We step in when a product feels like a downsized desktop app — slow, cluttered, and unfit for gestures. The result: clean, responsive, and built for thumbs.
Users get lost and abandon key actions.
Re-mapped journeys to reduce dead ends.
Tap targets feel off
or too small.
Refined touch zones based
on platform guidelines.
Nothing feels responsive
or intuitive.
Rebuilt interaction feedback
to give immediate visual cues.
Text is too small
or hard to scan.
Adjusted typography scale
and spacing for legibility.
Every mobile screen is built from small decisions about controls. A date field. A toggle. A slider. A picker wheel. The platform already ships versions of all of these, tested across millions of devices and familiar to anyone who has used a phone for more than a week. Reaching for a custom version of the same control is not free, even when the brand guidelines call for it.
A native control comes with behaviour a design file cannot fully specify. The correct keyboard type for the field below it. Accessibility labels read aloud by a screen reader. Haptic feedback tuned by the platform. Support for a larger text size chosen in the phone settings. Rebuild a control by hand and all of that has to be rebuilt too, or shipped without it.
The case for a custom control is real in specific spots. A brand-defining moment, such as a rating scale on a review screen or a distinctive way to browse a catalogue, can justify the extra design and engineering hours. So can a control the platform simply does not offer, like a two handed comparison slider. Outside those moments, a custom control mostly adds a maintenance cost with no matching gain for the person using the app.
The middle path most teams end up choosing is restyled native. Keep the underlying control and its built-in behaviour. Apply colour, spacing and type from the brand system on top. A styled native switch still reads correctly to a screen reader and still resizes with system text settings, while looking like it belongs to the product rather than to the default platform look.
A simple test before a new screen goes into design: list every control on it. Mark which ones the platform already provides. Anything left over is a genuine candidate for custom work, and worth the time. Anything already covered by a native equivalent should have a clear reason attached before a designer draws a replacement from scratch.
Testing effort follows the same split. A native control inherits fixes from the platform for free with every operating system update. A custom one does not. It needs its own testing pass on every new device size and every accessibility setting a person might turn on, for as long as the screen stays in the product.
Design effort scales with logic, use cases, and states — not how many screens
you counted in Figma.
Didn’t find what you were looking for? Drop us a line at info@toimi.pro.
Burbank's mobile audience has been trained by extraordinary entertainment apps — Disney+, Warner Bros./Max, the mobile apps of virtually every major entertainment brand. These set extraordinarily high standards for mobile UX and visual design. Great mobile design for Burbank requires platform-native fluency, information hierarchy respecting small-screen context, interaction patterns feeling natural on touch, and visual polish matching entertainment industry production values.
We follow a structured process: discovery and research, information architecture, wireframing, visual design (high-fidelity with brand application), prototyping (interactive Figma or Protopie prototypes), and design system development. For entertainment products, the visual design phase receives particular attention — meeting the bar set by the world's most polished mobile applications.
We build unified design systems maintaining brand consistency across platforms while respecting each platform's conventions. Brand elements are shared; interaction patterns, navigation structures, and system integrations follow platform guidelines. For entertainment brands, this delivers the premium iOS feel with the reach Android provides.
Figma is our primary design tool. We deliver component libraries organized as design systems, interactive prototypes, developer handoff specs, and design tokens directly mapping to implementation. For motion design, we use Lottie for complex animations — particularly powerful given Burbank's animation expertise baseline and the expectation for sophisticated motion in entertainment-adjacent apps.
Yes — research scales with project scope. For new Burbank products, we conduct user interviews, competitive analysis, and usability testing on prototypes. For iterations on existing products, we use behavioral analytics (Amplitude, Mixpanel), session recording, and targeted user research. For entertainment industry clients, we incorporate fan behavior research specific to content consumption and fandom patterns.
Accessibility is not optional — it's both ethically required and legally risky to ignore in California. We design mobile apps to WCAG 2.1 AA standards, with particular attention to entertainment industry content accessibility: video captions and audio descriptions, proper contrast for media-heavy interfaces, and VoiceOver/TalkBack compatibility.
Yes — cross-platform brand coherence is core. We audit your existing brand system, identify which elements translate naturally to mobile versus which need adaptation, and develop mobile-native extensions of your brand. For entertainment industry clients with established franchise visual languages, we work within those systems to create consistent experiences across platforms.
Yes — we support implementation throughout development. Our designers stay engaged during development to answer questions, review implementations against design intent, and iterate on designs as technical constraints emerge. Where visual quality is paramount, ongoing design QA during development ensures the final product matches the intended experience.
