I'm skeptical of all these companies with "AI" logos. I don't see much intelligence in generated logos.
Why:
1. The logo icon is almost always from a service like The Noun Project. Probably fetched with 'category' of the company user enters.
If it's not an icon then the first letter of the company name, why not?
2. The generated logo has the company name in different combinations of fonts, background and foreground colors. A simple algorithm with random value selection can do that. Where's AI in that?
Either AI is not being used at all or not to its full potential at least.
Why don't I see a logo for my product that has an icon like, say Airbnb's "A" or Apple's "Bitten Apple". All I get for my tech product are small mobiles and browser windows.
Your skepticism is partially correct and we've been pretty open about what we have and how we're applying ML. Lets take the example of getting all icons from a single category. If you choose the category food and your description contains "apple & bananas", it's not trivial to get an icon with an apple and banana unless you are using some sort of ML. Moreover, which fonts to put together is also not trivial. If we just start putting random stuff together, you'll be able to differentiate it pretty easily.
Now to your last point, we are working on something like that. We are training a deep learning architecture that creates logos from scratch, the stuff you are talking about. But we wanted to ship a simple yet decent product before we started working on more sophisticated stuff. In a couple of months, users will have option to select icons that are entirely generated by an AI engine.
I hope that clears some things. AI is being used in many places but there are also atleast 2-3 features that we're working on right now which will really exhibit the effectiveness of AI here.
Let me know if you wanna chat more about this. Happy to talk!
Some of the points you make were also brought up in the ShowHN post for 'My Brand New Logo', which similarly uses AI as it's USP. I would like to know, what differentiates your service?
We are training a deep learning architecture that creates logos from scratch. But we wanted to ship a simple yet decent product before we started working on more sophisticated stuff. In a couple of months, users will have option to select icons that are entirely generated by an AI engine.
I obviously have no idea how this product works. But it is true that for many companies it is just that we built a rule based algorithm and we call it AI because it sells better than calling it machine generated content.
Honestly speaking, having worked on over 8-10 ML and DL projects in last 4 years, I am quite aware of the fact that the term "AI" is used at places where it shouldn't be used.
The term "AI" in our product comes from the fact that in long term, we actually want AI to create entire logos/icons/fonts and we're actively working on this right now. Most of our current models use Conv Nets, Word Embeddings, and Random Forests which still atleast come under the category of AI.
The reason I have been trying to explain everyone about the inner workings of our product is to demonstrate that we're indeed using different ML systems and they actually make sense where they're used.
I’ve seen a couple of these sites that purport to design logos with AI. They seem to be based on the hope that randomized graphic options + sufficient clicks + ML = something better than random.
It might work, eventually, for organizations with very simple needs - they need a logo just to seem like a real business. But notice how none of these logos communicate much.
I have to say, logos are not where I would expect AI to triumph in the next little while.
Logos work when there are subtle resonances between what humans know, how they perceive things, and the wealth of information humans accumulate over a lifetime of looking at things. Not to mention, how one uses all these factors to distinguish oneself from peers.
The history of computers has often proven pronouncements like mine wrong - but usually the computer is used to do something different rather than replace the subtlety a human can bring. I still find it hard to see where the space is between “I made us a logo in Word with Papyrus” and a proper design process.
I agree. Branding and logo design is all about visual communication. It's subtle, and often times hinges on idiomatic context -- for better or worse. Take AirBnB, for example -- it was critically panned for looking like a butt. Applying machine learning to this goal doesn't mean the design process itself can really be abridged because you still have to figure out what it is you actually want to say.
Yeah, but let’s assume they aren’t trying for the unicorn-rebrand-in-200-countries market.
What’s the disruptive underdog market here?
Maybe it’s the ancillary stuff. Like, you have a basic logo, now generate the files for all the other things; biz cards, stationery, online, .icos, etc etc etc
I don't disagree with you at all. As mentioned in some other comments, our initial goal wasn't to generate perfect logos like professional designers. It was to let new startup founders who can't pay much buy a decent logo.
And we're not stopping here, no way! We are working on some features that will create a lot of stuff from scratch based on several deep learning architectures. We are excited to work on those features and we hope you'll like them once they are done.
Again, the goal is not to replace designers. The goal is to complement them or give founders a tool to get a decent logo in a few bucks. Happy to talk more.
It’s tough to compete with free things like https://hatchful.shopify.com because social media logos are included and don’t cost $49.
Not sure if the result logos are intentionally blurry, but that definitely needs to be fixed. You will lose more business with the low quality results, than you will from people who make a logo and save the high quality version for free. People who are actually going to be willing to pay are going to be turned off by the bad result.
Thanks a lot for providing feedback. I am guessing by your comments that you made a logo on mobile. If that's the case, we have been trying to fix this issue ASAP hence the message "click modify to see high quality version". These problems arise because of resizing on canvas and we have already fixed a lot of them. We'll hopefully fix all the quality issues in a couple of weeks but since the logos are not way too blurry, we are doing it as we go. Moreover, people usually buy the logos on desktop and the quality is pretty good on desktop from what I've observed on different screens. Please correct me if I am wrong.
Thanks again for your feedback. If you happen to visit the website in a couple of days, you'll hopefully see much better logos in terms of clarity.
The problem with this implementation I feel is that I'm 100% willing to spend hours scrolling through logos for something that would be the face of a project, so the top pick, or even the top 100 picks are not really meaningful to me. The part where this kind of service could be useful is that its faster to scroll through options than to fiddle with logos in photoshop to create options. In that vein I'd include a feedback loop where you can explore things that are adjacent to something you like. In my case I'd say "This icon is a slam dunk, lock it in and let's explore other elements."
You're spot on with your suggestion. This is a feature that we are very excited to be working on right now. We are working on different embeddings that lets you choose stuff based on your preferences. We wanted to first iteration of the product to be an end-to-end pipeline that creates decent logos. I believe we've achieved that and we're now working towards adding some cool features in the next few months.
One feedback we got from another user was to reduce the number of logos we show. Asking people to select one from 50 logos seemed like a good idea but people struggle to select one from 50 from what I've observed. We'll still let everyone see 50 logos for a while until our ML models are so good that the top 5 logos we make are the ones you're gonna like.
"a feedback loop where you can explore things that are adjacent to something you like" - I dabbled with this idea for a bit a few years back and ended up with logocaster.com as an early demo of the idea (desktop only). If you see a logo you like you can lock in the color scheme, font/font category and (basic) style.
I wish I had the time to get some icons in there and a better UI, but it's tough to compete with the awesome free logo generators out there, so I put it on hold.
Thanks -- it was just an interesting diversion with a trickle of traffic over the years, no ML under the hood (or anywhere close to it for that matter). I wish you and your team the best with your product, I especially would love to see custom drawn icons courtesy of your AI!
Could you share more details about what’s happening behind the scenes? I mean this in the spirit of constructive feedback but the logos it generated for my business just seemed to a random mixup of color and type combined with a freely available icon pulled from one of those “free icons” websites.
I don’t really see where the ML plays into this. Cool concept though, I’d love to see it ask me if I like such and such and refine the process a bit more to land on something I actually like.
Oh definitely. Here are some of the areas where ML comes in.
- The colors you see are generated by ML models, not us. If you don't like them, just hit the dislike button and our ML models will soon stop creating them.
- Icon selection based on the description is not an easy problem. You have to understand the semantics of what you're trying to say and match those with an icon's appearance. We're using word embeddings and auto encoders here.
- Initially, a genetic algorithm generates a bunch of stuff but that gets pruned by ML systems. As we get more feedback, that ranking/pruning is going to be more effective.
- Which fonts to combine together is not trivial. Convolutional neural networks come to the rescue here.
- Finally, one of the additional features we are working on is going to generate icons from scratch using GANs.
I hope this answers your question. Let me know if you wanna talk more about how we go about doing everything. Always happy to chat.
You seemed to encode here a typical Fiverr logo design workflow that I would do too at no / minimal budget.
May I challenge you to explore these options?
- Not all logos needs colors, actually they should work in black and white as well.
- Your models don't seem to understand meaning or just to be fair, context. A name, tagline is probably too little information to infer a match. For my music tv app, I got 80% notes, keys and other music related icons. Not very imaginative. I usually write down / sketch my first 3 ideas and then throw them away since if it took me 15 minutes it would too for others.
- Why put always an icon there? An icon is a supplement, most successful logos just use a pretty (and expensive) typeface.
- How to do more imaginative typography? I type in The Brand Name and it the engine doesn't even try to change the case of the text.
I would expect to be imaginative, like:
THE..
BRAND
NAME.
From an AI logo maker I would expect you to generate me a vector file point by point, preferably using some kind of GAN-s.
In my personal experience, the process of picking a logo for a startup is usually a long conversation among the founders about how to establish the brand, what the tone should be, and how to succinctly communicate the core value of the firm. The logo design itself is almost always outsourced, but the concept and sketch are either conceived by the founders or edited by them (choosing among various draft designs).
I'm not sure how/whether an AI-driven logo helps that process meaningfully. The execution of logo design is not the problem -- it's the concept which is the hard part. And that concept is a very human process.
Since the founders are in this thread: are you most passionate about design which led you to machine learning or are you passionate about machine learning and looked for a way to implement techniques? The engineering + ui/ux looks nifty, well done! As someone who has tried 99 designs, freelancers, and my own sketches for my projects' logos, my feedback is that this is a neat tool but I probably wouldn't find it useful were I ever to need to create a logo again.
Maybe a freelance web developer who has to create logos all the time for client projects would have a different perspective.
Edit: after looking through some more of the comments, if there was a feature that generated 100 different concepts of logos, let me share a link with other co-founders, and let us collaboratively tweak the results through rounds of feedback, THAT would be useful. As others commented, there are plenty of (free) 'design a logo' tools, but I don't know of any tools that 'help teams decide on a logo.' If the process helped us refine our concept, we would be so grateful for the value provided.
A couple of points. You are right when you say it's a long process but I believe you'll agree that it's not long for everybody. There are so many new companies that just want a decent and affordable logo as quickly as they can. Those are the people we are targeting now.
Regarding your comment about the logo concept - we are working on some deep learning architectures that generates the icon (concept) from scratch. That feature will take some time because of computational reasons but once that's in place, even startup founders who want to go a few rounds to get their logo concept would be able to use our website.
Let me know if you want to talk more about how we're gonna do it. Thanks again for your feedback, it's awesome!
That seems fair. We are definitely going to add an iteration process that you can go through to end up with something you like. Thanks again for the feedback. It's super helpful in improving the product.
Not just Namecheap, there are so many other options. We're not trying to replace designers or these free websites. We're providing an alternative that we believe is better because of several reasons.
- Our system figures out your needs by just looking at the description you provide. You don't have to select anything else to create very relevant logos to your brand. This is not the case with other websites where you have to provide plenty of information or at least do significant customizations.
- Not one of these websites are generating icons from scratch. We will in a couple of weeks/months. This is going to be a very exciting feature that will set us apart. Let me know if you want to talk about this in more detail.
- Our system learns as more people create logos. We have a feedback loop that continuous retrains the models to improve the logo creation process. In a few months, our logos will definitely be way better than free websites and other competitors.
Finally, at the end of the day, we still offer an alternative that we think has better features. If someone chooses to use a free website, by all means.
That's a good example of disenchantment in AI. It's not magic, but seems to be, so the more it's understandable, the more people tend to claim it isn't AI. I like how your comment pins this on the nature of designing -- Herb Simon gives a good definition of design in "sciences of the artificial" and this system seems to be designing. Not drawing, but designing.
AI has always been a sliding scale. A calculator is AI if you want to call it that. But when we start invoking terminology that evokes human-like creativity, things start to break down because we don't understand that kind of creativity and we have never built a machine capable of it. People like to bring up chess and Go in these conversations, because "people thought those required creativity". In reality, we found out that brute forcing a bunch of data through a computational statistics program ended up working, so those games actually didn't require creativity. This logo system is not doing anything remotely worthy of being called "design", unless you define that word to be utterly devoid of the implied creativity of a intelligent, sentient creator.
> In reality, we found out that brute forcing a bunch of data through a computational statistics program ended up working, so those games actually didn't require creativity
The assumption you are making, if I understand it, is that creativity needs to work like human creativity not just look like it. Similarly, design isn't design unless it works like human design, which involves sentience.
I'm just not sure that these assumptions are fair to make when we are discussing meaningful advances in artificial intelligence.
Right now, yes. But the main reason behind having a generic product is our long term vision. We wanted to get our initial product out and immediately start working on other features. One feature that will answer your concern here is icon generation from scratch using GAN architectures. We're working on it and it'll take some time but as soon as it's live, not only will you be able to use existing stock clipart, you'll be able to generate logo concepts from scratch.
This is by no means the final product that we want to have in a year or two. There was a reason we named the website "designwithai". We kept it generic because there are so many features that we're gonna add that are purely AI driven.
We can always talk more about the other features we're thinking about.
I don't disagree with you. The product is new and we've put a lot of effort in trying to create good logos but we're by no means perfect. The idea is to let users use it for a couple of months. If they like their logos, they buy them. If they don't, that is feedback for us and we can use that to significantly improve our models. And I believe that the logos might not be perfect but some of them are usually pretty good. You can have a look at our twitter page to see some good examples:
https://twitter.com/DesignwithAiHQ
Huh, the first handful I saw on your twitter feed do look pretty good to me, I agree.
The ones on your home page look a lot less good to me. I'm not sure you've picked your best to show on the home page, I see the home page and think "eh, these logos are not that good, I probably don't want this."
This is a dilemma we've been facing for quite some time now. Different people like different kinds of logos. The logos you see on our home page seemed good to a few people we talked with and the logos I am posting on twitter are all chosen by me. I might just go ahead and replace them with the twitter logos. Thanks for this feedback. No one has previously told me that they didn't like the logos on the homepage. I'm definitely going to consider changing them.
I wonder if it's not just the logos but the layout/design of the home page. Maybe the logos look better in isolation (as on the twitter feed), then all together with their edges jammed together? Maybe they'd look better on the home page with some separation/margin between them?
I dunno, you should probably get more feedback than two random people on the internet!
Founder here. Happy to answer any questions you might have. This has been going on for over a year and there were plenty of opportunities to apply machine learning to logo design e.g font and icon selection, color combinations, component alignments, icon generation etc. Please note that we are not trying to replace logo designers at all. We just want new brands to have an opportunity to get a quick and decent logo in a reasonable price. Happy to chat more about the product here.
The popup dialog you get when you click either "like" or "dislike" is annoying - show it the first time and then don't show it again. I'm happy to scroll through a bunch of logos and quickly mark some likes/dislikes, but not with a popup on each one.
As stated in one of the other comments - different people like different logos. The initial idea was given to us by the website but the pencil in the middle is something I added. Maybe I should've spent more time on our own logo :p I'll work on it!
AI and logo design is hard. I'm running https://mybrandnewlogo.com and it's basically a bunch of if / else statements and a lot of custom algorithms to generate the right proportions of layout elements and color schemes. Although it's quite intricate, there are no neural networks involved. Then again, when I studied AI 15 years ago, a part of what was considered AI were decision trees (it was part of Machine Learning in our course). Decision trees are basically if / else statements. Is that genuine AI? I don't know, but it's hard to draw a strict line between "real" AI and "simple" computer instructions.
If you can share this - what kinds of organizations are you targeting? What do they care the most about?
I have a background in graphic design and computering, and I find it hard to envision the customer. They want a logo, want full control, don’t want to involve another human, have a price point below Fiverr? But maybe you’re serving people that I can’t see would need logo services.
New startups or small businesses. You're right they want control but they can't afford tons of money to sink into iterations with a professional designer (also what makes a professional designer nowadays?). With this they get to see tons of variants of a logo that feels right to them with ease to make adjustments. Yes, they might be a bit soulless but it'll look sleek if you have a decent eye for design and application. Always ask yourself and test it with will this look good on a website, business card, shirt, whatever you need.
I'd argue these little generators can produce better looking mathematically sound logos that are cheaper than dealing with a back and forth when you hire someone from upwork, 99, fiverr, your local college student.
That's correct. Startups, freelancers, side-hustlers. In short, people that just want a nice logo, but don't have the budget and / or time to work with a professional design agency.
Regarding mathematics and aesthetics: whenever you generate something with an algorithm, you'll inevitably give up some kind of variation. An algorithm only works within a subset of all possibilities. So I don't think logo generators can do everything that a designer can.
But for a lot of people it's the perfect option. You'll get a good logo for a friendly price.
When you start customizing, you can change the size of the individual logo parts, like the name and icon. And in the end it's a vector file that stays sharp, so you can scale it up a billion times if you want to plot it on a billboard or an airplane.
You're absolutely right. We didn't want to get too fancy right away. We wanted a simple yet decent product in the start and with the feedback we were gonna get, we would improve the product. We're definitely going to add fancy stuff but gradually. People usually don't even get a decent logo and yet they have to pay a good amount for it.
Just from this post, over 500 logos have been liked/disliked by users which gives us a good amount of data to retrain our models for improvement and more fancy content.
Something went wrong :-(
This website is hosted by PythonAnywhere, an online hosting environment. Something went wrong while trying to load it; please try again later.
I had it pick a logo for “Brawndo - The Thirst Mutilator!” and it mostly picked cups, people drinking from cups, and some abstract geometry. There might not be any actual AI involved - I think picking the category “drinks” and hashing my brand name as a random seed could produce the same result (and it did prompt me for a category). So all in all I think paying someone on Craigslist $20 would yield a superior result.
I apologize if you didn't like the logos. We have a feedback loop in place that takes care of this. Since we just launched a week ago, there are some logos that users don't usually like.This is by no means perfect right now but it'll get better with time. We already have 118 logos that users have ranked using the "like" and "dislike" buttons. We'll soon be using all this data to create better logos.
I didn’t say I didn’t like it, just that the results are indistinguishable from random. Reminds me of http://tiffzhang.com/startup which used a pseudorandom number to deterministically generate start up websites w/logos.
The apology is because the fact that our system was not able to create logos that match the context you provided. That is what we intend to do and we want to do it well. The problem right now arises from the facts that we're somewhat in the range of 50-100k icons but we really need a couple million perhaps to always be able to offer you something that semantically matches your description. We'll keep working on our product and hopefully very soon, people won't have such issues.
Thanks for the feedback though. Really appreciate it.
Can anyone comment on how copyright and IP laws might play with this kind of concept? I can see accidental collision with existing branding, particularly if real world designs were ingested as training data. From what I understand that may not occur with this product, but it's an interesting line of thought.
That's a very real concern for us. We are taking a few measures for this and are continuing to look into this.
- As soon as a logo is purchased with a unique icon, we delete that icon from our data. - We manually go through our icon repositories and try to find icons that have already been used in logos and delete them.
We'll continue doing this until we are left with stuff that has not been used anywhere else in a logo.
Great to see one more logo maker to the community. I bought a logo two days ago from Wizlogo (https://wizlogo.com). They use premium marks instead of the noun project; you should also think about that - would solve more problems with the trademarks and so on. I would like to see monogram implementation or only text-based logotypes - there are a lot of different users all over the world, and the icons duplicate in the long run. However, great job!
Thanks a lot for the feedback. Your point about icons expiring is well taken and that is one reason we want to create a system that generates icons from scratch. We'll also add more monogram variations.
It seems like you're one of those people that didn't like our use of "machine learning" to create logos. Happy to chat about why ML is needed and why other solutions don't work.
- What colors to choose for the user if he/she doesn't know the colors?
- What icon to choose based on the text given?
- What fonts to use together?
- What font types to use (bold, italic etc)
- Can we generate icons from scratch?
- As we get user feedback, can we improve the logos?
And so many more areas where we can apply ML. Happy to talk at length about this if you want.
That's a very real concern for us. We are taking a few measures for this and are continuing to look into this.
- As soon as a logo is purchased with a unique icon, we delete that icon from our data.
- We manually go through our icon repositories and try to find icons that have already been used in logos and delete them.
We'll continue doing this until we are left with stuff that has not been used anywhere else in a logo.
Thank you so much. You bet! I spent 120 straight days while finishing up the development of the website and it was just too exciting for me to stop. There is still tons of stuff we are working on right now e.g using GANs to create icons from scratch, using Conv Nets to color the icons etc. Very excited for the future!
We're not claiming we're magical. Our machine learning systems are fairly straight forward right now but we're going to keep improving and understanding brand information is on the top of our todo list. The task of understanding emotion is non trivial but not impossible. We are working on a few areas to sort this out. Please keep in touch, we'll try our best to improve this product as well as we can.
Very cool. I love the fact that it requires almost no input except for the company name and description. I'm interested to see if AI can eventually create a font by itself? If that's possible you would definitely be able to create some iconic designs.
I'm super curious what the ML looks like behind the scenes. Do y'all think it's just a GAN thats been fed tons of logos that already exist? That seems unlikely–I can't imagine there are nearly enough logos for that.
Ha most people are. Unfortunately, it's not a GAN that does everything. We wanted a system that works and creates high quality logos and GANs are still reaching there. On a high level, there are multiple ML models that are responsible for different tasks such as color combination generation, icon selection, font pairing etc. All these collectively form the entire product. Let me know if you want to chat more about this.
Nowadays creating a product is much easier and effortless I think they're aiming to get that fast companies which doesn't have so much effort and money for design.
Sure, use character n-gram or word-part models that generate logos from input text that doesn’t have to be matched to a fixed vocabulary. When input text is weird, it should never fall back to trying to make the user self-select into a category and the logos should not try to be generated from coarse category information at all.
Comparison with Looka (and Brandmark), both of them are excellent competitors and it just raises the bar for us. But we want to be different in several ways.
More automation by AI - That's our main goal. If you create logos on Looka and Brandmark repetitively, you'll observe patterns. That happens because although Looka and Brandmark are applying AI, they are still getting a lot of information from the user before making logos i.e "select the logos you liked", "select the color schemes you like". We want to do away with all these things and only require the brand description. This cuts the time in less than half according to what we've measured. Below are some of the AI use cases we are working on. No other website is doing that right now.
AI Based Coloring - Our colors are not hand-picked by us. They are entirely generated by machine learning algorithms. We are also working on icon coloring using AI where the icon will have multiple colors entirely added by AI.
AI Based Icons - Almost every website including ours is using repositories of icons from websites like Flaticons, Nounproject etc. We are working on adding another layer where the icons are generated by the AI system itself.
AI Based Suggestions - We believe our in-browser customizer is relatively easier to use than others. We give the user an option to just select items that are suggested to him/her by our machine learning algorithms. We've got extremely positive feedback about this and are happy that people are liking it.
These are some of the areas where we're trying to be different than our competitors. We also offer more affordable prices than both Looka and Brandmark.
SaaS is pretty much the only possible business model for AI, the data/model have to be centralized. Although I suppose he could provide a Docker image or something for tech people to play around with, it'd inevitably get ripped off and he'd spend all his time taking down copycats.
I don't particularly like charging for SVG and different sizes/colors, but it seems to be the standard for logo-making websites. Although I can turn a PNG into SVG in a few minutes with Inkscape/potrace, the target demographic probably has never heard of Inkscape and would pay $15 on fiverr or something for a quick Adobe job. So as usual the business is basically scamming ignorant fools.
Maybe an alternative is ads, I'd run an experiment for a few weeks. B2B ads pay absurdly high and hardware is cheap, so they should be able to pay hosting bills or whatever. And then you have a few years of runway to find a decent business model.
For higher tiers, charging for high usage seems reasonable, maybe there's an interest in a logo API.
I'd also look at cross-selling things like SEO, A/B testing, domain name registration, and general website design as part of a package, basically an affiliate program. https://www.pixelslogodesign.com/ looks reasonable although maybe too high-end since they have employees rather than freelancers. But charging $50 for ML logo design + $25 of fiverr labor seems reasonable.
What other business models would you recommend? We are still pretty new and are open to suggestions. Moreover, we are still a very small team and it's easy for us to change our business model. SaaS seemed to be the best, so we went with it.
I am a strong believer in open-source and against rental/pay-per-use, so if there is some way to work that into your product that would be cool. People should be able to buy a product and run/use it at their leisure. But don't go and kill your profitability on my account...
I apologize if you didn't like the logos. We have a feedback loop in place that takes care of this. Since we just launched a week ago, there are some logos that users don't usually like. Could you please tell me your company name so that I can have a look at your logos and improve the product? This is by no means perfect right now but it'll get better with time. We already have 118 logos that users have ranked using the "like" and "dislike" buttons. We'll soon be using all this data to create better logos.
Why:
1. The logo icon is almost always from a service like The Noun Project. Probably fetched with 'category' of the company user enters. If it's not an icon then the first letter of the company name, why not?
2. The generated logo has the company name in different combinations of fonts, background and foreground colors. A simple algorithm with random value selection can do that. Where's AI in that?
Either AI is not being used at all or not to its full potential at least.
Why don't I see a logo for my product that has an icon like, say Airbnb's "A" or Apple's "Bitten Apple". All I get for my tech product are small mobiles and browser windows.