisions Agents could weigh gas prices, slippage, and token approvals against your personal preferences, then act accordingly. Always-on protection Instead of reacting to phishing attempts, an AI guard could intercept malicious contracts before you even see them. The downside Loss of agency If your AI decides what’s “safe” to sign, are you still in control? Users may become passive, unable to contest decisions. Single point of failure Compromised AI = compromised wallet. If the model is poisoned, your assets could drain in seconds. Opaque decision-making If an AI declines to sign a transaction, can it explain why in a way you trust? Or will users face the same opacity they do with contracts today — just one layer higher? New attack surface Imagine adversaries training prompts to trick the AI. Instead of phishing humans, they’ll phish machines — and the stakes will be higher. UX implications Explainable approvals Every AI-driven signature should come with a human-readable rationale: “I signed this swap because it’s from Uniswap V3, with your preset max slippage, and no unusual approvals.” Override paths Users must retain the ability to bypass or veto. AI should recommend, not dictate. Granular delegation Maybe your agent handles micro-payments but asks for confirmation on large transfers. Trust should be flexible, not absolute. Transparency of the agent itself Who trained it? Where is it running? How is it updated? Without clear answers, the AI becomes another black box. Why it matters The core promise of Web3 is self-sovereignty: you control your assets. But sovereignty means responsibility, and responsibility often feels like friction. AI agents promise to smooth that friction, but at the cost of moving power away from you. The real design challenge isn’t It’s If we solve that, AI won’t just automate Web3 — it’ll make it usable. What if an AI agent signs transactions on your behalf? was originally published in Coinmonks on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story
Partager
Medium2025/08/29 00:16
Partager
Could Pengu, SPX, or Pepe Be the Next Meme Coin Sensation? A Look at Their Path to Legendary Status

Could Pengu, SPX, or Pepe Be the Next Meme Coin Sensation? A Look at Their Path to Legendary Status

The crypto world is buzzing with speculation about the next big meme coin. Pengu, SPX, and Pepe are capturing attention and sparking discussions. Could one of these digital tokens rise to legendary status? This article explores their journeys, growth potential, and what makes them stand out in a crowded market. Uncover the factors driving their popularity. Pudgy Penguins Price Shows Mixed Signals, Awaiting Breakout Source: tradingview  Pudgy Penguins (PENGU) is currently trading between about three to nearly four $0.01. Over the past six months, it's soared almost 237%, reflecting strong potential. The nearest challenge is breaking the four-cent resistance. If it does, pushing towards nearly five $0.01 is possible. However, the price has dipped over 4% in just a week and faces a tough path with losses nearing a quarter in the past month. The current price dances around short-term moving averages, hinting at uncertainty. But PENGU’s upward journey in the long term offers hope, even as short-term numbers battle between gains and losses. The climb past key levels could trigger a significant breakout."Sei Cryptocurrency on the Brink of Breakout with Potential Gains SPX6900 Tests New Heights Despite Recent Dips Source: tradingview  SPX6900's current price is floating between $1.18 and $1.49. Recently, there's been a slight pullback, with a weekly drop of over 6%. Yet, when you look at the bigger picture, the coin has surged by nearly 138% over the last six months. The nearest resistance is at around $1.67; breaking past this could lead SPX to eye the next target of approximately $1.98. If it manages to climb to the second resistance, it could gain over a third in value from current levels. Although there's been a month-long decline of over 40%, SPX's long-term performance shows strength. The current indicators suggest room for growth, provided it can maintain upward momentum. Pepe Gains Ground: Could This Be the Start of a Bull Run? Source: tradingview  Pepe (PEPE) is seeing some price action between $0.000009864 and $0.000011744. It sits just under a resistance point at $0.000012657. If it breaks through, it might head toward the second resistance around $0.000014537, a potential rise of about 24% from its low today. The coin is above its 10-day average but falls short of the 100-day trend. While the price recently dipped 4.38% in a week and 14.37% over the month, it's still higher than six months ago by 28.64%. The RSI at 54.80 suggests it's not overbought nor oversold, hinting room for growth as interest builds. Conclusion Pengu, SPX, and Pepe each have a unique journey and different strengths. Pengu boasts a strong online community. SPX has innovative features that stand out. Pepe, with its connection to popular culture, holds nostalgic appeal. Each one has elements that could make it rise to meme coin sensation status. However, their success will depend on factors like market trends and community support. Investors will need to watch how these coins develop and adapt to future changes. Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.
Partager
Coinstats2025/08/28 23:13
Partager