Case study: Pixel — make code match design, fast
Overview
Pixel is a tool that makes it fast and easy for software engineers to match their code to the original design. It compares a Figma design to the live coded screen, highlights every visual mismatch, and helps teams fix issues quickly with annotations and code callouts.
Problem: Quality assurance is frustrating
Designers and engineers can spend as much as 30% of their time working together on quality assurance. But high‑quality design is the difference between a confusing user experience and one that intuitively works.
Background
Designers and engineers spend as much as 30% of their time working together on quality assurance.
User Research
We interviewed 20 small‑to‑medium product teams.
“Handing off my designs to a developer is the worst thing I ever have to do. It never looks 100% like what I designed.”
Insight: Designers are frustrated when the end product doesn’t look like their designs.
“As a small product, we don’t have time to make things pixel perfect. But the designer says it’s only 50% of the way there when I think I’m done.”
Insight: Developers don’t prioritize visual design in their work.
Design Goals
- Clarity: Make discrepancies between design and code instantly understandable
- Speed: Minimize time to identify and fix mismatches
- Collaboration: Support smooth designer–developer communication
- Precision: Ensure pixel‑level accuracy
- Workflow Fit: Integrate with Figma and live prototypes
Key Features
- Visual Diff with Annotations: Compares Figma to live code and flags visual mismatches (spacing, typography, color, etc.) with annotated screenshots.
- Integrated Comment Tracking: Creates organized comments tied to each discrepancy to reduce back‑and‑forth and track progress.
- Code Callouts (and upcoming Fix Suggestions): Pinpoints the exact lines of code likely causing the mismatch, with smart code suggestions planned.
Comparison
Traditional QA Process
- Time spent: 5–10 hours per sprint
- Impact: Can consume up to 30% of an engineer’s time
QA with Pixel
- Time spent: As little as 5–15 minutes per screen
- Impact: Cuts QA time by 70–90%, freeing engineers to build
Competition
Figma’s Dev Mode and tools like Zeplin help with specs and handoff, but they don’t focus on end‑of‑cycle quality. Pixel targets the exhaustive guess‑and‑check at the very end by pinpointing errors and (soon) suggesting fixes.
Business
Free plan with 3 comparisons. Pro at $25/month for unlimited screens. Enterprise from $500/month for teams that need shared workflows and admin controls.
Let’s get technical
Traction
- Built a working prototype for side‑by‑side design/code comparison and annotation
- Partnered with 3 early‑stage startups actively using Pixel and shaping the roadmap
Takeaways
Combining storytelling, technical insight, and real‑world pain points created a tool that resonates with designers and developers. By focusing on precision, speed, and collaboration, Pixel turns a tedious QA process into a streamlined, one‑click flow.