It started with a bold, uncompromising post by Rikki Teeters declaring that the "UI/UX Designer" title should have never existed. The discussion exploded, but what truly caught my eye was the reply from the man who coined "User Experience" himself, Don Norman. See the LinkedIn post.

Their exchange reignited one of the longest-running debates in our community. It’s a conversation I’ve followed for years, and seeing these two perspectives collide prompted me to finally synthesize my own thoughts on why this issue is so much more than just semantics.

A Flawed Title

Rikki Teeters’ argument is simple: the "UI/UX Designer" title is a semantic failure that diminishes both disciplines. As he puts it, "If you tell me you’re a UI/UX designer, I immediately assume you are an expert at neither UI nor UX. Pick one."

True expertise in either field is a full-time job. While the hybrid title might work out of necessity in a startup, it's a compromise, not an ideal.

Two Disciplines, One Designer?

The two roles require completely different mindsets:

UX Design is the invisible strategy.

It’s the foundational work that precedes any visual design. Rooted in research, psychology, and data analysis, UX is about understanding human needs and architecting a logical, intuitive path to a solution. The UX designer is the architect who draws the blueprints for a house, ensuring the flow, structure, and functionality meet the inhabitants' needs long before anyone thinks about the color of the walls.

UI Design is the tangible craft.

It’s the visual and interactive layer that brings the strategy to life. UI focuses on aesthetics, brand expression, and the look and feel of every button, icon, and color. The UI designer is the interior designer who chooses the paint, furniture, and lighting to make the house beautiful and pleasant to live in.

The classic cake analogy holds true: UX is the recipe and the structure of the cake; UI is the frosting. Teeters’ point that there isn’t enough time in a day to do both well resonates because trying to bake the cake and perfectly decorate it at the same time often leads to a sloppy result.

Why Is This Title Everywhere?

So why is this flawed title so common? It comes down to a corporate culture obsessed with tangible results. In the rush to ship products, the visible UI—the polished screens—gets all the attention, while the slower, invisible work of foundational UX research is often sidelined.

This is the core issue that both Teeters and Norman are reacting to, whether the solution is building taller fences between disciplines or tearing them all down.

A Path to Clarity

So where does that leave us? As I see it, the alternative titles emerging in the industry offer a path forward.

Product Designer:

This title feels like a pragmatic evolution. It acknowledges that modern design is intertwined with business strategy. A Product Designer is a versatile professional who bridges user needs (UX), visual execution (UI), and product goals—a role shaped by the reality of how modern tech companies work.

Experience Designer (XD):

This is the philosophical correction that Norman himself now champions. It’s his attempt to reclaim the original, holistic meaning of "experience" and pull it away from its narrow, screen-focused interpretation. An Experience Designer’s focus is on the entire journey, across all touchpoints, both digital and physical.

It’s More Than Just a Title

Ultimately, this debate is about defining our value. But clarifying our titles doesn’t mean we should work in silos. A great designer thinks in systems. Whether focused on UI or UX, he always keeps an eye on the entire process. He knows that every decision, from the color of a button to the structure of a user flow, impacts the final product.

Are we simply screen painters, or are we strategic problem-solvers?

For me, the answer is clear. By using a language that respects our distinct skills, we educate our colleagues and shift the conversation from just "how it looks" to "how it works" and, most importantly, "how it feels."