Website2023

Case study

Digisquad

A French development studio building web apps, SaaS and internal tools. The site sells engineering judgement to founders who cannot evaluate code — so it argues with real interfaces, a named client and plain answers.

WebsiteUX / UICopy structure

ClientDigisquad

Year2023

RoleDesign + copy

Timeline5 weeks

Request an audit ↗Talk about a similar project

The homepage, top to bottom: the promise, the interfaces they build, the support model, the stacks, the culture, a named client and the FAQ.

Work details

TypeStudio website

IndustrySoftware studio · web apps and SaaS

ClientDigisquad (FR)

RoleWebsite design, copy structure and art direction

Year2023

Timeline5 weeks

StatusShipped

DeliverablesHomepage system, case-study cards, FAQ set

Fonts

InterIBM Plex Mono

Colours

Built with

Figma

Nuxt

TypeScript

Tailwind CSS

Monochrome on purpose: with no brand colour in play, the only coloured things on the page are the client screenshots.

What it needed

Selling engineering to people who cannot judge it.

A founder choosing a development studio cannot assess architecture, so they fall back on price and confidence. Studio sites answer that with adjectives — expert, agile, passionate — and every competitor sounds identical. Digisquad needed the opposite: show the interfaces, name the stacks, explain how a project is run, and answer the awkward questions about billing and maintenance before anyone has to ask them.

What I did

Promise

Head for the essential, we automate the rest. One line, two actions, and no illustration — the page opens on a near-empty screen and lets the work do the talking.

Proof

Real product screens next, arranged as a drift of overlapping interfaces: account settings, sign-in, verification, security, profile. The details are legible, which is the point.

Method

The engagement is drawn as four areas — architecture, frontend, backend, audit and delivery — each with a small rendering of what it produces, so a founder can see what they are buying rather than reading a service list.

Stacks

Frontend, backend and infrastructure logos in three plain grids. It is the one place where a technical reader is allowed to check the studio against their own preferences.

Objections

A named client vouching in his own words, then a nine-question FAQ covering billing, planning, maintenance, consulting and branding — the questions that otherwise burn the first call.

What shipped

3 shots

Digisquad — the product-interface section — Real screens instead of adjectives: account, sign-up, security, notifications, all from shipped work.

Digisquad — the stack and expertise section — Frontend frameworks and backend architecture, named and shown as logos rather than claimed.

What it changed

9questions answered on the page instead of on the first call

1named client, quoted in his own words

0illustrations — every image on the page is real product UI

The next step

Selling expertise that clients cannot evaluate? I put the work and the awkward questions on the page, in that order.

Website · $1,190 to $2,790 · 2–4 weeks

Talk about a similar project ↗

More work

All work ↗

Laast.ioWebsite + product

XeriaWebsite