Today, we’re announcing the public preview of AWS Well-Architected Agent, an AI-powered service that analyzes your AWS environment to deliver targeted, contextual recommendations for improving your applications’ cost, security, performance, and resilience. The AWS Well-Architected Agent analyzes your infrastructure, understands unique business goals, and delivers contextual recommendations with ready-to-implement fixes. It delivers context-aware optimization without relying on manual audits or generic checklists.

The agent evaluates your environment as an experienced cloud architect would. It automatically correlates utilization metrics, resource configurations, and application topology, and analyzes against Well-Architected best practices across 65+ AWS services. It generates recommendations aligned to your declared business goals, delivers implementation packages with every finding, and surfaces cross-pillar trade-offs making it simpler to remediate the findings.

Here are the three main features of this service:

• Goal-aligned intelligence: AWS Well-Architected Agent replaces flat, undifferentiated findings with context-aware, prioritized recommendations. You declare your business objectives and share your application context. The agent automatically generates and prioritizes recommendations by impact and effort against those goals.
• Three-level recommendations: AWS Well-Architected Agent provides individual resource findings with specific dollar impact (where applicable) and step-by-step remediation, consolidated findings across multiple resources scoped to your application, and broad architectural patterns and designs with Infrastructure as Code (IaC) code changes needed to align with Well-Architected best practices.
• Optionality in remediation: You can choose your path on how you want to remediate with a complete implementation steps tailored to your environment: the console walk-throughs, updated IaC changes for architecture-level recommendations, and AWS Command Line Interface (AWS CLI) commands.

AWS Well-Architected Agent in action
To get started, create an agent profile to define the scope of what Well-Architected Agent can access and provide recommendations on, complete the IAM role setup to access resources, conduct architecture review, and remediate recommendations.

Create an agent profile
In the AWS Well-Architected console, choose Get started with Well-Architected Agent. You can define an agent profile that specifies which AWS accounts and applications to monitor, which optimization pillars to focus on, and the permissions required.

You can choose AWS accounts or AWS Regions to monitor and optimization pillars that matter most to your business. You can also set goals for each pillar: cost optimization, performance, resilience, and security.

To give access to the agent for your AWS environment, provision customer-managed IAM roles the agent uses to read resource configurations, utilization metrics, and application topology. To learn more, visit the IAM prerequisite for AWS Well-Architected Agent.

When you choose Get Started, the agent creates your agent profile. Resource and application recommendations will be generated within 24 hours after profile creation.

You can conduct an architecture review on pre-deployment workloads by uploading an IaC project in Terraform, AWS CloudFormation, or AWS Cloud Development Kit (CDK) to be analyzed. Choose Conduct architecture review in the dashboard, upload a.zip file containing IaC project or repository file, and select which Well-Architected lens to use for reviewing your infrastructure.

You can define your applications to add context which will enhance the relevancy and further contextualize recommendations. Choose Add application context in the dashboard, add your applications with AWS accounts, AWS Regions, AWS services, tags if you want to narrow the scope to specific resources, and the details of applications.

Review prioritized recommendations and start remediating
Now you can see generated prioritized recommendations generated by the agent across your resources and applications, selected pillars, ranked against your declared goals, with automation-ready remediation included.

When you choose the specific recommendation, you can see the details, insights into why the agent are suggesting the recommendation, impacts and trade-off, and recommended fixes across affected AWS resources.

Choose Start remediation to address recommended fixes. You can choose the console, updated IaC template, CLI commands to remediate by the resolution type. It provides detailed step-by-step instructions and you can roll out this instruction and verify the result.

When you choose Using updated IaC template, the agent provides the code changes needed to update your existing IaC templates such as the CDK function shown above which you can copy directly into your codebase.

You can also configure API access to integrate recommendations directly into your existing development and operations workflows. To interact with the agent programmatically, including calling APIs and searching documentation, try the AWS MCP Server and plugins with your preferred AI coding tool. To learn more, visit the AWS Well-Architected Agent documentation.

Things to know
Here are some things that you should know about the Well-Architected Agent.

• Automation: You can receive recommendations with the exact IaC code changes needed to remediate, with risks identified by pillar, catching issues before they reach production. Recommendations are delivered through the console and API so you can act without context-switching. Recommendations are also updated periodically, so new recommendations are available for your team to track regularly.
• Evaluation: Generative AI capabilities produce this recommendation, which may contain errors or incomplete information. You are responsible for evaluating the recommendation in your specific context and implementing appropriate oversight and safeguards. Learn more about AWS Responsible AI practices.

You can still use existing AWS Well-Architected Tool to manually evaluate your cloud architecture with user-defined lenses that measure your workload using your own best practices.

Join the preview
Access to the AWS Well-Architected Agent and its recommendations is available in US East (N. Virginia), US East (Ohio), and US West (Oregon). You can onboard workloads from any AWS commercial Region. AWS Well-Architected Agent is delivered by AWS Support and available to AWS customers with an AWS Support plan.

Give it a try today in the AWS Well-Architected console and send feedback through your usual AWS Support contacts.

— Channy

The post Announcing AWS Well-Architected Agent, an AI-powered intelligence to optimize your cloud environment (preview) appeared first on The NOKIA Blog.

Sooner or later, a CFO looks at your wireframes and asks what any of it actually does for the bottom line. Storyboards don’t answer that question, and the era when a 5-minute pitch could answer it ended, unfortunately, a while ago.

These days, if you want to win budget, buy-in, and backing for UX, the design has to be provably good for the business, not only for the people using it.

And proving that takes more than taping a dollar sign to a redesign. You have to understand how your organization defines value in the first place, how it measures that value, and how a credible line gets drawn between a design initiative and an outcome leadership already cares about.

Rather than scatter tips, this article follows one worked example the whole way through. Meridian is a mid-size B2B SaaS company, and it is entirely made up — that label matters, so it gets repeated where it counts. Its onboarding redesign carries the same figures from goal-setting through cost accounting, causal testing, and the final ROI number, because a framework only becomes tangible when the numbers connect. Every step is one you can rerun inside your own organization.

Why ROI Matters More Than Ever in UX Conversations

Companies now want clarity on what every dollar buys, and “delightful user experiences” stopped clearing that bar some time ago. I still remember a former colleague celebrating a $1 million redesign he’d gotten greenlit mostly on the strength of a couple of three.js tricks. Try that pitch in front of a finance team today and see how far the particles get you.

Executives don’t hate UX, they just hate vagueness. A pitch built on “users will find it easier” loses, every time, to the department promising 12% more sales in Q3. The difference is the one between a streamlined checkout flow that reduced cart abandonment with completed purchases up 22%, and the same work rewarded with “the QA testers like it.” One of those goes on your resume. The rest of this article is about earning the first version, with Meridian’s numbers doing the work.

When Business Goals And KPIs Don’t Exist Yet

Most writing about UX ROI makes a convenient assumption: that the organization already owns clean business goals and KPIs for you to hook your work onto. Real companies are messier than that. Plenty run on ambitions like “grow faster” or “improve the customer journey” that nobody ever broke into anything measurable, and an ROI case built on that ambiguity sounds impressive right up until somebody scrutinizes it.

So the first job is often to help the organization define what success even looks like. Interview stakeholders across departments — what does product consider a good quarter, where does customer success watch users struggle, where do sales deals stall — and listen for the themes that keep resurfacing across conversations, because those recurring themes are the company’s latent business objectives. A useful forcing function is the OKR model (Objectives and Key Results), which doesn’t tolerate vagueness.

At Meridian, the stated ambition was “improve the rate of new users’ adoption of the platform,” which you can neither design toward nor measure against. Interviews turned up the real shape of the problem. Trial users needed a median of 14 days to reach first value, most churned before getting there, and onboarding questions were burying the support queue. Out of that came an OKR with actual edges: reduce median time-to-first-value from 14 days to 7 with the use of a guided setup flow, and lift trial-to-paid conversion from 8% to 9.5%.

One warning about formalizing KPIs: Impose them from inside the UX team and leadership will suspect you’ve rigged the field in your own favor, so co-create them with whoever owns the outcome — though never at the price of accepting targets that set your team up for an uncomfortable situation. Meridian’s head of product agreed that setup-completion rate was a fair proxy for onboarding usability, and customer success signed off on time-to-first-value, a number already sitting on their own dashboard.

A KPI ladder that ends at a metric somebody already watches buys you credibility before any design work starts.

Quantifying The Full Cost Of The Investment

ROI has a denominator, and the denominator is where most UX teams go wrong. You can’t calculate a return without strategic financial planning, yet cost usually gets counted as designer salaries or consulting hours and nothing else. A finance team will find the rest whether or not you counted it, so count it first.

Direct costs are the visible ones. Meridian’s redesign ran $45,000 in design and research labor plus another $8,000 in tooling and participant incentives. Licenses for Figma, UserTesting, Hotjar, analytics platforms, research incentive spend — all of it belongs in the total, and that’s before the inevitable instances of vendor lock-in every UX team eventually faces. Engineering sits in the same column, because a UX redesign doesn’t stop at the mockup. Building the guided setup took two frontend sprints plus a QA pass, $38,000 worth, and the project generated about $4,000 of coordination overhead along the way in new syncs and shared dashboards.

The line item nearly everyone misses, and the one worth stealing from this article if you steal nothing else, is stakeholder time. Workshops, design reviews, and feedback sessions all pull senior people away from their primary work. A VP of Product spending four hours a week in UX reviews is a VP not spending those hours on roadmap planning or partner negotiations. Log the attendance — who came, for how long, at what seniority — and price it at fully loaded cost, meaning salary plus benefits divided by productive hours. A quarter’s worth of workshops, reviews, and interviews at Meridian priced out at $22,000.

Add it all up: $45,000 in design labor, $8,000 in tooling, $38,000 in engineering, $22,000 in stakeholder time, $4,000 in coordination. The investment is $117,000. Saying that number out loud beats saying “we spent $45K on design,” precisely because it already includes everything a finance team would have dug up on its own.

Proving Causation, Not Just Correlation

Most UX ROI pitches die right here. Conversions rose after the redesign, sure — and the CFO wants to know how you ruled out the new pricing, the seasonal traffic bump, and the marketing campaign that shipped the same week. Without a convincing answer, your entire ROI story crumbles.

After all these years, the gold standard for proving causation is still A/B testing: run the old experience against the new one on an even traffic split until the sample means something.

Onboarding happens to suit a phased rollout, which is why Meridian could do this cleanly. For eight weeks, half of new trial signups received the redesigned guided setup while half stayed on the legacy flow. Control converted to paid at 8.0%. The variant came in at 9.4%. With roughly 6,100 trials inside the window, the difference was statistically significant, but a 1.4-point gap on a single test is still the kind of result that deserves a second look before anyone builds a budget on it, which is one reason the team held back on attribution below. Where a split isn’t feasible — a change too structural, a user base too small — fall back to a time series instead. Measure steadily for weeks before the change, implement, then keep measuring against the baseline you established.

Documenting whatever else happens around the same time as your UX change is the unglamorous half of causation.

A pricing-page test from Meridian’s marketing team overlapped weeks five through eight of the rollout. The UX team noted it, confirmed it hit both cohorts evenly, and still chose to attribute only 70% of the observed lift to the redesign in the final math. There is no formula that produces that number; treat it as an illustrative assumption for this example.

The team asked how much of the lift could plausibly belong to the pricing test if it had helped one cohort slightly more than the other, settled on a ceiling of about a third, and rounded the redesign’s share down to 70%. Your figure will differ. What matters is that it is written down and argued for before the results arrive, not fitted to them afterwards. That restraint is worth money in a skeptical room. “We attribute roughly 70% of the lift to the onboarding change, with the remainder likely influenced by concurrent pricing work” survives cross-examination; claiming everything does not. Cohort analysis then backed the number up, since the lift held across acquisition channels and tenure bands, and at that point the skeptics had very little left to work with.

Leading and lagging indicators belong on the same slide, because each covers the other’s weakness. Meridian’s leading indicators moved first — setup completion climbed from 62% to 89%, median time-to-first-value dropped from 14 days to 6.5 — and the lagging trial-to-paid number followed. Mechanism first, business outcome second. Presented together, they form a causal chain that’s harder to poke holes in than either one alone.

The ROI Calculation, End to End

So what did Meridian actually earn? The company sees about 40,000 trial signups a year. Lifting conversion from 8.0% to 9.4% adds roughly 560 paying customers annually, and at an average of $1,800 in annual recurring revenue per account, those customers represent about $1,008,000 in new ARR. Applying the conservative 70% attribution from the causal work trims the defensible figure to roughly $706,000.

Set that against the full $117,000 investment and the first-year ROI lands near 5:1, with payback arriving in roughly two months. There’s a second line, too. Onboarding-related support tickets dropped about 30%, some 3,600 fewer tickets a year, worth another $54,000 annually at $15 per resolved ticket. Keep it as its own line rather than folding it into one swollen headline number. The case reads as more honest that way and loses none of its force.

Three assumptions carry that result, and each belongs on the slide next to it. The 40,000 signups and the $1,800 average ARR are the prior year’s actuals held flat, so a growth or pricing change moves the outcome in either direction. The 70% attribution is the illustrative assumption from the causal work, not a measured quantity. And the two-month payback counts new ARR as it lands rather than revenue recognized net of churn, which flatters the timeline; on a net basis the payback stretches to roughly a quarter. State those three plainly and a finance team can adapt the example to its own numbers. Hide them and the whole thing starts to look like marketing math, however careful the experiment was.

What persuades in the final presentation is not sophistication. Open with the baseline: what stalled trials and support volume were already costing. Show the delta in terms leadership reads fluently, metrics like conversion rate uplift chief among them. A chart of setup completion climbing from 62% to 89% will beat a paragraph of UX jargon, and a translation like “each abandoned setup costs us 0.3 support tickets” beats the chart. Above all, keep every figure identical from the first slide to the last. A room full of finance people forgives many things, but never numbers that wobble between slides.

Tailoring The Case To Whoever Holds The Purse Strings

Budget decisions come out of coalitions. A CFO may hold the final say when adding AI to the checkout process, but marketing, product, and customer success all lean on that decision, and each means something different by “value.”

A CFO hears cost, revenue, and risk. A CMO hears conversion and acquisition cost, since UX is a lever for increasing marketing ROI. Product counts support tickets; customer success thinks in retention. The underlying numbers never change; only the framing rotates, and a CFO wants a projection, not a moodboard. Meridian’s CFO slide read “the onboarding redesign protects roughly $706,000 in new ARR a year against a $117,000 investment,” while the CMO version led with what a 9.4% trial conversion does to blended acquisition cost.

Beyond the Dollar Sign: Qualitative and Non-Financial Metrics

Some UX outcomes never translate cleanly into revenue, and pretending they do weakens the parts of your case that are solid.

The trick with qualitative evidence is collecting it rigorously enough that nobody can wave it off as anecdote.

Scores like Net Promoter Score (NPS), CSAT, and Customer Effort Score already sit inside most reporting cadences, which makes them cheap to borrow. Tie your work to their movement, and segment wherever the data allows.

Meridian could say that NPS among trial users on the redesigned onboarding was 51 against 34 for the legacy flow, which lands far harder than any blended average. Verbatim feedback from surveys, support transcripts, and app store reviews adds the emotional weight the scores lack. Internal tools deserve the same discipline, since employee experience is increasingly recognized as a business driver — a dashboard redesign that hands account managers 45 minutes a day back is a productivity gain, a satisfaction gain, and a retention lever all in one.

Brand perception resists direct measurement but leaves tracks in repeat visits, organic referrals, and social sentiment. It carries extra weight in trust-sensitive industries like finance or healthcare, and it forms fast, given that UX design influences the first impressions of a whopping 94% of customers.

Whatever you collect, systematize the collecting. Run pre- and post-surveys with consistent question sets, use structured usability testing with task-based scoring, and put the qualitative right next to the quantitative when you present.

“Setup completion rose from 62% to 89%, and in post-test interviews 8 of 10 participants called the new flow intuitive, against 3 of 10 for the old one” — a pairing like that is much harder to dismiss than either half on its own.

Making the Case Stick

UX loses the budget battle unless it’s mapped to company-wide objectives, so phrase the proposal in the words of this year’s board presentation.

Nobody at Meridian pitched “simplify the onboarding UI”; the pitch was a redesigned trial experience worth 1.4 points of upgrade rate, roughly $1M in annual recurring revenue before attribution. Bring evidence in both registers, since that is what social proof is for: the case, clearly labeled, plus screenshots, impact graphs, and user quotes. Find internal allies who can repeat the ROI narrative in rooms you’ll never enter, and write the playbook down, because repeatable ROI is what earns recurring investment.

Resources for Going Deeper

This topic has been explored extensively by researchers, practitioners, and consultancies. Here’s a curated set of resources worth studying if you want to build a stronger ROI practice around UX.

• “Measuring the User Experience” by Tom Tullis and Bill Albert is the definitive guide to UX metrics. It covers everything from task-based measurements to survey design to statistical analysis, and it’s written for practitioners, not academics.
• Jared Spool’s “The $300 Million Button” case study is a classic example of how a single UX change (removing a mandatory registration step) generated massive revenue uplift. It’s a story every UX professional should have in their back pocket.
• Forrester’s research on UX ROI provides enterprise-focused frameworks for building business cases around experience design, including their widely cited finding that every dollar invested in UX returns $100.
• “UX Strategy” by Jaime Levy bridges the gap between design thinking and business strategy, offering practical tools for aligning UX initiatives with organizational goals and market positioning.
• The Design Value Index by the Design Management Institute tracks publicly traded companies that invest heavily in design against the S&P 500. The data consistently shows that design-led companies outperform the index by significant margins, and it’s a powerful data point for executive presentations.
• Google’s HEART framework provides a structured approach to selecting UX metrics at scale. HEART stands for Happiness, Engagement, Adoption, Retention, and Task success, and it’s particularly useful for teams that struggle to decide which metrics to track.

Conclusion

A seat at the table never comes from beauty or novelty. It comes from measurable, defensible impact, which means UX leaders have to trade the artist’s posture for the strategist’s. Speak in outcomes rather than outputs. Connect pixels to profit.

When someone challenges the numbers, don’t flinch. Show the controlled experiment, the cohort analysis, and the before-and-after metrics, every figure holding steady from the first slide to the last, the way Meridian’s did, with the customer quotes and the employee-satisfaction data sitting right beside the revenue impact. Prove the work does more than delight users, and be ready to defend the ratio line by line. That’s when the CFO leans in, and that’s when design stops being optional.

(yk)

The post Building A UX ROI Case That Survives The Boardroom appeared first on The NOKIA Blog.

Ever since the commercialisation of the Graphical User Interface pioneered by systems like the Xerox Star and popularised by the original Apple Macintosh, software has relied heavily on point-and-click interactions. If you wanted to book a trip, buy a pair of shoes, or research a health symptom, you were expected to navigate a labyrinth of user interfaces. You click menus, adjust range sliders, fill out multi-step forms, deal with cookie pop-ups, and open dozens of browser tabs just to cross-reference basic information. We have become accustomed to spending more time managing the software rather than actually achieving our goals.

That contract is officially changing. Driven by advances in artificial intelligence and large language models, a new generation of web tools is pioneering a radical philosophy: Intent-Driven Design. Rather than expecting our users to learn complex menus and click through elaborate sales funnels, these platforms operate by capturing high-level human goals and silently executing the grunt work in the background.

This vision builds on long-standing HCI concepts like Golden Krishna’s “The Best Interface Is No Interface” and Don Norman’s principles of human-centered design.

The ultimate goal of modern web design is no longer to build prettier buttons or flashy animations; it is to eliminate the interface entirely.

Well, at least what we understand based on our current experience.

It is essential for UX designers to understand the changes we’re witnessing and even re-evaluate our role, shifting our focus from designing visible interfaces to guiding transparent, intent-driven AI experiences.

The Death Of The “10-click” Process

To understand where web design is going, we first have to look at the friction we have accepted as “normal” for decades.

Consider the traditional workflow of buying a flight online. The user experience is intentionally hyper-interactive:

1. Navigate to a travel aggregator or airline website.
2. Select “Round Trip” from a dropdown menu.
3. Type the origin city and wait for auto-complete.
4. Type the destination city and wait for auto-complete.
5. Click a calendar modal, toggle through months, and select departure and return dates.
6. Choose the number of passengers and cabin class.
7. Click “Search” and wait for the results page to load.
8. Filter by price, layover duration, departure time, and airline.
9. Sort the results and scan through dozens of individual options.
10. Click through a three-page checkout funnel dodging upsells for rental cars and travel insurance.

This is a classic point-and-click UI paradigm. The computer acts as a passive container of data, and the human acts as the orchestrator, manually inputting parameters, interpreting raw outputs, and executing each micro-step along the way.

Intent-driven design flips this dynamic entirely. Instead of forcing you to navigate the mechanical steps of how to find a flight, the interface asks a simple question: What are you trying to accomplish?

When you express a goal, such as “Find me a non-stop flight to Chicago next weekend under $300 that arrives before 5 PM”, the software reads your intent, executes the multi-step search query behind the scenes, compares the options, and presents a single actionable resolution. The ten clicks dissolve into one clear intent outcome.

Three Web Platform Examples Replacing Buttons With Intent

This shift isn’t a theoretical vision of the distant future. Some of the world’s most accessible websites allow you to experience intent-capturing systems already.

1. Perplexity AI: Search Without The Open Tabs

Traditional search engines like Google were built as directories. You typed a keyword, and the interface rewarded you with ten blue links. The actual work of opening five tabs, skimming long articles, dodging ads, and manually assembling an answer was left to you. Although this is now changing, with AI content appearing first when you search on Google.

Perplexity AI allows anyone to perform instant intent-based searches. Instead of forcing you to click into multiple tabs, the interface synthesises the perfect result for your context.

• The interaction: You ask a complex question in plain English: “Compare the top three budget laptops for a computer science student, focusing on battery life and keyboard quality.”
• The invisible work: In under two seconds, the platform searches the web, reads dozens of articles, evaluates hardware specifications, and cross-references user reviews.

• The result: (See screen above) Instead of throwing web pages at you, Perplexity dynamically generates a single custom answer complete with formatted comparison tables, pros and cons lists, and concise inline citations. You get the outcome of thirty clicks in just one.

2. Vercel v0: Web Design Without Dragging And Dropping

For years, creating a website meant using visual builders like Figma or drag-and-drop web editors. As designers, we spent hours manually drawing rectangles, picking hexadecimal colour codes, adjusting padding values, and sometimes writing CSS code.

Vercel v0 lets anyone test its generative interface builder right from the home page without signing in.

• The Interaction: A user types a descriptive goal into the input prompt: “Create a modern dark-mode dashboard for a subscription SaaS app showing monthly revenue, active users, and a customer churn chart.”
• The invisible work: The underlying AI understands layout principles, accessibility guidelines, UI component libraries, and responsiveness. It writes clean HTML, Tailwind CSS, and React code in real time.
• The result: Rather than spending an afternoon manipulating elements, the user receives a fully functional, pixel-perfect user interface in seconds! The traditional visual design tool disappears, replaced by raw human intent.

3. Goblin.tools: Breaking Down Overwhelming Tasks

Many traditional productivity tools require you to manually construct task lists, drag items across Kanban boards, and assign micro-deadlines. Goblin.tools is a free, single-page suite of single-task AI tools designed specifically for neurodivergent users or anyone feeling overwhelmed, requiring zero sign-ups or configuration.

• The interaction: You enter a vague, intimidating goal into the Magic Todo tool, such as “Prepare for a job interview”.
• The invisible work: Instead of forcing you to plan every step, the system analyses the cognitive load of the goal and automatically breaks it down into small, actionable sub-tasks adjusted to your preferred level of detail.
• The result: The interface eliminates the stressful task-planning phase and presents a clean checklist tailored to your exact goal.

The Core Pillars Of Intent-driven Web Design

When you remove traditional menus, sidebars, and forms, how do you keep a website usable? Designers pioneering this space rely on three core pillars:

1. High-level Goals

An invisible interface doesn’t always wait for you to type a command — it leverages context to anticipate user needs. Guided by industry standards like Apple’s Human Interface Guidelines on Contextual & Ambient Design, modern systems read environmental metadata, such as device state, location, and past interaction patterns, to trigger proactive actions.

For example:

• Time and location: A food delivery web app prioritising your saved home address and dinner items automatically at 6:30 PM on a weekday.
• Cross-app history: A calendar application noticing an email about an upcoming appointment and surfacing a one-click “Add to Schedule” card without forcing you to copy and paste event details manually.

2. Generative UI

In traditional web design, every user sees the exact same layout. An e-commerce store shows the same navigation bar whether you are a first-time visitor looking for customer support or a returning customer tracking a package.

As highlighted in the Nielsen Norman Group’s analysis on AI as a new UX paradigm, computing is shifting from command-based interaction to outcome-specification. This enables Generative UI, where interfaces are rendered dynamically on the fly based on what you are trying to do in that exact moment. For example, platforms like Vercel v0 demonstrate how raw intent can instantly render functional code components without manual layout building. If you express a desire to compute complex financial data, the interface generates a dynamic calculator widget on demand, receding once your goal is completed.

3. Execution by AI Agents

Traditional interfaces are obsessed with prevention, constantly peppering users with confirmation pop-ups (“Are you sure you want to delete this file?”).

Intent-driven interfaces adapt Jakob Nielsen’s 10 Usability Heuristics on User Control and Error Recovery by shifting the safety net from prevention to easy reversibility. Because autonomous agents take actions on your behalf, products prioritise frictionless rollback mechanisms. A prominent “Undo” button, simple revision prompts (“Make this summary shorter”), and transparent audit logs replace intrusive warning modals.

The Hidden Risks

While removing interface friction is liberating, stripping away visual controls introduces significant product design challenges. When software acts on inferred intent rather than direct point-and-click commands, designers must navigate critical ethical and technical pitfalls.

The Illusion Of Control

When a website makes decisions for you, it can quickly feel patronising or invasive. As explored by the Stanford Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) Group, automation must maintain clear boundaries to prevent user frustration. Furthermore, ethical frameworks from the Center for Humane Technology emphasise that product designers must guard against manipulative defaults.

Designers must strike a delicate balance: automate routine execution, but explicitly prompt the user for high-stakes confirmations (such as financial transactions, publishing public content, or altering privacy settings).

The Black Box Problem

In a traditional UI, if you get an unexpected result, you can usually diagnose the issue — perhaps you checked the wrong filter box or selected an incorrect date.

With an intent-driven interface, troubleshooting becomes harder. To address this “black box” challenge, the Google PAIR (People + AI Research) Guidebook advocates for transparent feedback loops. The system must explicitly state its interpretation (“Searching for non-stop flights to Chicago under $300…”) so users can calibrate trust and correct misinterpretations instantly.

From A UX Perspective

As a UX designer, always being curious to understand how our design approach is changing in the world of AI, I find it essential that we re-evaluate the foundational elements of our craft.

Rather than designing static buttons and rigid forms, we need to learn to map and present dynamic, generative UI components that adapt on the fly to user intent.

By mastering these evolving patterns, like ambient feedback, inline prompts, and transparent AI status indicators, we can ensure that screenless, agent-driven tools remain intuitive, ethical, and deeply human-centered.

Conclusion

The ultimate goal: The best design is no design.

For decades, the digital industry has evaluated software success through engagement metrics like time spent in app, click-through rates, and page views per session. Websites were deliberately engineered to maximise visual engagement and interaction volume.

The philosophy behind Golden Krishna’s seminal book The Best Interface Is No Interface, aligned with the broader Center for Humane Technology’s Time Well Spent movement, turns these metrics on their head. The ultimate test of a modern digital product is no longer how visually captivating its buttons are, but rather: How effectively did this software solve the problem and get out of the user’s way?,

We are entering an era where web applications will no longer be measured by the beauty of their interfaces, but by their ability to render those complex interfaces completely obsolete. The future of the web isn’t more interaction — it is seamless, invisible completion.

(ah, yk)

The post The Death Of The Button: Why The Best Interface Is No Interface appeared first on The NOKIA Blog.

Today, Amazon EC2 R9g and R9gd instances are generally available, powered by AWS Graviton5 processors. R9g instances are memory-optimized and deliver up to 25% better compute performance compared to Graviton4-based R8g instances, powered by the most energy efficient processor AWS has ever built.

R9g instances are ideal for memory-intensive workloads including databases, in-memory caches (Valkey, Redis, MemCached), real-time big data analytics, Linux-based workloads including containerized and micro-service-based applications (e.g. Kubernetes, Docker, EKS, ECS), as well as applications written in popular programming languages such as C/C++, Rust, Go, Java, Python, .NET Core, Node.js, Ruby, and PHP.

R9gd instances include local NVMe-based SSD block-level storage, ideal for memory-intensive workloads requiring fast, low-latency local storage such as open-source databases, distributed real-time big data analytics, large in-memory databases, and large caching workloads.

If you’re running workloads on R8g instances today, R9g gives you more performance per vCPU with faster memory, higher network and Amazon EBS bandwidth, and a larger L3 cache, all while using less energy.

What makes R9g different
Graviton5 processors bring several hardware improvements over Graviton4:

• Up to 25% higher compute performance per vCPU
• DDR5 8800 MT/s memory (up from 5600 MT/s in Graviton4), the fastest memory available in the cloud
• 5x larger L3 cache for better data locality
• Up to 2x higher network and EBS bandwidth for the largest instance sizes (up to 100 Gbps network, up to 72 Gbps EBS on the 48xlarge)
• Up to 3x higher packet-processing performance

R9g and R9gd instances support Instance Bandwidth Configuration (IBC), which lets you adjust the allocation of bandwidth between Amazon EBS and Amazon VPC networking by 25%. This helps optimize performance for workloads with specific bandwidth requirements such as databases and caching.

All R9g and R9gd instances run on the AWS Nitro System, which offloads virtualization, storage, and networking to dedicated hardware. This gives your applications near-bare-metal performance while maintaining strong security isolation between instances.

R9g and R9gd instances feature the Nitro Isolation Engine (NIE), the same enhancement to the Nitro System introduced with C9g and M9g instances earlier this year, which enforces isolation of instances and harnesses formal verification to provide assurances of isolation with mathematical precision. Nitro Isolation Engine is a purpose-built component that is responsible for enforcing isolation between virtual machines, including mediation of all access to virtual machine memory, CPU register state, and I/O devices through a minimal set of APIs. Nitro Isolation Engine leverages formal verification, a technique to mathematically demonstrate that the hardware or software behaves as intended, and not just in specific test cases. This intensive verification technique establishes Nitro as the first formally verified cloud hypervisor, pioneering a new standard for mathematically proven cloud security. To learn more about the Nitro Isolation Engine, visit the blog post. For details on the formal verification results, including scope and assumptions, see the technical white paper.

EC2 R9g and R9gd instance specifications
R9g and R9gd instances are each available in 11 sizes, from medium to metal-48xl. The following tables show the full specifications for each size.

R9gd instances offer the same compute and networking performance as R9g, with the addition of local NVMe-based SSD storage for workloads that need fast, low-latency scratch space or temporary caches.

Getting started
You can launch R9g and R9gd instances from the Amazon EC2 console using any supported Arm-based AMI. R9g instances support Amazon Linux 2023, Amazon Linux 2, Ubuntu 22.04+, RHEL 8.4+, SUSE Linux Enterprise Server 15 SP3+, Debian 12+, and other major Linux distributions.

If you’re migrating from R8g, no code changes are required for most applications. Select the equivalent R9g instance size and your application runs with better performance. For containerized workloads, R9g works with Amazon EKS, Amazon ECS, and standard Kubernetes deployments. Multi-arch container images built for Arm64 run without changes.

Several resources help you get started: the AWS Graviton Getting Started Guide covers how to build, run, and optimize workloads on Graviton-based instances. The Graviton Savings Dashboard helps you track cost savings. AWS Transform automates code transformations for migrating Java applications from x86 to Graviton. To learn more, visit AWS Graviton Processors or Level up your compute with AWS Graviton.

Pricing and availability
Amazon EC2 R9g and R9gd instances are available in US East (N. Virginia, Ohio), US West (Oregon), and Europe (Frankfurt) Regions.

R9g and R9gd instances are available for purchase through Savings Plans, On-Demand, Spot Instances, Dedicated Instances, or Dedicated Hosts. For detailed pricing, visit the Amazon EC2 pricing page.

Ready to get started? Launch R9g instances from the Amazon EC2 console. For more details, visit the Amazon EC2 R9g instances page.

If you want to call APIs, search documentation, find regional availability, and check troubleshooting about this feature, try using the AWS MCP Server and plugins with your preferred AI tool. Share your feedback on AWS re:Post for Amazon EC2 or reach out through your usual AWS Support contacts.

— Daniel Abib

The post Amazon EC2 R9g and R9gd instances powered by AWS Graviton5 processors are now generally available appeared first on The NOKIA Blog.

In organisations today, data has never been more available. Dashboards and performance decks exist for almost every function — sales, product, marketing, operations — and the tools to build them have never been more accessible. And yet, in weekly standups and quarterly reviews, the same thing happens constantly: someone shares the numbers, the room nods, and the meeting ends without a decision or clear direction.

When that happens, the data usually takes the blame. The numbers weren’t granular enough, the dataset wasn’t complete, we need more information before we can act. But the data is almost never the problem. The reality is that nobody designed it to deliver insights. The chart was built from what was available, not from the question that needed answering. The audience was assumed rather than understood, and what should actually change as a result of seeing this data — that question — was never asked at all.

Data visualisation and UX are solving the same underlying problem: both are trying to move the right information to the right person in a way that changes something. The vocabulary is different, but the underlying challenge is identical, and the moment you start treating them as complementary disciplines is the moment dashboards stop being a passive collection of charts and start doing something functional.

For designers who work with data, analysts who present to non-technical audiences, and marketers who need their numbers to do more than sit in a slide, this read is for you.

The Chart Was Never The Whole Story

In 1973, the statistician Francis Anscombe (PDF) published a paper that made a quiet but clarifying point. He constructed four datasets that are statistically identical: same mean, same variance, same correlation coefficient, and same regression line. Run the numbers on any of them, and they are identical. Plot them, and they could not be more different.

Anscombe’s lesson to statisticians was about diagnosis: visualisation reveals the operational truth that raw numbers conceal.

But visualisation isn’t just diagnostic; it is also communicative. The form you choose is where understanding either emerges or gets lost in the noise. Does your audience walk away with numbers, or with a story they’ll quote and talk about?

One of the most striking examples is Visual Capitalist’s History of Pandemics. Instead of burying the reader in a massive data table of casualty counts, it maps the death toll of major historical pandemics using a proportional bubble layout on a single timeline.

Before your brain reads a single number, your visual system grasps the sheer scale of the Black Death relative to everything else on the page. The right visualisation does not just plot the data but makes the story impossible to miss.

Edward Tufte codified a foundational principle for the craft with his data-ink ratio: every mark on a chart should serve the data, not decorate it. It remains a widely used framework in data visualisation, anchored in the assumption that clarity and visual hygiene are the goal.

For a chart in isolation, that holds. But a chart is never read in isolation: it’s read by a person, in a specific context, under specific pressure. Strip a chart down to its cleanest form, and you might be removing the exact layer of context a decision-maker needs. Simplicity isn’t the goal in itself; appropriate complexity is.

Data is a message, and the right amount of signal depends entirely on who’s receiving it.

Which leads to the core principle of data UX: roughly 80% of the work that determines whether a dashboard succeeds happens before you ever draw a chart.

That dependency is the thread the rest of this piece pulls on.

The 80% That Happens Before The Chart

The high-leverage 80% almost never happens on screen. It happens upstream: before a tool is opened, before a dataset is pulled, before a single design choice is made. It comes down to three questions, and once they become habitual, they change what you notice, what you ask, and what you push back on at the outset of every project.

1. Context: What are we trying to show with this data?
   This is where you define what the visualisations actually need to serve before you touch any raw data. Writing down the precise operational questions, specifically enough to determine what gets pulled and what gets filtered, is what produces a dashboard that helps with decision-making.
2. Audience: Who is this for, and how do they think?
   This is the empathy step. Knowing who’s in the room, what they’re accountable for, and how they engage with data determines how much complexity the visualisation can carry, and how it should be presented.
3. Insight: What should change once this data lands?
   A decision, a new direction, a shift in understanding. If the intended strategic outcome isn’t clear during the design phase, it will remain invisible once the dashboard goes live.

Context: What Are We Trying To Show With This Data?

Most data-heavy projects start backward: teams pull whatever metrics their internal analytics tools already track and build visualisations around them, while the question the data was supposed to answer either gets assumed or never gets asked. This happens simply because we anchor on the data in front of us as the boundary of what’s possible.

Defining a goal first sounds obvious, but in practice, it rarely happens with the necessary clarity. “Show me how the product is performing” is not a goal; “Identify which features drive retention among users who signed up in Q1” is, as it includes three things the first doesn’t: a metric, a population, and an implied action. That specificity is what converts an open-ended exploration into a constrained, answerable design problem. Which one you start from determines everything that follows: what you include, what comparisons matter, and what you leave out entirely.

Starting with available data produces a dashboard that answers no particular question, because it was never built for one — every number is present, none of them pointed anywhere. Starting with the operational question does the reverse: every element on the screen earns its place, because each one is there to help answer it.

For example, consider a UX team trying to fix a leaky checkout flow for an e-commerce website. A data-first approach pulls everything available, from clicks to scroll depth and device types, yielding a massive dashboard that leaves everyone asking, “Okay, but what do we actually change?” A context-first approach starts with a constraint: “At which step of the checkout do users drop off?” By filtering out 90% of the noise, the team builds a simple funnel chart, instantly spots a bottleneck on the payment screen, and knows exactly what to redesign.

Audience: Who Is This For, And How Do They Think?

Designing for an audience comes down to two things: accountability and familiarity.

Familiarity is about data literacy. Do they read charts instinctively, or does a complex visualisation create friction? Handing a dense, multi-layered dashboard to a Head of Sales and a senior analyst is like giving the same map to someone who navigates by landmarks and someone who reads grid coordinates. The data is accurate, but it is only functional for one of them.

Accountability dictates how that complexity must be presented. A chart showing a 12% decline carries vastly different weight for the executive responsible for that number versus the analyst simply reporting it. Understanding your audience means grasping this relationship; data is never processed neutrally when your performance is on the line.

Together, familiarity and accountability decide one practical thing: how much you can put in front of someone.

In data visualisation, simplicity is not a fixed virtue — the right level of it is contingent on who is reading, and what they need to do.

An analyst relies on a high-density environment to conduct diagnostic discovery. By isolating individual behaviour nodes and mapping out raw user flows, they interrogate the data at its atomic level to uncover the hidden insights and underperforming spend that will shape future campaigns.

An executive, by contrast, requires a highly synthesised translation of that data to immediately identify what is driving commercial growth. Tailoring a dashboard to your audience means adjusting the density dial, delivering maximum signal with appropriate complexity for the specific brain in the room.

Insight: What Should Change Once This Data Lands?

Most data projects operate on the comfortable assumption that if a chart is accurate and clear, the insight will take care of itself. In reality, information and insight are entirely different states. Information is what the data shows, whereas insight is the specific decision, shift in understanding, or course correction someone makes as a result of seeing it. If the intended business change isn’t defined before the design begins, a dashboard will default to passive reporting rather than driving action.

Marketing and engineering teams experience the danger of this gap whenever a core business metric suddenly plummets.

A dashboard built for information simply sounds the alarm, showing a chart that tracks a sharp 15% drop in booking rates. Because the data lacks depth, leadership defaults to panic: they immediately call the UX design team, assuming the app is broken or the checkout flow is flawed. Because the data doesn’t pinpoint the core of the problem, it triggers a costly, misplaced fire drill.

A dashboard built for insight isolates the variables required to make an informed decision. Instead of a single, flat booking metric, the visualisation maps the drop against traffic sources and campaign launches — instantly revealing that while app performance and core user conversion are perfectly stable, the sitewide rate was artificially diluted by a massive influx of low-intent click traffic from a newly scaled campaign. The team doesn’t waste time redesigning a functioning app; they get the exact insight needed to pause the underperforming marketing campaign and adjust their acquisition strategy.

Every visualisation implies a next step, even if that step is “nothing needs to change right now.” The question is whether the design makes that implication clear enough for the viewer to recognise it.

From Questions To Dashboard: A Project Walk-through

My aha moment in data visualisation happened during a project for a client-facing B2B SaaS platform focused on enterprise talent management and competency tracking in Pegasystems skills. The platform captured a massive footprint of daily telemetry, and the brief arrived open-ended: “We have an immense archive of user activity, now we need to present it to enterprise teams.”

We could very easily have charted everything that was captured, but we wouldn’t be doing end users any favours if they just ended up looking at a data graveyard. My responsibility immediately moved beyond pure interface craftsmanship; it became about architecting a highly practical tool for real people who would open this dashboard routinely and need it to tell them an honest, immediate story about their workflows.

Here is how the project actually went.

Context

The client believed this massive pool of data could help their users perform better, and wanted an interface that finally enabled that growth. Translating that broad ambition into tangible visualisations required defining the practical mechanics of performance. What variables indicate advancement vs passive usage? What does “perform better” actually mean? How do you measure it?

An obvious candidate was time spent by product. Every platform tracks it. It is easy to show, and it feels meaningful. But time spent is a proxy; it tells you someone was there, not whether they got anything out of it.

The more meaningful signals were competency scores by area, certification completion rates, and historical performance trajectories. Integrating time-spent data alongside these performance metrics added a useful layer of interpretation, helping us surface which modules users were underutilising and whether that directly correlated with lagging scores. Time spent became a supporting signal in the larger story.

The second question was about the appropriate level of granularity. An identical metric carries completely different weight depending on who is looking at it. An individual contributor tracking their own completion rate needs to know if they are pacing correctly, whereas a manager reviewing a team aggregate needs to know precisely who requires immediate support. This distinction shaped every subsequent data-exposure and filtering decision. Defining that structural story early determined exactly what to show, and to whom.

Audience

The most straightforward approach to this design would have been predictable: use the same charts, but offer an individual view and an aggregated team view. Far too many dashboards rely on this shortcut, subtly tweaking the scale of identical data visualisations and labelling it “personalisation.”

An authentic analysis of the audience reveals a much deeper rift. Frontline team leads and individual contributors required distinct narrative structures and design principles.

Having used e-learning platforms myself, I remember the frustration of opening a tool without a clear sense of my current standing, core strengths, or slipping metrics. That personal experience directly guided the individual contributor workspace; it needed to act as a highly tailored, self-directed mirror that was granular, honest, and personal.

Conversely, the manager’s interface had to bypass individual milestones initially to provide a macro pulse check on team vulnerabilities. It was designed around a different operational reality: how is the group progressing, and where are the consistent gaps? The view prioritised the aggregate picture first, while retaining an intuitive path to drill down into tactical day-to-day coordination when needed.

Insight

Our insight strategy was locked in during the early conceptual phase, long before wireframing a single chart. We intentionally abandoned the idea of building a dense, passive data log and focused on pacing the narrative arc.

For individual contributors, the core value was self-direction, ensuring they could glance at the interface on a Monday morning and immediately derive a clear priority list for the week ahead.

For managers, the goal was to fundamentally shift the timing of operational conversations, providing them with the necessary baseline to intervene before a skill gap evolved into a critical project failure. The visualisations needed to surface the exact moments when a human check-in would be useful, shifting their workflow from reactive post-mortems to proactive guidance.

The comparison tool was the highlight nobody had asked for. A manager dashboard and an individual dashboard are easy to anticipate. What is harder to land is: what if a manager wants to compare two specific team members against the same metrics, side by side? That view came from a design assumption, and it turned out to be the feature that resonated most.

The decisions that mattered most in this project weren’t in the initial brief — capturing data they hadn’t thought to request, and structuring it to answer questions they had not previously known how to articulate, which is the core differentiator of a user-centric data strategy.

Designing The Mental Model Early

The choice of visualisation layout must follow the geometric nature of the data itself. For this project, the core design problem was enabling an individual user to answer a specific question at a single glance: across eight distinct competency areas, where are my relative strengths and gaps?

To solve this, we mapped the data using a radar chart. By organising multiple variables across axes radiating from a central point using polar coordinates, the interface connects the data points to form a single, unified shape. An even, balanced polygon instantly signals well-rounded proficiency, while a sharply skewed shape draws the eye immediately to an outlier area.

While a traditional linear bar chart would have forced the viewer to scan eight individual bars and mentally calculate the variance, a concentric, radial layout segments the data layers to make progress tracking and skill gaps immediately readable. When all dimensions share an identical scale and scoring method, the radar chart is not an unconventional aesthetic choice — it is the most functional tool for multi-dimensional analysis.

The colour system was the other decision made early, and I mean early. During the branding exercise, each of the three products was assigned a colour. That colour did not stay in the brand guidelines. It was built into the data model from the beginning, running consistently across every chart, every filter, every breakdown. By the time a user landed on the dashboard for the first time, the mental model was already in place. They had not been taught the language. They already knew it.

What Changed

The shift from passive information to active insight showed up first in how the dashboard was actually used. Following the deployment of the personalised dashboards and side-by-side team comparison tools, weekly active engagement on the platform’s analytics features rose noticeably, per internally reported figures. Managers were no longer opening the tool once a month to pull static reports. They were using it every Monday morning to actively plan their week.

Revenue and user growth also moved in the right direction over the following two quarters, though — as with most single-project outcomes — it’s hard to isolate the dashboard’s exact contribution from everything else that changed at the same time. The client reported churn across the platform falling to one of its lowest points on record. The clearest evidence of impact came from qualitative feedback. Managers reported that instead of using data to dissect a ‘bad’ month after the fact, the visualisations allowed them to instantly spot slipping performance and schedule a quick supportive catch-up before it turned into a real gap.

Closing

Data design reaches its full potential when visual presentation is treated as an upstream architectural choice rather than a downstream formatting step. Bringing structured UX thinking to data turns visualisations into active decision-making engines, ensuring every chart, report, and metric directly serves a human purpose:

• Upstream framing: Grounding every visual choice in a specific operational question rather than defaulting to available metrics.
• Calibrated density: Tuning the level of complexity directly to the literacy and accountability of the specific reader.
• Decision-driven insight: Structuring data to reveal strategic outcomes rather than isolated stats, turning visual signals into immediate operational momentum.

The next time you are tasked with creating a data visualisation — whether it is an enterprise dashboard, an executive report, or a public-facing infographic — step away from the design canvas and BI tools. Focus your initial effort on the human decisions behind the screen. Only then will your data stop being a passive log of the past and start driving the direction of the future.

(yk)

The post Rethinking Data Visualisation: A UX Approach To Dashboards That Actually Drives Decisions appeared first on The NOKIA Blog.

There are also big differences between hosting providers. Some focus on low-cost shared hosting, while others offer managed WordPress hosting, cloud hosting, or plans built for businesses and agencies. The tools included with each plan can vary just as much. Backups, staging sites, caching, security, migrations, CDN access, and developer tools may be included, limited, or cost extra.

This comparison looks at six popular WordPress hosts: WordPress.com, Bluehost, Pressable, Cloudways, Kinsta, and SiteGround. Each provider has been tested and compared across the areas that matter when running a WordPress website.

The goal isn’t to name one host that works for everyone. A personal blog, WooCommerce store, client website, and busy online publication have very different hosting needs. Instead, the results should make it easier to see where each provider works well, where it falls short, and which type of WordPress website it suits best.

Best WordPress Hosting: Quick Recommendations

Not everyone needs to compare every plan and technical detail. These recommendations offer a quick starting point based on common WordPress projects. Each host has been selected for a different type of user, with performance, management tools, support, pricing, and the overall hosting experience taken into account.

Best Overall WordPress Host: WordPress.com

WordPress.com is our best overall host because it combines managed WordPress hosting with the flexibility and ease of use many websites need. It works well for blogs and business sites, with plans suitable for larger publications and WooCommerce stores.

Much of the technical work is handled for you, including caching, security, updates, SSL, and CDN access. All paid plans now support third-party plugins and custom theme uploads. Business adds daily backups, staging, SFTP, SSH, database access, WP-CLI, and other developer tools.

WordPress.com is run by Automattic, a company with deep ties to the WordPress open-source project and WordPress.org. That experience carries through to its managed hosting and support, which is useful when a problem involves both WordPress and the hosting platform.

There is less server maintenance to handle, while developers can choose Business when they need more advanced access. Those needing full server control may prefer cloud or VPS hosting.

Pricing varies between plans, so always compare promotional rates with the normal renewal price.

Further Information:

WordPress.com Plans & Pricing

• Personal: Supports third-party plugins and themes, custom CSS and code, along with security, support, and migration tools.
• Premium: Includes everything in Personal, with additional design, analytics, SEO, advertising, and monetization tools.
• Business: Adds daily backups, staging, SFTP, SSH, WP-CLI, database access, GitHub deployments, and other developer tools.
• Commerce: Includes the tools available with Business and adds WooCommerce and online selling tools.

All data correct as of August, 2026.

Best WordPress Managed Host: Kinsta

Kinsta is our choice for the best managed WordPress host. It is built for WordPress sites that need strong performance, reliable hosting, and useful management tools without the site owner having to manage the server.

Every WordPress site runs in its own isolated container, with access to Kinsta’s cloud infrastructure and a choice of 30 data center locations. Server caching, edge caching, a Cloudflare-powered CDN, security, daily backups, and performance monitoring are included.

Kinsta also provides a strong set of developer tools, including DevKinsta. SSH and SFTP are included with all WordPress hosting plans, WP-CLI is installed by default, and staging gives developers a separate platform to test changes. MyKinsta also offers database management, logs, analytics, and Kinsta’s APM performance tool.

The main drawback is price. Kinsta costs more than budget WordPress hosting, so it is harder to justify for a small personal site. But for businesses, busy publications, stores, and other sites where performance and support matter, the extra cost makes sense.

Further Information:

Kinsta Plans & Pricing

• Single Site Plans: Built for one WordPress website, with several levels based on traffic or bandwidth. All include CDN, edge caching, daily backups, staging, security, migrations, SSH, SFTP, and WP-CLI.
• Multiple Site Plans: Designed for users who manage several WordPress installations. These plans increase the number of sites and available resources while keeping them under one Kinsta account.
• Agency Plans: Made for agencies that manage larger collections of client sites. They provide higher limits and more capacity while retaining the same managed WordPress platform and development tools.
• Custom Plans: Available for WordPress projects that need more resources than the standard plans provide. These are better suited to very busy sites and projects with unusual hosting requirements.

All data correct as of August, 2026.

Best WordPress Blogger Host: Cloudways

Cloudways is our choice for the best WordPress blogger host, particularly for established blogs and publications that have grown beyond basic shared hosting. It provides managed cloud hosting while still giving site owners more control over server resources than most managed WordPress platforms.

With Cloudways Flexible, WordPress can run on cloud infrastructure from DigitalOcean, Vultr, Linode, AWS, or Google Cloud. You choose the provider, server size, and location, while Cloudways handles much of the server setup and management. Resources can also be increased as traffic grows.

WordPress tools include server caching, staging, cloning, automated backups, SSL, migrations, security tools, SSH, SFTP, Git, and WP-CLI. Multiple WordPress sites can also run on the same server, provided it has enough resources.

This flexibility is why Cloudways works well for established bloggers. A growing publication can increase its hosting resources without moving to another platform. The tradeoff is complexity. There are more server settings to understand than with WordPress.com or Kinsta. But for bloggers comfortable managing WordPress, that extra control can be useful.

Further Information:

Cloudways Plans & Pricing

• DigitalOcean: The most practical starting point for many WordPress blogs. Plans provide dedicated cloud resources, SSD or NVMe storage, vertical scaling, and a choice of server locations.
• Vultr: Offers a broad choice of data center locations and server configurations. It is useful when the main audience is closer to a Vultr location or a different server setup is required.
• Linode: Another option for blogs that want predictable cloud resources and a choice of server locations while keeping Cloudways responsible for much of the server management.
• AWS: Uses Amazon Web Services infrastructure and provides more server configuration choices. It is generally more expensive and is better suited to sites with requirements that justify the added cost.
• Google Cloud: Runs WordPress on Google Compute Engine through the Cloudways dashboard. Like AWS, it provides flexible server resources but usually costs more than the simpler cloud options.

All data correct as of August, 2026.

Best WordPress Developer Host: Pressable

Pressable is our choice for the best WordPress developer host. It is a fully managed WordPress platform from Automattic, the company behind WordPress.com and WooCommerce, and runs on its WP Cloud infrastructure. That WordPress focus is one of the main reasons it works so well for development work.

Developers get staging and sandbox environments for every site, along with SSH, SFTP, WP-CLI, Git, database access, and other tools needed for building and maintaining WordPress sites. DupliKits can also be used to create reusable site templates, which can save time when several projects start with a similar setup.

Pressable handles much of the hosting work in the background. Hourly and daily backups, caching, security monitoring, automatic scaling, a global CDN, and site migrations are included. There is also 24/7 support from a team that works with WordPress every day.

Pricing is higher than budget hosting, but that is not really what Pressable is competing with. The value comes from reducing server maintenance while keeping the development tools needed for regular WordPress work. For freelance developers and teams managing several sites, that balance makes Pressable a strong choice.

Further Information:

Pressable Plans & Pricing

• Signature 1: Supports one WordPress site, 30,000 monthly visits, and 20GB of storage. Suitable for developers managing a single business or client site.
• Signature 2: Supports three WordPress sites, 50,000 monthly visits, and 30GB of storage. Useful for developers who manage a small collection of client sites.
• Signature 3: Supports five WordPress sites, 75,000 monthly visits, and 35GB of storage. Offers more room for freelancers maintaining several active WordPress projects.
• Signature 4: Supports ten WordPress sites, 150,000 monthly visits, and 50GB of storage. Excellent for developers and small teams that manage a larger group of websites.
• Signature 5 and Above: Plans increase from 20 to 100 WordPress installations, with higher traffic and storage limits. They are aimed at larger development teams and agencies with many sites.

All data correct as of August, 2026.

Best WordPress Agency Host: SiteGround

SiteGround is our choice for the best WordPress agency host. It combines managed WordPress hosting with tools for building, testing, managing, and handing client websites once a project is complete and launched. GrowBig and GoGeek also allow multiple websites under one account, which makes them better suited to agency work than the single site StartUp plan.

SiteGround handles many routine hosting jobs, including WordPress updates, daily backups, caching, CDN access, SSL, security, and server maintenance. GrowBig and GoGeek also include WordPress staging, while developers have access to SSH, SFTP, WP-CLI, databases, and other common development tools.

The agency tools are the main reason for choosing SiteGround here. Team members can be added as collaborators without sharing the main account login. Finished websites can also be transferred to clients while the agency remains attached as a collaborator. GoGeek adds white label client access, so clients using Site Tools do not see SiteGround branding.

The main drawback is renewal pricing. SiteGround offers large discounts for the first year, but regular rates are much higher. Agencies should use those renewal prices when calculating the long-term cost of hosting client websites.

Further Information:

SiteGround Plans & Pricing

• StartUp: Supports one website, around 10,000 monthly visits, and 10GB of storage. It includes managed WordPress tools, daily backups, caching, CDN access, SSL, and email. The single site limit makes it less useful for agency hosting.
• GrowBig: Supports unlimited websites within its resource limits, around 100,000 monthly visits, and 50GB of storage. It adds more server resources, WordPress staging, on-demand backups, and collaboration tools. This is a good starting point for smaller agencies.
• GoGeek: Supports unlimited websites within its resource limits, around 400,000 monthly visits, and 100GB of storage. It provides more server resources and adds white-label client access, making it the strongest shared hosting plan for agencies managing client websites.

All data correct as of August, 2026.

WordPress.com is our choice for the best WooCommerce host. WooCommerce can now be installed on any paid WordPress.com plan, giving store owners more choice over how much hosting and how many store tools they actually need.

The close connection with WooCommerce is a major advantage. WordPress.com and WooCommerce are both part of Automattic, so the hosting platform is built and supported by people with a deep understanding of WordPress and WooCommerce. This becomes useful when a problem involves the store, WordPress, and the hosting environment.

For larger stores, the Commerce plan includes everything in Business, along with WooCommerce and additional selling tools. This includes real-time backups, staging, SFTP, SSH, database access, payment tools, shipping integrations, automated taxes, product recommendations, and other WooCommerce extensions.

WordPress.com also handles much of the hosting work, including caching, security, updates, SSL, and server management. Store owners can concentrate on products, orders, customers, and sales rather than maintaining the server. It may cost more than basic WooCommerce hosting, but the managed setup makes more sense as a store becomes busier.

Further Information:

WordPress.com Commerce Plans & Pricing

• Personal: WooCommerce can be installed alongside third-party plugins and themes. It provides a low-cost starting point for a very small store, but it does not include the advanced backups, staging, and developer tools available on higher plans.
• Premium: Includes everything in Personal, along with additional design, analytics, SEO, advertising, and monetization tools. WooCommerce can be installed, although growing stores may benefit from the stronger hosting tools available with Business.
• Business: Adds real-time backups, staging, SFTP, SSH, database access, WP-CLI, and other developer tools. WooCommerce can be installed normally, making Business a good choice for store owners who want to build their own WooCommerce setup.
• Commerce: Includes everything in Business and adds WooCommerce with a collection of store tools and extensions. It supports unlimited products and orders, payments, shipping integrations, automated taxes, product recommendations, abandoned cart emails, and other selling tools.

All data correct as of August, 2026.

Best Budget WordPress Host: Bluehost

Bluehost is our choice for the best budget WordPress host. Its lower-priced plans provide the tools needed to run a blog, portfolio, small business site, or other WordPress project without paying the higher monthly cost of premium managed hosting.

WordPress hosting includes managed updates, SSL, CDN access, malware scanning, backups, migration tools, and a domain for the first year. Bluehost also provides a 99.99% uptime SLA and several server locations. WordPress setup and site management are handled through a dashboard aimed at users who may not have much hosting experience.

Starter is the obvious choice for smaller sites, while Business provides more storage, supports more websites, and adds further security and backup tools. Higher performance plans are available when a site needs more resources, so there is room to move beyond the entry-level packages.

The main issue is renewal pricing. Bluehost offers large discounts for the initial term, but the regular price is considerably higher. That needs to be included when comparing it with other budget hosts. For a smaller WordPress site where keeping the initial cost low matters, Bluehost still provides a strong set of hosting tools for the money.

Further Information:

Bluehost Plans & Pricing

• Starter: Supports up to ten websites with 10GB of NVMe storage. It includes managed WordPress updates, CDN access, SSL, malware scanning, weekly backups, migration tools, and a domain for the first year. It is the best fit for blogs and smaller WordPress sites.
• Business: Supports up to 50 websites with 50GB of NVMe storage. It provides more room for growing sites and is better suited to users managing several WordPress installations or a busier business website.

All data correct as of August, 2026.

Most WordPress hosts include more than just server space. Backups, staging sites, caching, CDN access, SSL, security, and migration tools reduce the amount of work needed to maintain a site. A host may advertise backups but run them only weekly, or offer staging only on its more expensive plans.

There is also a difference between a tool being included and it being well connected to the hosting platform. The right setup depends on whether the project needs simple management or greater control.

Developer requirements can be very different from those of someone running a single blog. Staging sites, SSH, SFTP, WP-CLI, Git, database access, logs, and local development tools will save a lot of time. They are also useful when testing updates or tracking down a problem without making changes directly on a live site.

Cloudways provides the greatest server control of the hosts compared here, while Kinsta and Pressable combine strong development tools with a more managed setup. WordPress.com also provides many common development tools on suitable plans. SiteGround covers most everyday development needs, while Bluehost provides enough access for many smaller projects.

The main question is how much control is actually required. More server access is useful for some developers, but it also means taking responsibility for more of the hosting setup.

AI tools are starting to appear in WordPress hosting platforms. Many providers now use it to help monitor websites, detect security threats, improve performance, and simplify routine management tasks. Some platforms also include AI assistants that can answer questions, troubleshoot common issues, or help configure hosting settings.

While these tools can save time, they shouldn’t be the main reason for choosing a host. Performance, reliability, support, and security still matter more. AI is best viewed as a useful addition rather than a replacement for a well-managed hosting platform.

The table below shows how the six hosts in this comparison currently approach AI.

All data correct as of August, 2026.

WordPress.com currently has the most complete AI setup of the hosts compared here. Its AI website builder can create a new WordPress site, while WordPress Agent continues working inside the site after it has been built. It can help with content, layouts, images, pages, and other editing jobs.

The more interesting addition for developers is MCP support. WordPress.com can connect with outside AI agents such as ChatGPT, Claude, Cursor, and other compatible tools. These agents can read site information and, with permission, carry out tasks such as creating posts, managing content, working with media, and changing site settings. MCP is available across paid WordPress.com plans.

Other hosts are using AI in narrower ways, often concentrating on initial site creation, content generation, or hosting support. Those tools can still be useful, but they should not be a major reason to choose a host on their own. Hosting performance, support, backups, security, development tools, and long-term cost still matter much more.

How to Choose a WordPress Host

Choosing a WordPress host is one of the biggest decisions you’ll make for your website. Your hosting provider affects performance, reliability, security, and how easy your site is to manage. The right host will keep your website running smoothly and give you access to support when you need it.

No hosting plan suits every website. A personal blog has different needs than an online store or an agency managing client sites. Knowing what your website requires before comparing providers will help you narrow your options and avoid paying for services you won’t use.

When comparing hosts, look at uptime, page speed, server locations, backups, staging sites, security, support, and renewal pricing. These factors often matter just as much as the monthly cost.

The articles below cover the main topics involved in choosing a WordPress host. Whether you’re building your first website or moving to a new provider, they’ll help you compare your options and make a confident choice.

WordPress Hosting for Different Needs

Choosing a hosting plan that matches your needs can improve performance, make your website easier to manage, and help you avoid paying for resources you won’t use. As your website grows, you can move to a plan with more storage, power, and management tools.

Whether you’re building your first WordPress website, running an online store, or managing client sites, understanding the strengths of each hosting option will make it easier to choose the right provider.

WordPress Performance & Security

A good hosting provider gives your WordPress website a solid foundation, but hosting is only part of the picture. Your website’s setup, the tools you use, and your security practices all affect performance, reliability, and keeping your visitors safe.

Many WordPress hosts include caching, content delivery networks (CDNs), backups, malware scanning, and SSL certificates. Knowing how these features work will help you get more from your hosting plan. Regular maintenance also helps keep your website running well. Updating WordPress, plugins, and themes, monitoring performance, and following good security practices can prevent many common problems.

The articles below cover the tools and techniques that can improve website speed, strengthen security, and simplify day-to-day management.

Managing Your WordPress Hosting

Launching a WordPress website is only the start. Regular maintenance helps keep your website secure, reliable, and running smoothly. Many hosting providers include tools that simplify routine tasks, but it still helps to understand how they work.

Common tasks include migrating websites, installing SSL certificates, updating PHP, managing domains, restoring backups, and monitoring uptime. Learning these skills will help you solve problems more quickly and get more from your hosting provider.

Whether you’re looking after one website or several client projects, a regular maintenance routine can reduce downtime and keep your websites in good shape.

The articles below cover the most common hosting management tasks and show you how to handle them with confidence.

• When Your WordPress Website Has Outgrown its Hosting

  How do you know when a hosting change is needed? Here are a few things to consider.

• Hosting Your Client’s WordPress Website

  Learn how to avoid common hosting mistakes when hosting WordPress sites for clients.

• Understanding Your Web Host

  Your host may not cover all your needs. Take these steps to ensure your website runs smoothly.

• Building a Performant WordPress Website

  Learn how to boost performance with better hosting, lighter themes, and smart optimzation strategies.

• What To Know About Your Client’s WordPress Website

  We cover what to check first, including themes, plugins, custom code, hosting, and unused tools.

• Add an SSL Certificate to Your WordPress Website

  A quick SSL certificate setup can mean big benefits for your site and visitors.

• WordPress Website Email Issues

  Learn how to test sending, check logs, change the from address, set up SMTP, or use a mail delivery service.

Final Verdict: Which WordPress Host Should You Choose?

WordPress.com is our best overall choice because it works for a broad range of WordPress projects while handling much of the hosting management. It is suitable for blogs, business websites, larger publications, and WooCommerce stores, with access to plugins, themes, staging, backups, security, caching, and development tools on suitable plans.

Kinsta is the better choice for users who want premium managed WordPress hosting and are willing to pay more for it. Cloudways suits established bloggers and publications that want greater control over server resources. Pressable is our choice for developers because its managed platform includes a strong set of WordPress development tools.

SiteGround makes sense for agencies managing several client websites, particularly when collaboration and site management tools are needed. And Bluehost remains the budget choice for smaller WordPress sites where keeping the hosting bill low matters more than having advanced management tools.

No host wins every category because WordPress websites have different requirements. The best option is the provider that has enough performance and resources for the site, includes the tools that will actually be used, and remains affordable after introductory pricing ends. For most WordPress users looking for a balance across those areas, WordPress.com gets our overall recommendation.

WordPress Hosting FAQs

WordPress hosting can look more complicated than it needs to be. Hosting companies use different plan names, prices, limits, and technical terms, even when the services are similar. These answers cover some of the most common questions about choosing and using WordPress hosting.

• What is the best hosting for WordPress?
  WordPress.com is our best overall WordPress host because it combines managed hosting with good performance, security, backups, CDN access, and WordPress support. Kinsta is our choice for managed hosting, Cloudways for bloggers, Pressable for developers, SiteGround for agencies, and Bluehost for smaller budgets.
• How much should WordPress hosting cost?
  Basic WordPress hosting can cost only a few dollars per month, while managed hosting may cost $20 to $50 per month or more. Larger sites and stores can cost considerably more. Always check the regular renewal price because introductory rates can make the first term look much cheaper.
• Do I need managed WordPress hosting?
  No. Smaller blogs, portfolios, and business sites can run well on lower-cost hosting. Managed WordPress hosting becomes more useful for busy sites, stores, and businesses that benefit from automatic backups, security, caching, staging, and WordPress-focused support.
• Can I change WordPress hosts later?
  Yes. WordPress sites can be moved between hosting providers. Many hosts provide migration tools or will move the site for you. Keep the old hosting active until the new site has been checked and the domain is pointing to the new server.
• Does better hosting make WordPress faster?
  Better hosting can improve WordPress performance by providing faster servers, more resources, caching, and CDN access. But hosting cannot fix every problem. Large images, heavy themes, slow plugins, external scripts, and database problems can still make a site slow.
• Is WordPress hosting different from regular web hosting?
  WordPress hosting is web hosting set up with WordPress in mind. It may include WordPress updates, caching, backups, security, staging, WP-CLI, and specialist support. WordPress can also run on regular hosting as long as the server meets its requirements.
• Do I need separate hosting for WooCommerce?
  No. WooCommerce runs on WordPress and does not require a separate type of hosting. But stores can need more server resources because carts, checkout pages, customer accounts, orders, and stock changes create more database activity than a typical WordPress site.
• How much traffic can WordPress hosting handle?
  There is no single number. A cached blog and a busy WooCommerce store can use very different resources even with the same number of visitors. Check the host’s traffic, bandwidth, storage, CPU, memory, and other resource limits before choosing a plan.

Read more articles by Paul Andrew

The post The Best WordPress Hosting in 2026 appeared first on The NOKIA Blog.

Designers, photographers, illustrators, and other creative professionals also have practical requirements. Staging makes it possible to test layout changes privately. Automatic backups protect client work, while collaboration tools can help freelancers and agencies manage several websites. Good support is also valuable when a technical problem interrupts a project or affects a live site.

This collection compares WordPress hosts based on the features that matter most to creatives. These include performance, media handling, storage, theme and plugin support, staging, backups, client management, and long term cost.

Some options are suited to a single portfolio, while others provide the tools needed to manage client websites or run a creative agency. The best choice depends on the type of work being presented and how much control the website owner needs.

Quick Recommendations

Each of these hosts suits a different type of creative website. WordPress.com offers the simplest overall package, while Kinsta and Pressable provide stronger tools for studios and client work. Cloudways gives experienced users more control, and Rocket.net is a good match for image heavy portfolios.

WordPress.com is the best choice for creatives who want managed hosting with little technical maintenance. Kinsta is better suited to established studios that place greater value on performance, staging, and developer tools. Pressable is worth considering when several client websites need to be built, tested, and managed from one account.

Cloudways offers more flexibility but requires greater technical confidence. Rocket.net offers managed performance and a built in CDN for visual websites with an international audience. SiteGround and Hostinger cost less at the start, although their renewal prices are considerably higher.

Prices shown are monthly equivalents based on the billing terms displayed by each provider.

What Creatives Should Look for in WordPress Hosting

Creative websites often contain large images, complex layouts, video, animation, and interactive features. These elements can place more pressure on hosting than a basic blog or small business website.

• Image and media performance: Look for server caching, CDN access, and enough storage for a growing media library. Image compression and support for WebP or AVIF can also help portfolio pages load faster.
• Theme and design tool support: The host should support custom themes and third party plugins. Designers using page builders, animation plugins, or Advanced Custom Fields may also benefit from higher PHP memory and stronger server resources.
• Staging and development tools: Staging allows design changes, theme updates, and new layouts to be tested privately. SFTP, SSH, WP CLI, Git, database access, and PHP controls are also useful for custom and client websites.
• Client and team management: Freelancers and agencies may need collaborator accounts, separate permissions, site cloning, and a central dashboard for managing several projects. Site transfer and billing handover tools can also simplify client delivery.
• Backups and site recovery: Automatic backups provide protection when an update, code change, or plugin conflict causes a problem. Check how often backups are created, how long they are stored, and whether the website can be restored with a single click.
• Pricing and renewal costs: Check the regular renewal rate rather than relying on the introductory price. Storage, traffic, staging, backups, email, and additional websites may depend on the plan, so the cheapest option is not always the best value.

Top WordPress Hosts for Designers & Creatives

1. Best Overall for Creatives: WordPress.com

WordPress.com is a good choice for creatives who want managed hosting without spending much time on server maintenance. Updates, security, backups, caching, and performance tools are handled for you, leaving designers to manage their website through a familiar WordPress dashboard.

The Business plan is the best fit for a professional portfolio or creative business. It includes 50GB of storage, a global CDN, staging, real time backups, and 250GB of separate VideoPress storage. Custom themes and third party plugins are supported, so designers are not limited to the themes and tools supplied. SFTP, SSH, WP CLI, Git commands, and GitHub deployments are also available for more advanced projects.

The main drawback is cost. Each website requires its own plan, which may not suit freelancers or agencies managing a large number of client sites. However, it remains a practical option for individual designers, photographers, illustrators, and creative businesses that want strong performance without dealing with the technical side of hosting.

• Recommended plan: Business.
• Best for: Professional portfolios and creative business websites.
• Key strength: Managed hosting with strong media and development tools.
• Main drawback: A separate plan is required for each website.

Read moreThe joy of art

Further Information:

2. Best for Creative Studios: Kinsta

Kinsta is well suited to established designers and creative studios that need dependable managed hosting for a professional portfolio, company website, or online store. Its platform handles caching, security, backups, and server maintenance, while the MyKinsta dashboard provides access to staging, analytics, redirects, and other WordPress tools.

Every plan includes a global CDN, automatic daily backups, free migrations, application performance monitoring, and malware removal. Designers can create a staging copy before changing a layout, installing a new plugin, or updating a custom theme. Site transfer and user access controls are also useful when a studio works with outside developers or needs to hand a project over to a client.

The main limitation for visual websites is storage. The entry plan includes 10GB, which may be restrictive for a large photography or video portfolio. Visitor, bandwidth, storage, and CDN limits can also lead to additional charges. Kinsta costs more than shared hosting, but its performance and management tools make it a strong option when the website supports an established creative business.

• Recommended plan: Single 20GB
• Best for: Established creative studios and professional portfolios
• Key strength: Managed performance and development tools
• Main drawback: Limited storage on the entry plan

Further Information:

3. Best for Freelance Designers: Cloudways

Cloudways is a good option for freelance designers who want more control than a typical managed WordPress plan provides. Websites run on cloud servers, with Cloudways supplying the dashboard, security tools, caching, backups, staging, and technical support.

The Flexible Micro plan includes 2GB of RAM, one virtual CPU, 50GB of storage, and 2TB of transfer bandwidth. It can host multiple WordPress installations, although every site shares the same server resources. Designers can create staging sites, clone existing projects, change the PHP version, and access files through SFTP or SSH. Monthly and hourly billing also make it possible to increase server resources as client work grows.

Cloudways requires more technical knowledge than WordPress.com or Kinsta. The dashboard includes server settings that may be unfamiliar to less experienced users. Cloudflare Enterprise is a paid addition on Flexible plans, while offsite backup storage is charged separately. Business email is not included. These extra costs need to be considered, but the flexible setup remains useful for freelancers managing several client websites.

• Recommended plan: Flexible Micro
• Best for: Freelance designers managing several websites
• Key strength: Flexible cloud resources and server controls
• Main drawback: More technical than fully managed alternatives

Further Information:

4. Best for Managing Client Websites: Pressable

Pressable is designed for WordPress professionals who build and maintain websites for clients. Its dashboard provides access to production, staging, and sandbox environments, giving designers separate spaces for development, testing, and client review.

The Signature plans include automatic backups, a global CDN, edge caching, free migrations, malware monitoring, and WordPress support. Granular collaborator permissions allow developers, designers, and clients to receive different levels of access. Pressable also provides site templates through DupliKits, which can save time when several projects use the same plugins, theme, or starting configuration.

The Signature 1 plan is suitable for a single client website, while higher plans support several installations. Storage and monthly visits are limited, and additional usage can result in extra charges. Pressable is also more expensive than placing several sites on one shared hosting account. However, its staging, sandbox, cloning, and collaboration tools make it a practical choice for designers who include hosting and maintenance in their client services.

• Recommended plan: Signature 1
• Best for: Designers building and maintaining client websites
• Key strength: Staging, sandbox, and collaboration tools
• Main drawback: Additional charges for storage and visitor overages

Further Information:

5. Best for Small Creative Studios: SiteGround

SiteGround is a practical choice for designers and small creative studios that need to host several websites without paying for each installation separately. Its custom Site Tools dashboard provides access to domains, email, backups, caching, security, and development tools.

The GrowBig plan supports unlimited websites and includes 50GB of storage, a CDN, daily backups, on demand backups, collaborators, and WordPress staging. Designers can test theme and layout changes before publishing them, while collaborator accounts allow clients or team members to access individual websites. Email hosting is included, which can reduce the need for another paid service.

The introductory price is low, but the renewal rate is much higher. SiteGround also uses shared hosting, so demanding WooCommerce sites or portfolios with heavy media libraries may require a more powerful plan. Even so, GrowBig offers a useful balance of storage, development tools, and multiple site support for small studios. Agencies needing Git, white label access, and priority support should consider the GoGeek plan.

• Recommended plan: GrowBig
• Best for: Small creative studios hosting several websites
• Key strength: Multiple websites with staging and collaboration tools
• Main drawback: A large price increase at renewal

Further Information:

6. Best for Portfolio Performance: Rocket.net

Rocket.net is a managed WordPress host built around Cloudflare Enterprise. Its global CDN caches website content closer to visitors, which can improve the delivery of portfolio images, fonts, scripts, and other visual assets to an international audience.

The Starter plan includes one WordPress website, unmetered visitors, 10GB of storage, 50GB of bandwidth, unlimited PHP workers, and a 99.99% uptime guarantee. Security features include a web application firewall, malware protection, and automatic updates. Daily backups are retained for 30 days, while free migrations are available for existing websites.

The 10GB storage allowance is the main concern for photographers and other creatives with large media libraries. Storage overages cost $2 per GB, so images should be resized and compressed before being uploaded. Video should usually be hosted through a separate video platform. Rocket.net is not the cheapest option for a single website, but its CDN, managed security, and straightforward pricing make it a strong choice when portfolio performance matters more than storage capacity.

• Recommended plan: Starter
• Best for: Portfolios serving visitors in several countries
• Key strength: Cloudflare Enterprise CDN included with every plan
• Main drawback: Only 10GB of storage on the Starter plan

Further Information:

7. Best Budget Option: Hostinger

Hostinger offers low cost managed WordPress hosting for designers creating a first portfolio, personal website, or small creative business site. Its custom dashboard handles WordPress installation, updates, backups, domains, email, and other common hosting tasks.

The Unlimited plan is the better choice for creative work. It includes 50GB of NVMe storage, daily backups, a CDN, and support for unlimited websites. One click staging allows designers to test theme updates and layout changes before publishing them. Email accounts, ecommerce support, and AI tools are also included, although some features are only available during the initial contract period.

The advertised monthly price requires payment for 48 months in advance. The plan renews at a much higher rate, so the full contract cost should be considered before signing up. Unlimited website claims are also governed by a fair usage policy, which means the account still has resource limits. Hostinger does not provide the same level of server control or advanced management tools found as other hosts, but it offers useful features for creatives working with a smaller budget.

• Recommended plan: Unlimited
• Best for: New portfolios and budget conscious creative businesses
• Key strength: Generous storage and multiple website support
• Main drawback: The lowest price requires a four year commitment

Further Information:

Performance Tips for Creative WordPress Websites

Good hosting can only do so much if images, video, fonts, and animation are not properly managed. The following steps can help keep a visual WordPress website responsive.

• Resize images to match the largest dimensions at which they will be displayed.
• Use WebP or AVIF files where browser support and image quality allow.
• Compress portfolio images before uploading them to WordPress.
• Use lazy loading so images outside the visible area are not loaded immediately.
• Serve images, scripts, and stylesheets through a CDN.
• Host long or high resolution videos through a dedicated video platform.
• Limit unnecessary font files, background videos, and complex animations.
• Test important portfolio pages on mobile devices and slower connections.
• Monitor storage and bandwidth use as the media library grows.

How the Hosts Were Assessed

Each host was assessed using its published plan details, feature documentation, pricing, and suitability for creative WordPress websites. The recommendations place particular weight on the following factors:

• Performance when serving images and other visual content.
• Storage, bandwidth, and visitor limits.
• Support for custom themes, plugins, and design tools.
• Staging, backups, site cloning, and recovery options.
• Developer access through SFTP, SSH, WP CLI, or Git.
• Tools for managing team members and client websites.
• Introductory pricing, renewal rates, and additional charges.

The final rankings reflect how useful each hosting service is for designers, photographers, freelancers, and creative studios. Pricing and plan limits were checked against the information published by each provider while this article was being prepared.

Final Verdict

WordPress.com is the best overall choice for designers and creatives who want managed hosting with strong media support. The Business plan includes 50GB of storage, separate VideoPress storage, staging, backups, a CDN, and developer tools. It is particularly well suited to professional portfolios and creative business websites.

Kinsta is a stronger option for established studios that value managed performance and detailed site controls. Pressable provides useful staging, sandbox, cloning, and collaboration features for designers maintaining client websites. Cloudways offers more server control and flexible resources, although it requires greater technical confidence.

SiteGround works well for small studios that want to host several websites from one account. Rocket.net is suited to portfolios with an international audience, but its storage limits need careful management. Hostinger is the most affordable option at the start and provides enough storage for a new portfolio, though its long contract and higher renewal rate should be considered.

Read more articles by Paul Andrew

The post Best WordPress Hosts for Designers & Creatives in 2026 appeared first on The NOKIA Blog.

There’s been a lot of confusion and panic this week about “huge fines”, “drastic measures” and “sweeping new AI rules” in the EU. In reality, it’s a lot more narrow — and a lot more sensible. And mostly it’s about making AI more obvious when it actually needs to be obvious — especially for AI-generated content.

Starting from Aug 2, 2026, AI labelling is a legal requirement for any company that serves EU citizens. And similar to European Accessibility Act, it’s not limited to EU companies. It affects any company worldwide with EU operations as long as their AI output is used by people in the EU. Let’s see what exactly it means for us.

What Actually Needs Labelling

The goal of AI labelling is to help everyone exposed to AI content to recognize, in a clear and distinguishable way, that the content has been artificially generated or manipulated.

According to Article 50(4) of the AI Act, AI labelling applies to:

1. Deepfakes. Any image, audio, or video that resembles a real person, object, place, or event and would falsely appear authentic or truthful. Content that is not deceptively realistic generally doesn’t apply.
2. Chatbots and AI agents. Users must be informed if they’re not talking to a human.
3. Fully AI-written text. Specifically on matters of public interest, where there has been no human review or editorial work.
4. Emotion recognition and biometric categorization tools.

Both providers (who build or supply the AI system) and deployers (who use it) carry legal obligations. Similar to GDPR and EAA, a company doesn’t escape Article 50 just because it licensed an external AI tool from a third party.

However, it doesn’t mean that all AI-generated content must be explicitly labelled.

Not All AI-Generated Content Must Be Labelled

Beyond the use cases above, pretty much everything else — the vast majority of AI-assisted work — simply isn’t covered by new transparency rules. Most notably, the disclosure obligation does not apply where the AI-generated text has been reviewed and edited by a human, with a named person or entity taking editorial responsibility for it.

Some confusion circles around what exactly “public interest” means, where it starts and where it ends. On its own, it refers to health, safety, environment, economy, finances, politics, science, or culture. If AI-generated product claims touch upon them, the disclosure rule applies.

Some law firms recommend labelling realistic AI-generated illustrations or photos as a precaution for advertising, marketing and other commercial content. AI-generated product illustrations, photos, or posters do need a disclosure, as long as they resemble a real person, place, object, or event.

The Fine Line Between “Edited” And “AI-Generated”

But at which point does edited AI content stop being AI content? When a form is pre-filled with AI, but then a user edits it, is it still AI? EU Commission’s guidance is a little fuzzy. Small assistive edits — spellcheck, grammar, formatting, cropping, colour correction, and AI-generated translation — don’t count as AI generation.

AI-generated summaries, composite imagery, substantive rewrites, or adding and removing elements from a photo are considered AI generation. In practice, fine-tuning a sentence a person wrote is fine, but generating the sentence on its own requires a disclosure.

“A human skimmed it before publishing” doesn’t qualify as editorial review. The Commission is explicit that it needs to be substantive, with a named person responsible for the editorial control.

In other words, the fine line lies between intentional manual intervention and automated generation. The latter always has to be disclosed (exception: closed B2B environments).

AI Sparkles Probably Not Enough

As part of the Code of Practice, the European Commission has published an EU AI icon set. It’s a specific “AI” mark (similar to the AI label in Carbon Design System) — not the generic ✨ sparkle that many products use to signal AI. The signal must be “clear and distinguishable”.

The sparkle might be too ambiguous to signal AI clearly. Mostly because it’s often used to mean “AI-powered feature”, rather than “this specific content was generated by AI”. That’s the kind of signal EU guidelines are trying to rule out.

The Commission is explicit: using an icon “does not establish legal compliance by itself.” A barely visible icon, a note buried in the footer, or a label that flashes for a second are all not compliant.

The icon should be clearly visible, with a plain language label and accessible to assistive technologies. A safe bet is to pair any icon with plain text (“AI-generated”) — and it needs to persist when being reshared or downloaded.

In fact, the EU Commission also published Code of Practice on marking and labelling of AI content.

It Isn’t Just EU

It might feel like a yet another regulation coming from the EU, but in reality there are plenty of other similar regulations that emerged recently worldwide:

1. China has mandatory AI labelling since 1 September 2025. With visible tags and watermarked metadata.
2. California has SB 942, as amended by AB 853, which became mandatory on the exact same day as the EU rules (2 August 2026), deliberately timed to align.
3. South Korea has the AI Basic Act that took effect on 22 January 2026, widely cited as the first comprehensive national-level AI law to mandate deepfake labels. Fines are modest by EU standards (roughly $20K per violation), with a one-year grace period before enforcement bites.
4. India has an IT Rules amendment, in force since 20 February 2026. Platforms must label “synthetically generated information”, and takedown timing for most harmful deepfakes was cut to 3 hours.

All of these are signs of upcoming AI regulation that looks more like a pattern, rather than a coincidence. So if you’re shipping anything AI this year, it’s probably a good idea to have a conversation about what exactly is going to be AI-labelled, and what not.

Wrapping Up

One final note is that new EU AI transparency rules are much broader than US laws on AI disclosure, where certain state laws require disclosures for synthetic human performers, political advertising or specific AI applications.

None of this really deserves panic or confusion. It’s about a fairly simple idea that has been emerging worldwide at almost the same time:

When AI content could easily be mistaken for human content, creators must say so — in a way that is clear, obvious, and unambiguous. And parts of the UI that are AI-generated must be disclosed as such.

If anything, it will help people distinguish between AI slop and not AI — and everybody can only benefit from that.

Meet “Design Patterns For AI Interfaces”

Meet Design Patterns For AI Interfaces, Vitaly’s new video course with practical examples from real-life products — with a live UX training happening soon. Jump to a free preview.

Useful Resources

(yk)

The post New EU Guidelines For AI Labelling appeared first on The NOKIA Blog.

SEO has always had a dash of mysticism to it. People have tried various tricks and techniques to improve rankings. Now, we’re faced with the challenge of pleasing AEO (Answer Engine Optimization). The goal is to get your content cited by AI models. That could be a search engine like Google. But it also includes ChatGPT, Claude, and other AI tools. When a user asks an AI model a question, you want to be a source of relevant information.

Much like SEO, AEO inspires debate about what providers are looking for in a website. Do we need to do anything drastic? Or are the fundamentals of adding metadata and structured content enough?

These are among the questions we’re trying to answer here today. We can’t promise perfect results, nor that best practices won’t change (that’s a given). But we can show you some tools and resources to help you on your journey.

The good news is that WordPress is a great platform for getting your site noticed by search engines. It already includes some basics, such as logical content structure and sitemaps. And its plugin ecosystem is full of high-quality tools. This includes options for improving your site’s AEO.

Let’s get started!

Why You Should Care About AEO

Traditional search engines are still an important piece of the puzzle for discovering content. However, people are also turning to AI tools for information within the context of a conversation. That differs quite a bit from how we’ve researched topics for the past 30 years or so.

For example, you might use Bing to find a list of WordPress e-commerce plugins. That’s great, but you still have to click through each relevant link to find what you’re looking for. You could, in theory, waste a lot of time researching plugins that aren’t a good fit for your project.

Compare that experience with using an AI tool like Gemini. You could ask for WordPress e-commerce plugins with specific features, such as subscriptions or shipping integrations. The AI model will provide a summary of plugins that match your request, complete with background information.

AI provides a succinct report that makes it easier for users to find links of interest. That’s important to every website owner, whether you’re a plumber or a tech publication. Making your site AEO-friendly is part of getting your content seen by the right people.

It’s also a different deal than the training bots that hog site resources. You can still block harmful bots while welcoming the legitimate ones.

Scan Your Site for AI Agent Readiness

What does your WordPress website need to be indexed by AI models? You may already be on the right track.

The basics of SEO, such as a robots.txt file and an XML sitemap, are must-haves. These items help direct bots to your content and tell them what to index, similar to how search engines use them. But there’s more to the story.

Cloudflare has a helpful scanning tool, Is Your Site Agent-Ready?, that analyzes your website’s structure. It looks for the following:

• The discoverability of your site, via robots.txt, sitemaps, link response headers, and DNS records.
• If your site makes content available in an AI-accessible format, such as Markdown.
• How your site manages bot access via robots.txt.
• Any agent skills your site may have, such as MCP.
• E-commerce protocols.

You’ll receive a report that details where you’re succeeding and where there’s room for improvement. We should note that some of the above may not apply to your website. For example, agent skills won’t be relevant unless you have AI agents on your website. You can also adjust the scan settings to focus only on the areas you care about.

As with all scanning tools (AI and otherwise), take the results with a grain of salt. However, they will provide some actionable advice. It’s up to you to determine what makes sense for your website.

Turn Your HTML Content Into Markdown

It may be a surprise, but HTML isn’t the best format for AI models to read. Instead, they prefer Markdown. This plain-text markup language is easier for bots (and humans) to understand. Elements like headings and lists can be identified without knowing code.

Markdown is also more efficient than HTML. Models don’t have to sift through lines of unnecessary code to access your content. That means fewer tokens, which is better for everyone.

WordPress doesn’t natively support Markdown output. However, WordPress.org recently added this capability via the experimental html-to-md plugin – and you can, too. It’s a simple way to make your site friendlier to AI models.

Install the plugin, activate it, and a <link> element will be added to each page’s header, pointing to the Markdown version. Your site’s visitors won’t know the difference, but AI models will.

LLM Markdown is a similar plugin, but with a twist. A settings page lets you enable or disable Markdown output for specific post types. Look for more plugins to hit the market as Markdown output becomes more commonplace.

Cloudflare users with paid plans also have access to a Markdown for Agents feature. It doesn’t require a plugin – simply turn it on in your account dashboard.

Helpful AEO Resources

Optimizing your WordPress website (or any website, for that matter) for AI agents isn’t as hard as you may think. The tools and tips above will help you determine and address your needs.

But AEO is a nascent subject. As such, expect things to change quickly. The following are some resources you can use to learn more and stay ahead of the game:

We hope you found this overview useful. Now that you have a better idea of what AEO is, it’s time for action!

here. He recently started a writing service for WordPress products: WP Product Writeup. He also has an opinion on just about every subject. You can follow his rants on Bluesky @karks.com.

Read more articles by Eric Karkovack

The post How To Make Your WordPress Website AI-Friendly appeared first on The NOKIA Blog.

Most of us install a dependency once and never look at it again. It does its job, the tests pass, and we move on. But the web platform keeps moving too, and a surprising number of the libraries sitting in your package.json today are now built into the browser.

In a typical mid-sized JavaScript app, you can often find somewhere between 60KB and 90KB (minified and gzipped) of dependencies that the platform can now handle on its own. Date and number formatting, HTTP requests, modals, tooltips, deep cloning, grouping arrays: these were all real gaps a few years ago. A lot of them aren’t gaps anymore.

The reason those libraries stick around isn’t laziness. It’s that most teams don’t re-audit their dependencies on a Baseline cadence, or are simply not aware of how fast browsers are shipping these days. You check npm audit for security, but is this library still doing something the browser can’t? is a question that rarely gets asked. So the libraries stay.

In this article, we’ll run that audit together. Instead of going through dependencies one by one, we’ll work in clusters, because the wins tend to come in groups. We’ll do the bundle math, build a small decision framework you can reuse, and stay honest about the cases where the platform still falls short. By the end, you’ll have a repeatable process you can run on your own package.json.

What “Baseline” Actually Means

Before we start deleting things, let’s quickly recap what Baseline is. Feel free to skip this section if you’re already familiar.

Baseline is a project from the WebDX Community Group that tells you, in plain terms, how safe a web feature is to use across the major browsers (Chrome, Edge, Firefox, and Safari). A feature can be in one of three states:

• Limited availability
  The feature hasn’t shipped in all the major engines yet. Not safe to rely on without a fallback.
• Baseline Newly available
  The feature has just landed in all the major engines. It works for users on up-to-date browsers, but older devices in the wild may not have it yet.
• Baseline Widely available
  The feature has been in all the major engines for 30 months. At this point, you can reach for it without much thought.

That 30-month gap between “Newly” and “Widely” matters a lot for this audit. A feature that’s Widely available is something you can usually drop a library for today. A feature that’s only Newly available is something you can drop a library for if you check your audience first, or if you’re comfortable with a small feature check. We’ll treat those two cases differently throughout.

You can look any feature up on webstatus.dev, on MDN (every reference page shows a Baseline badge near the top), or programmatically with the web-features npm package. We’ll use all three later when we run the audit on a real project.

A Decision Framework Before You Delete Anything

It’s tempting to read “the browser does this now” and start ripping libraries out. Let’s not do that. A swap that looks free on paper can quietly break things for a chunk of your users, or cost you a feature you were relying on without realizing it.

So before dropping any library, ask three questions. We’ll reuse these in every cluster below.

1. Is the replacement Baseline-safe for my audience?

Not “is it Baseline” in the abstract, but “is it safe for the people who actually use my app.” If the native feature is Widely available, this is usually a yes. If it’s only Newly available, check your analytics or your browserslist config and see what share of your users would miss out. A B2B dashboard where everyone’s on the latest browser is a very different situation from a public-facing site with a long tail of old Android devices.

2. What does the swap actually cost?

Dropping a library isn’t always free. Sometimes the native feature isn’t supported widely enough yet, so you’d reach for a polyfill. If that polyfill is heavier than the library you’re removing, you’ve made your bundle bigger, unless you load it conditionally. We’ll see exactly this with Temporal later.

3. Does the platform feature cover my real use case?

Libraries often do more than the platform feature they resemble. axios isn’t just fetch with automatic JSON parsing; it has interceptors, request cancellation, and retries. If you’re using those, a straight swap to fetch will leave you reimplementing them. Check what you actually use before assuming it’s a drop-in replacement.

Keep these three in mind. Every cluster below is really just these questions applied to a different corner of your dependencies.

Cluster 1: Internationalization (The Biggest Drop Today Win)

This is the cluster where you’ll usually find the most KBs sitting on top of features that are already Widely available. The browser ships a whole family of formatting tools under the Intl namespace, and a lot of small, popular libraries became unnecessary.

Here are the usual suspects and what replaces them:

• timeago.js (1 KB gz) → Intl.RelativeTimeFormat
• pluralize (2.3 KB gz) → Intl.PluralRules
• numeral (3.9 KB gz) → Intl.NumberFormat
• humanize-duration (6.6 KB gz) → Intl.DurationFormat
• list-joining helpers → Intl.ListFormat

Let’s walk through some of them.

Relative Time

timeago.js exists to turn a timestamp into “3 hours ago”. Intl.RelativeTimeFormat does the same thing, and it’s Baseline Widely available.

const rtf = new Intl.RelativeTimeFormat("en", { numeric: "auto" });

rtf.format(-1, "day"); // "yesterday"
rtf.format(3, "hour"); // "in 3 hours"
rtf.format(-2, "week"); // "2 weeks ago"

The numeric: "auto" option is the nice touch here: it gives you “yesterday” instead of “1 day ago” where the language has a word for it. You pass a number and a unit, and you get a localized string back.

You may be wondering about the one thing timeago.js does that this snippet doesn’t: it picks the unit for you. Given a date, timeago.js decides whether to say “seconds” or “days.” Intl.RelativeTimeFormat expects you to do that part. It’s a few lines of arithmetic (work out the difference, find the largest unit that fits), and once you’ve written that helper, you don’t need the library anymore.

Numbers, Currency, And Lists

Intl.NumberFormat covers most of what number-formatting libraries do: thousands separators, currency, percentages, and compact notation.

new Intl.NumberFormat("en-US").format(1234567.89);
// "1,234,567.89"

new Intl.NumberFormat("en-US", { style: "currency", currency: "USD" }).format(
  1234.5,
);
// "$1,234.50"

new Intl.NumberFormat("en", { notation: "compact" }).format(1200000);
// "1.2M"

And Intl.ListFormat, Widely available, handles the “join an array into a sentence” problem, including the Oxford comma, which is the kind of thing people write fiddly helper functions for:

const lf = new Intl.ListFormat("en", { style: "long", type: "conjunction" });

lf.format(["Alice", "Bob", "Carol"]);
// "Alice, Bob, and Carol"

The One Caveat: Durations

humanize-duration turns a number of milliseconds into “1 hour, 30 minutes”. The platform equivalent is Intl.DurationFormat:

const df = new Intl.DurationFormat("en", { style: "long" });

df.format({ hours: 1, minutes: 30 });
// "1 hour, 30 minutes"

One thing to keep in mind is that Intl.DurationFormat is Baseline Newly available at the time of writing, not Widely available. It landed in all the major engines in March 2025, and it’s on track to become Widely available in 2027. So this one fails question 1 for broad-audience apps unless you check your traffic first or add a fallback. For an internal tool on modern browsers, it’s fine today. For a public site with old devices, give it another year or guard it with a feature check.

The Math On This Cluster

If your app uses the full set (humanize-duration, timeago.js, pluralize, numeral), that’s roughly 14 KB gzipped of dependencies, most of it replaceable right now with Widely available APIs. The internationalization cluster is usually the easiest win in the whole audit.

Cluster 2: HTTP Clients

This cluster is more nuanced, so it’s a good one to slow down on.

The browser HTTP libraries people reach for are axios (17 KB gz) and superagent (19 KB gz). For most requests, fetch plus AbortController covers what you need, and both are Widely available.

A basic GET looks like this:

// axios
const { data } = await axios.get("/api/users");

// fetch
const res = await fetch("/api/users");
const data = await res.json();

The one extra line (res.json()) is fetch being explicit where axios was implicit. That’s the pattern across this whole cluster: fetch does less for you by default, and you decide whether you want the things it leaves out.

Timeouts

axios has a timeout option. fetch has AbortSignal.timeout():

const res = await fetch("/api/users", {
  signal: AbortSignal.timeout(5000), // abort after 5 seconds
});

Where fetch Doesn’t Replace axios

This is where question 3 does most of the work, so let’s be specific about the gaps:

• fetch doesn’t reject on HTTP errors.
  A 404 or 500 is a resolved promise, not a rejection. You have to check res.ok yourself. axios rejects on any non-2xx status.
• No interceptors.
  If you rely on axios interceptors to attach auth tokens or handle 401s in one place, fetch has no equivalent. You’d wrap fetch in your own function or class to get the same behavior.
• No automatic retries.
  axios (with a plugin) can retry failed requests. With fetch, that’s your code to write.
• No upload progress.
  fetch still can’t report upload progress in a first-class way. If you have a file uploader with a progress bar, that’s a real reason to keep a library.

I personally heavily rely on interceptors in my interactive online courses, such as Learn JavaScript, and I have solved that for years using a custom class on top of fetch. I’ve shipped this to millions of users and have seen lots of success with it.

None of these are hard to rebuild, and most apps only use one or two of them. But this is exactly the kind of cluster where you shouldn’t do a blind find-and-replace. Look at how you actually use your HTTP client first. If it’s plain GETs and POSTs, dropping axios for a thin fetch wrapper saves you about 17 KB gzipped.

Cluster 3: UI Primitives

This cluster has some of the most satisfying swaps, because the platform features don’t just match the libraries, they’re often more accessible than what teams ship by hand.

The libraries here are modal dialogs (something like a11y-dialog, 1.8 KB gz), tooltip and popover libraries (tippy.js, 14 KB gz, which bundles Popper for positioning), focus-trap (6.6 KB gz), and body-scroll-lock (1.3 KB gz). They get replaced by three platform features: the <dialog> element, the Popover API, and CSS anchor positioning.

The <dialog> Element

A huge amount of modal-related code exists to solve accessibility problems: trapping focus inside the modal, closing on Escape, restoring focus to the previous element when the dialog is closed, and rendering above everything else. The <dialog> element, Widely available, does all of that for you.

<dialog id="confirm">
  <form method="dialog">
    <p>Delete this file?</p>
    <button value="cancel">Cancel</button>
    <button value="delete">Delete</button>
  </form>
</dialog>

const dialog = document.querySelector("#confirm");

dialog.showModal(); // focus moves in, background goes inert, Escape closes it

dialog.addEventListener("close", () => {
  console.log(dialog.returnValue); // "cancel" or "delete"
});

Calling showModal() does the work that focus-trap was installed for: focus moves into the dialog, the rest of the page becomes inert so you can’t tab out of it, Escape closes it, and focus returns to the element that opened it. The dialog renders in the browser’s Top layer, so you don’t fight z-index. You also get a ::backdrop pseudo-element to style the overlay.

That single element can replace your modal library and focus-trap. The one piece it doesn’t handle on its own is locking the background from scrolling, which is what body-scroll-lock was for. That’s now one line of CSS:

body:has(dialog:modal) {
  overflow: hidden;
}

If you’re wondering why we’re using dialog:modal instead of dialog[open], it’s because the open attribute is set as soon as you call show(), but the dialog isn’t actually modal so you don’t want to lock scrolling yet. The :modal pseudo-class is only true when the dialog is actually modal, which is the case when you call showModal().

So three libraries collapse into one element and one CSS rule.

Popover API And Anchor Positioning

For things that aren’t full modals (dropdown menus, tooltips, the small floating panels that tippy.js handles), the Popover API gives you light-dismiss behavior, top-layer rendering, and Escape-to-close with no JavaScript at all:

<button popovertarget="menu" id="options">Options</button>

<div id="menu" popover>
  <!-- menu content -->
</div>

Clicking the button toggles the popover. Clicking outside it closes it. It’s Baseline Newly available (since January 2025).

The other half of what a tooltip library does is positioning: keeping the floating element pinned to its trigger and flipping it when it would overflow the viewport. That’s what Popper (bundled inside tippy.js) handles, and it’s now a CSS feature called anchor positioning. Here it pins the same #menu popover directly under its trigger button:

#options {
  anchor-name: --trigger;
}

.tooltip {
  position-anchor: --trigger;
  position-area: top;
  margin: 0;
}

Anchor positioning is the newest feature in this article. It became Baseline Newly available in January 2026, when Firefox 147 shipped it (Chrome had it since version 125, and Safari since version 26). Because it’s this fresh, it’s squarely a question-1 feature: great for modern audiences, but check your traffic, and note that some of the more advanced parts (like position-try fallbacks) have uneven support across versions. Keep a sensible fallback for older browsers.

Between <dialog>, the Popover API, and anchor positioning, the UI primitives cluster (tooltip library, modal library, focus-trap, body-scroll-lock) adds up to roughly 24 KB gzipped, and you come out the other side with better accessibility defaults than most hand-rolled solutions.

Cluster 4: Lodash Utilities

Lodash is rarely imported whole anymore, but its individual functions show up everywhere, either as the full lodash package (25 KB gz) or as standalone installs like lodash.clonedeep and lodash.groupby. Several of the most common ones now have direct platform equivalents.

Grouping

lodash.groupby reorganizes an array into an object keyed by some property. Object.groupBy does exactly that:

const products = [
  { name: "Apple", category: "fruit" },
  { name: "Carrot", category: "vegetable" },
  { name: "Banana", category: "fruit" },
];

const grouped = Object.groupBy(products, (product) => product.category);
// {
//   fruit: [{ name: "Apple", ... }, { name: "Banana", ... }],
//   vegetable: [{ name: "Carrot", ... }],
// }

There’s also Map.groupBy for when you want a Map instead of a plain object (handy if your keys aren’t strings). Both are Baseline Newly available, since March 2024, and on track to become Widely available in late 2026.

Deep Cloning

lodash.clonedeep makes a deep copy of an object. structuredClone is the platform version, and it’s Widely available:

const original = { user: { name: "Sam", roles: ["admin"] } };

const copy = structuredClone(original);
copy.user.roles.push("editor");

original.user.roles; // ["admin"] (unchanged)

structuredClone handles the tricky cases that trip up JSON.parse(JSON.stringify(...)): it clones Date, Map, Set, ArrayBuffer, and circular references correctly. The limit to know about (question 3 again) is that it can’t clone functions, DOM nodes, or class instances; it throws on functions and drops the prototype on class instances. For plain data, which is what most people deep-clone, it’s a clean replacement.

Set Operations

If you’ve ever pulled in a Lodash helper for union, intersection, or difference, the Set object now has these built in. They’re Baseline Newly available, since June 2024:

const admins = new Set(["sam", "alex", "jo"]);
const editors = new Set(["alex", "kim"]);

admins.intersection(editors); // Set { "alex" }
admins.union(editors); // Set { "sam", "alex", "jo", "kim" }
admins.difference(editors); // Set { "sam", "jo" }

The full set of methods is union, intersection, difference, symmetricDifference, isSubsetOf, isSupersetOf, and isDisjointFrom.

What’s Worth Keeping

Not all of Lodash has moved into the platform. debounce and throttle still have no native equivalent, and they’re genuinely useful, so cherry-picking lodash.debounce is reasonable. The point of this cluster isn’t “delete Lodash,” it’s “stop shipping the parts the browser already has.” Dropping lodash.clonedeep and lodash.groupby alone is about 8 KB gzipped, and if you were importing the full lodash for a handful of functions, replacing the platform-covered ones can let you drop it entirely.

Cluster 5: Temporal, A Case Study In Not Dropping A Library Yet

Every cluster so far has ended in “go ahead, drop it.” This one is the opposite, and that’s why it’s worth including: it shows the framework telling you to wait.

Temporal is the long-awaited replacement for JavaScript’s Date, and it’s a genuinely better API: immutable objects, sane time zone handling, and no more month indexes starting at zero. It reached TC39 Stage 4 in March 2026 and is part of the ES2026 specification. Firefox shipped it in version 139 (in 2025), and Chrome shipped it in version 144 (January 2026). Safari hasn’t shipped it in a stable release yet; it’s in Safari Technology Preview, with stable support expected later in 2026.

If Temporal is news to you, check out the Temporal Cheatsheet for a quick overview of the API and a comparison to Date.

However, Temporal is not Baseline. It’s still in limited availability, because Safari users don’t have it. To use it across all browsers today, you need a polyfill, and this is where the math turns against you.

The official @js-temporal/polyfill is about 44 KB gzipped. There’s a smaller polyfill that internally does not depend on BigInt and it weighs 19 KB gzipped. A lightweight date library like dayjs is about 3 KB gzipped. So if you swap dayjs for Temporal plus its polyfill right now, you’re not saving 3 KB, you’re adding roughly 41 KB to your bundle, unless you are able to load the polyfill conditionally.

Run it through the framework:

• Question 1 (audience): Temporal isn’t Baseline. For a broad audience, that’s a lot of people.
• Question 2 (cost): the polyfill is more than ten times the size of the library you’d remove. The swap makes your bundle bigger.
• Question 3 (feature gap): Temporal actually wins here; it does more than dayjs. But that doesn’t matter while questions 1 and 2 are failing.

The verdict is generally clear: keep dayjs (or date-fns) for now. The moment to revisit is when Safari ships Temporal in a stable release and it reaches Baseline. At that point you can use Temporal natively and conditionally load the polyfill for users on older browsers. This is a feature to write down and check again in a few months, not one to act on today.

How To Run This Audit On Your Own package.json

The clusters above are a starting map, but your dependencies are your own. Here’s a repeatable process you can run this quarter.

Step 1: List Your Production Dependencies

Start by listing what actually ships to users:

npm ls --omit=dev --depth=0

Step 2: Measure What Each One Costs

For a quick per-package number, Bundlephobia gives you the minified and gzipped size of any npm package. For the real picture (what each dependency costs in your actual bundle, after tree-shaking and deduplication), run a bundle analyzer against your build. npx source-map-explorer works on most bundles, and npx vite-bundle-visualizer works for Vite projects.

Step 3: Check The Baseline Status Of Each Replacement

For each candidate, find the platform feature that would replace it and check its Baseline status. The quickest way is webstatus.dev or the Baseline badge on the feature’s MDN page.

Step 4: Run The Three Questions

For each library with a platform replacement, go back to the framework: Is it Baseline-safe for your audience? What does the swap cost? Does the feature cover how you actually use the library? Most of your decisions will fall out of question 1 (check the feature’s status against your browserslist) and question 3 (check your own usage).

Step 5: Swap Behind Progressive Enhancement Where Needed

For Widely available features, swap and move on. For Newly available ones, either confirm your audience is on modern browsers or guard the new code with a quick feature check and keep a fallback:

if (typeof Intl.DurationFormat === "function") {
  // use the platform feature
} else {
  // fall back to the library, or a simpler format
}

That way you ship less code to the users who can run it, without breaking the ones who can’t.

Wrapping Up

Add the clusters up, and the picture is concrete. The internationalization cluster is around 14 KB gzipped, HTTP is around 17 KB, the UI primitives are around 24 KB, and the Lodash utilities are 8 KB or more depending on how much of the library you were shipping. For a typical mid-sized app, that’s somewhere between 60 KB and 90 KB gzipped of dependencies you can hand back to the platform, and more if you were shipping the full lodash or several of these libraries at once. (The uncompressed numbers are two to three times larger, which is what you’ll see in a bundle analyzer before gzip.)

I’ve chosen relatively lean packages for most of these features, but some individual packages could still be heavy. Your dialog package, for instance, could alone weigh as much as 50KB gzipped depending on what you’re using.

A few features are worth keeping an eye on over the next year, because they’ll open up further swaps:

• Temporal going native.
  Once Safari ships it in a stable release and it reaches Baseline, you can drop both your date library and the polyfill, turning today’s regression into a real win.
• CSS anchor positioning maturing.
  It became Baseline Newly available in January 2026. As it ages toward Widely available, dropping tooltip and popover positioning libraries gets safer for broad audiences.
• Object.groupBy and friends crossing into Widely available.
  The 2024 batch (array grouping, Set methods) is on track to become Widely available in late 2026, which moves them from “check your audience” to “just use it.”

None of this is a one-time cleanup. The platform ships new features constantly, and the gap between “you need a library for this” and “the browser does this” keeps closing. The habit worth building is small: once a quarter, run the audit. List your dependencies, check what’s now Baseline, and hand back what you can.

Pick one cluster from this article, open your package.json, and see how much of it the browser already does for you.

(yk)

The post How Baseline Can Help You Ship Less JavaScript appeared first on The NOKIA Blog.

Seriously, some of us are spending something close to a BMW’s (or perhaps a Ferrari’s) monthly payment on AI. What started as a small monthly fee to use ChatGPT, Claude, or Copilot has turned into something completely different. We have become the proverbial kids in the candy store.

It’s a bad case of consumerism fueled by our desire to experiment with new toys. It doesn’t help that AI companies are making it easy to spend significant money without a second thought. Integrating with your favorite SaaS or even WordPress is easy. Yet, the virtual cash register silently rings with each prompt and automation we create.

Perhaps all of this is happening too fast (maybe that’s the intention). We may be falling into an AI-powered trap that will be difficult to escape.

The Grumpy Designer likes to keep things rational. So, let’s hit the brakes, take a step back, and analyze what we’re doing. We’re the only ones who can stop the insanity, after all.

Your Monthly AI Plan Isn’t All-Encompassing

The early days of AI (a whole 2-3 years ago) were exciting. I had fun playing around with ChatGPT and seeing what silly or productive things I could accomplish.

Its coding abilities may pale compared to what we have today. But it was still incredibly handy for troubleshooting and building basic WordPress plugins. I decided that their $20-per-month Plus plan was a relative bargain. It offered access to the latest models and improved performance.

And it’s still a good deal, if you use it in your browser or their app. An individual performing occasional coding, image generation, or file analysis will get a lot for their money. It’s once you step outside of those boundaries that things become costly and confusing.

Such monthly plans typically don’t provide you with API access. For that, you’ll need to purchase tokens. It’s a common practice across the big AI companies.

I won’t argue with the premise of token-based usage. AI requires a lot of computing power to do its job. It must provide quick and accurate answers to user queries. Then there is the cost associated with training and improving each model.

The real problem lies in educating consumers on the differences. It’s not until you need an API key that you realize your monthly plan won’t cover you.

How Much Will That Task Cost?

Generating an API key and connecting your favorite AI model to a third-party service is simple. Figuring out how many tokens you’ll need isn’t so clear. That’s the downside of not having a good/better/best pricing model.

Reputable AI companies let you set spending caps and disable auto-purchasing once you hit your limit. This will save you from a massive bill. It’s also a good security measure, should your API key fall into the wrong hands.

However, experimentation is the only way to understand the costs of using AI tokens. Figure out what you want to do, ask AI to do it, and check your account dashboard to see how much you spent. The trick is to extrapolate that cost based on how many times you’ll perform a given task.

The other challenge is that some tasks will use more tokens than others. For example, generating a headline for your blog post will likely cost less than generating a featured image. Thus, you’ll want to watch your token usage carefully.

Setting a small spending limit may be fine for light-duty tasks. That strategy won’t work for organizations with multiple users who are highly dependent on AI, though. You’ll quickly run out of tokens and will have to go without the service or set a higher limit.

It appears that companies are beginning to realize that willy-nilly usage of AI is costly. Some will narrow the scope of what these tools do for them. It’s also an argument for developing local AI models. Maybe we still need humans after all?

Put AI in Its Place

Sure, AI can do just about everything. But the decision on when and how to use it is ours to make. The increasing and uncertain token costs are reason enough to scrutinize every task. Some of what we’re doing may not be worth the price.

There are other benefits to being less reliant on AI. Fewer tokens spent means less electricity (and less pollution). The environmental impact is real and only getting worse as more of us employ these models.

It’s also an opportunity to stay connected to our humanity. Imagine all the knowledge we might lose if we cede every task to machines. There is also the potential to lose personal and professional relationships. Do you want to trade that for efficiency?

All of this makes me want to treat tokens as something to spend wisely. From now on, I’ll ask myself: Is this task tokenworthy?

here. He recently started a writing service for WordPress products: WP Product Writeup. He also has an opinion on just about every subject. You can follow his rants on Bluesky @karks.com.

Read more articles by Eric Karkovack

The post Cherish Your Tokens, Grumpy Designer appeared first on The NOKIA Blog.

Last week, my team visited Seoul to meet AWS Korea User Group (AWSKRUG) leaders. AWSKRUG is the largest cloud developer community in Korea, with 20 meetup groups organized by topic and area that collectively host over 100 events each year, primarily in Seoul.

My team regularly visits countries across the Asia-Pacific region, listens to feedback from user group leaders, and works to support their communities. At this meeting, leaders honestly shared what they did well in the first half of the year, what needs improvement, and what they asked of AWS Developer Experience team. We also enjoyed a pleasant conversation during our Chimaek time together.

Now, let’s take a closer look at key launches of last week.

A one-click Lambda setup prompt for coding agents caught my eye most last week. This prompt configures your agent with AWS Serverless skills and the Serverless Model Context Protocol (MCP) server, embedding serverless best practices from the start. This prompt references the Lambda agent setup guide, which includes installation commands for Claude Code, Kiro, Cursor, GitHub Copilot, Codex, Devin Desktop, and OpenCode.

To get started, choose the Copy agent prompt button on the Lambda console screen or copy fetch https://docs.aws.amazon.com/lambda/latest/dg/samples/aws-lambda-agent-setup.md directly, and paste this URL in your preferred AI agent.

You can also use Agent Toolkit for AWS to give your coding agent current AWS knowledge and safe resource access. Use fetch https://raw.githubusercontent.com/aws/agent-toolkit-for-aws/refs/heads/main/setup-instructions/setup.md for installing AWS MCP Server.

Last week’s launches

Here are last week’s launches that caught my attention:

• OpenAI GPT-5.6 Sol, Terra, and Luna on Amazon Bedrock: You can use the smartest family of models from OpenAI yet on Bedrock’s next-generation inference engine built for high performance, security, and reliability. The three models span capability tiers from flagship reasoning (Sol) to balanced performance (Terra) to fast, cost-efficient inference (Luna), all accessible through the Responses API on Amazon Bedrock.
• Same-day transitions to Amazon S3 Standard-IA and S3 One Zone-IA: You can now transition objects to S3 Standard-Infrequent Access (S3 Standard-IA) and S3 One Zone-Infrequent Access (S3 One Zone-IA) as soon as the day they are created, without the previous 30-day minimum retention period in S3 Standard. These storage classes offer up to 40% lower storage costs than S3 Standard while still providing millisecond access when needed, making them ideal for backups, log analytics, and compliance workloads where data becomes cold within hours or days.
• Self-managed code storage on AWS Lambda: With self-managed Amazon S3 buckets for code storage, you can reference source code directly from your own S3 buckets without Lambda creating intermediate copies. This eliminates code storage limits and reduces function activation time after function creates and updates by removing the copy step.
• Importing users with password hashes on Amazon Cognito: You can now import users with password hashes in CSV user imports. Previously, imported users had to reset their passwords on first sign-in. Now, you can include password hashes in the CSV import, enabling users to sign in immediately with their existing credentials. When creating a CSV import, you specify the password hashing algorithm used by your source system.

For a full list of AWS announcements, be sure to keep an eye on the What’s New with AWS page.

Additional updates

Here are some additional news items that you might find interesting:

• Amazon SQS turns 20: Two decades of reliable messaging at scale: When Amazon SQS launched publicly in July 2006, it made this pattern available to every AWS customer. Twenty years later, that core function, decoupling producers from consumers, remains the reason customers use SQS. Let’s look back important milestones after Jeff’s 15th anniversary post.
• Open Protocols with the Strands Agents SDK: Learn how open AI protocols such as MCP, A2A, UTCP, AG-UI, and x402 work together using Strands Agents SDK for building AI agents as an example implementation, though the patterns apply to any agent framework.
• Open source Bulk Executor for Amazon DynamoDB: Performing bulk operations against all items in a DynamoDB table has historically required custom coding. The Bulk Executor for DynamoDB simplifies bulk tasks like these. You can use this feature to invoke commands like count, find, delete, or update. No coding is required, even when running at large scale.
• Transform AWS Support Case Workflows with Kiro CLI: Explore how Kiro CLI’s MCP integration accelerates support case workflows by combining investigation, documentation lookup, and case creation into a single conversational interface across three real-world scenarios: AWS Glue job failures, AWS Lambda cold start investigation, and AWS WAF false positive analysis.

For a full list of AWS blog posts, be sure to keep an eye on the AWS Blogs page.

Learn more about AWS, browse and join upcoming AWS-led in-person and virtual events, startup events, and developer-focused events including AWS Summits. Join the AWS Builder Center to connect with builders, share solutions, and access content that supports your development.

Finally, some customers experienced an issue with Cost Explorer displaying inaccurate estimated billing data in last weekend. They may have received erroneous budget and cost anomaly detection alerts, and observed inflated estimated cost and usage data. The issue has been resolved, and all AWS services are operating normally. We apologize for the concern this incident caused our customers and are conducting a thorough retrospective to prevent events like this from reoccurring, as well as improving our response when billing incidents occur. For more information, visit the AWS Health Dashboard.

That’s all for this week. Check back next Monday for another Weekly Roundup!

— Channy

The post AWS Weekly Roundup: One-click Lambda setup prompt, OpenAI GPT-5.6 models on Bedrock, and more (July 20, 2026) appeared first on The NOKIA Blog.