01
Connection Uncertainty
Users were unsure which available machine or connection represented the correct destination.
Protected by NDA
Ethernet Communication Tool
This desktop tool helps developers, embedded engineers, and technical operators establish Ethernet communication between systems and transfer files reliably. The design challenge was not to hide technical complexity altogether, but to present the right information at the right moment—so users could focus on connecting, selecting a destination, and transferring data rather than interpreting networking concepts first.
↓Errors
Adapter Selection Errors
2×
Faster Connection Setup
95%
Transfer Visibility
↑Trust
User Confidence in Transfers
Overview
Project Snapshot
Platform
Desktop
Role
UI/UX Designer
Duration
4 Weeks
Team
1 Designer,5 Dev's
Users
Non Technical Ops
Validation
Stakeholder Review
Context
The Problem Space
File transfer was technically possible, but the experience made a simple task feel unnecessarily complex.
The Core Problem
Users understand the system before complete the task.
In industrial testing and embedded-system environments, teams often need to transfer files directly between machines without relying on internet connectivity.
Although the underlying networking technology was reliable, the interface exposed too much technical complexity at the wrong moment. Users had to interpret connections, destinations, transfer states, and failures before they could confidently complete a simple file-transfer task.
01
Technical Environment
Direct machine-to-machine communication in controlled industrial environments.
02
Primary Task
Connect, select a destination, transfer files, and verify completion.
03
UX Opportunity
Reduce technical interpretation without hiding important system information.
User Friction
Where the experience broke down
02
Limited Transfer Visibility
During large transfers, users lacked a clear understanding of what was happening and whether the process was progressing.
03
Error Recovery
When something failed, users needed clearer feedback about what went wrong and what action they should take next.
Key Insight
The core issue wasn't a lack of technical knowledge.
It was a mental-model mismatch. The system communicated how the technology worked, while users primarily needed to understand what they needed to do next.
System thinking
Connection → Protocol → Transfer → Status
→
User thinking
Select → Send → Confirm
Understand the User
Research Goals
01
How do users currently establish Ethernet communication?
02
Where do users hesitate or need to interpret technical information?
03
How do they identify the correct network interface?
04
What information do they need before starting a transfer?
#
Research Approach
Understanding User Needs Through Workflow Analysis
The research combined informal user discussions, workflow analysis, and review of the existing experience to identify friction points. Rather than measuring quantitative outcomes, the study focused on understanding what users needed to know at each step to make confident decisions. This helped identify where technical information could be simplified, prioritized, or moved into secondary layers.
Define the User
Who I Designed For
The experience needed to work for both technically experienced engineers and operators who interact with the system primarily to complete a task.
Primary Persona
System Engineer
“I want to connect, transfer confidently, and confirm completion.”
Needs
- Clear connection and device status
- Reliable transfer progress and feedback
- Quick access to technical diagnostics
- Clear recovery actions and guidance
Pain Points
- Multiple interfaces and unclear connections
- Devices becoming unavailable during connectivity changes
- Limited visibility during file transfers
- Unclear errors and completion states
Secondary Persona
Non-Technical Operator
“I want to know what to select, what is happening, and what to do next.”
Needs
- Simple connection and device guidance
- Clear step-by-step task flow
- Visible transfer progress and status
- Plain-language errors with recovery steps
Pain Points
- Confusing terminology and connection states
- Unclear device and transfer status
- Limited feedback during long transfers
- Errors without clear next steps
Problem Statement
Defining the Challenge
How might we simplify Ethernet communication for tech/non-tech users by reducing setup complexity, improving system visibility, and creating confidence during file transfers?
Research Key Findings
Four insights shaped the direction of the experience.
Across both user types, the same underlying pattern emerged: users didn't need more technical information. They needed the right information at the right moment.
01
Expertise doesn't mean technical UI is preferred
Observation
Experienced users understood networking concepts, but still had to interpret which interface was relevant to their immediate task.
“For a simple task, why should I spend time
understanding the system?”
Design Opportunity
Reduce the gap between system complexity and user intent.
02
Connection state is a decision, not just a status
Observation
Knowing that an adapter exists is different from knowing whether it can currently support the intended communication.
“Can I use this connection?”
Design Opportunity
Make connection state actionable instead of presenting it as passive system metadata.
03
Users need confidence before they transfer
Observation
File transfer is consequential. Users need confidence in both the selected files and their destination.
Source → Destination → Data
Design Opportunity
Make source and destination identity explicit before the transfer begins.
04
An error should provide a path forward
Observation
Technical exceptions can explain what went wrong without helping users understand what to do next.
What happened → Why it matters → What to do next
Design Opportunity
Turn error messages into actionable recovery guidance instead of passive failure reports.
New Mental Model
From understanding the system to completing the task.
The interface should guide users through the minimum information required at each stage, while keeping deeper technical details available when they need them.
01
Detect
Know what's available
Surface available devices and connection states without requiring users to understand networking terminology first.
02
Select
Choose with confidence
Make destination identity, device state, and transfer context explicit before an action is taken.
03
Transfer
Send and confirm
Provide clear progress, completion feedback, and actionable recovery when something goes wrong.
UX Strategy
Turning complexity into a clear workflow
Instead of exposing networking concepts first, I reorganized the experience around what users actually needed to accomplish: detect → select → transfer.
Design Principles
Principles that guided every interaction
These principles translated the research findings into concrete interaction decisions throughout the product.
01
Progressive Disclosure
Show the information users need to complete the current task first. Keep technical details such as IP addresses and adapter names accessible without making them the primary focus.
Less upfront complexity02
Visibility of Status
Make the system state continuously understandable: available, connected, transferring, completed, or requiring attention.
Always know what's happening03
Recognition Over Recall
Help users recognize available devices, destinations, and actions rather than asking them to remember technical information or system terminology.
See it → understand it → act04
Error Prevention
Prevent incorrect actions before they happen by clearly communicating device availability, destination identity, and transfer requirements.
Prevent before explaining05
Actionable Recovery
When something fails, explain what happened, why it matters, and what the user can do next instead of leaving them with a technical error message.
Understand → recover → continue
Information Architecture
Structuring the Experience
The architecture follows the same task-oriented mental model, moving users from connection awareness to device selection, file transfer, and confirmation.
Design Process
Five Key Design Decisions
01
Connection Dashboard
Connection Cards Simplify Network Status
I replaced the technical adapter list with clear connection cards, making the most relevant status information easy to scan and act on.
02
Smart Empty States
Empty States Guide the Next Action
Instead of simply showing what was missing, each empty state explained the situation and gave users a clear next step.
03
Device Selection
Clear Destination Selection Reduces Risk
The workflow made the source, destination, and data explicit, giving users confidence before starting a transfer.
04
File Transfer Experience
Transfer Progress Builds Confidence
Users could see what was being transferred, where it was going, and how the operation was progressing in real time.
05
Error Prevention & Recovery
Errors Become Clear Recovery Paths
Error states focused on what happened and what to do next, helping users recover without relying on technical troubleshooting.
Wireframing
Low-Fidelity Exploration
The wireframes established the structural foundation for the workflows, and audit experience before moving into high-fidelity design.
Visual Design
Minimal. Functional. Reliable.
The visual system was designed to reduce cognitive load while making system status, actions, and feedback immediately clear.
Design Language
A quiet interface for high-confidence tasks.
Rather than adding visual complexity to communicate technical functionality, I used hierarchy, spacing, typography, and restrained colour to make important information easier to understand.
01
Design Principles
01
Minimal
Remove every element that does not support a user action.
02
Functional
Every element has a clear and singular purpose.
03
Readable
Status and information should be understood at a glance.
04
Consistent
Similar actions should always look and behave the same way.
02
Colour System
Green
Connected · Success · Complete
Blue
Active · Data Transfer
Orange
Warning · Limited Connection
Red
Error · Disconnected
Gray
Inactive · Not Available
Accessibility
High contrast · Clear typography hierarchy · Large interaction targets · Icons with supporting labels · Status communicated through colour, shape, and text.
Reusable Components
Design System Elements
A focused component system keeps interactions consistent, predictable, and scalable across the experience.
01 · Connection Card
Eth_Port_1
192.168.10.1
02 · Status Badge
CONNECTED
03 · Device Card
Receiver_A
Target Device
04 · Primary Button
05 · Secondary Button
06 · File Row
build_v2.bin
42 MB
07 · Progress Indicator
08 · Empty State
No adapters found
09 · Inline Error
Connection interrupted. Please verify the cable.
10 · Notification
Transfer Complete
×
11 · Confirmation Panel
Start Transfer?
12 · Technical Disclosure
Advanced Details
⌄
13 · Retry Action
14 · Toggle Setting
15 · Search Field
Find device...
Key Challenge
Simplifying Without Oversimplifying
The design tension
How do you simplify a technical workflow without hiding the information experts need?
The challenge was not removing technical information. It was deciding when and where that information should appear.
01
Design Principle
Progressive Disclosure
Keep the primary workflow focused on the task while making deeper technical information available when users need it.
01
Operational Layer
Information users need to understand the current state and complete the task confidently.
02
Technical Layer
Deeper system information remains accessible for troubleshooting, diagnostics, and expert workflows.
✓
Design Outcome
Simple by default. Technical when necessary.
Routine tasks stay lightweight while advanced information remains available without overwhelming the primary workflow.
Final UI
The Final Experience
Validation & Outcomes
Validated Through Review
The redesigned workflow was reviewed with end users and stakeholders to evaluate clarity, task flow, and confidence during file transfer.
01
Workflow Clarity
Reviews confirmed that users could more easily understand the connection, destination, and transfer workflow.
Validated
02
Task Confidence
Users had clearer visibility into what was happening, what had completed, and what action was required next.
Improved
03
Recovery & Diagnostics
Common failure scenarios and technical details were reviewed to ensure expert users could still access the information they need.
Reviewed
04
Qualitative Validation
Findings were based on qualitative feedback and review, rather than formal usability benchmarks or quantitative metrics.
Qualitative
Overall Outcome
A clearer workflow with less cognitive overhead.
The final experience shifted attention away from networking complexity and toward the user's actual goal: connect → select → transfer → confirm.
Problem Solving
Before & After
Before
Technical adapter list
Manual interpretation
Weak status visibility
Unclear destination
Limited transfer feedback
Technical errors
Generic empty states
Technical-first workflow
After
Connection-focused cards
Guided selection
Persistent connection state
Explicit destination confirmation
Transparent progress
Human-readable recovery guidance
Actionable empty states
Task-first workflow
Technical Constraints
Simplifying the Experience Without Hiding the System
01
Data Relationships
Projects, versions, documents, certifications, approvals, and activity needed to remain connected.
Simplify the user's mental model without breaking the underlying relationships.
02
Permissions
Different users have different responsibilities and access requirements.
Design actions and information around role-aware behavior.
03
Implementation Feasibility
Some apparently simple interactions could introduce disproportionate backend complexity.
Absorb complexity through grouping, defaults, validation, and contextual explanation.
04
NDA Constraints
Product names, screenshots, infrastructure details, datasets, and organizational identifiers are
protected.
Use anonymized or reconstructed portfolio representations.
Reflection
Key Learnings
01
Human-centered technical workflows: Respect technical users’
expertise while
keeping workflows simple and intuitive.
02
System status matters: Clearly communicate connection,
transfer, and
completion states throughout the workflow.
03
Errors should enable action: Explain what went wrong and
provide a
clear, realistic next step.
04
Progressive disclosure: Keep the interface simple while
making deeper
technical details available when needed.
"Effective document UX turns static archives into dynamic knowledge systems: metadata precision, OCR searchability, and instant categorization turn hours of document retrieval into seconds of decision-making clarity."
Search accuracy builds operational confidence: When engineers can instantly filter millions of legacy records, preview complex schematics, and trace revision lineages, unstructured documentation becomes an actionable operational asset.