Design & UX is a Medium publication with short pieces on interface details, icons, buttons, and responsive design.
HN commenters find some articles useful, like the button to nowhere, but one complains Medium posts draw conclusions that don't follow from the science they cite.
The apparent origin of the idea, the "button to nowhere" that they linked to in the story is also a good read: https://medium.com/design-ux/77d911517318
From a user perspective, I think there are both good and bad ways how this technique can be used:
I actually like the way Sendwithus used it - as part of a very very early "pre-alpha" version where you're not yet interested in providing a reliant service and just want to get a feel for the demand. As a user you're informed early-on that you're looking at a version in development - so you will not be surprised by missing or incomplete features and will maybe even motivated to provide additional feedback.
The downside of this approach is of course that the data you're gathering is really only good for that - an early overview. Your test group will likely be very different from the actual people who will later use the service. The usage patterns will be as well.
The second way to use the technique is how Nick Kishfy describes it in the "button to nowhere" article. In that approach, "buttons to nowhere" are not just inserted into an early preview/development version, but into the actual product as a continuous part of the development process.
This would solve all of the above problems and would give you a much richer set of data over a much longer time span - but from a user perspective that would be the worst thing possible.
Having additional strong portfolio pieces definitely helps, and yes quality over quantity. Whether it will be enough for Google & Co, I don't know. Usually these companies require more experience, if you want to work as a UX designer for them. But don't let that discourage you - definitely work on your sideprojects - you never know.
Also, it wasn't clear from your post what you want to focus on initially as a designer - more on this topic here: https://medium.com/design-ux/3623c3243aa6
Again, judging from your portfolio only, it looks like you should maybe focus on UI design first, as this seems to be your strong point and find a job in a UX specific agency, so you can see and learn what other UX practioners do, learn more about UCD etc.
I'm sure there must be UX only agencies in Australia or startups - a quick Google search came back with
http://www.stamfordinteractive.com.au/join-our-team/
http://www.lbi.com/au/
If you could work for LBi for example, you could maybe transfer more easily to the US at a later stage.
Other tips:
* Get on Dribbble (that's how some UI designers get hired / headhunted)
* Start blogging about design, what you're passionate about etc - helps later on when recruiters review your portfolio
Anyway, keep us updated...
Not marketing advice per se, but I highly recommend subscribing to Hack Design [1] and giving more thought to not just the visual design and presentation of your apps, but also the audience. My personal opinion is that non-game indie devs need a niche, what's yours? If you're selling to school kids, then find a good hook. For example, public middle schools in California require Spanish fluency. Sell to the parents of those kids perhaps? Or if you're going after the international tourist, try to combine the language skills with travel info some how: "We'll teach you Spanish before you're plane lands!"
Also, I'm sure I'm not the first one to say it but you've gotta move to iOS7. Do the easy thing and try using all native color scheme. As a design exercise [2] it will help you focus on content.
Good luck!
[1] http://hackdesign.org/
[2] https://medium.com/design-ux/7348987453e3
Uh oh. It really does look like [1] is ripping off [2]. They've reordered the list a bit and added a couple.
If all other things were equal, [1] might be slightly more substantive. But not if they ripped off another post. HN has a strong bias in favor of original sources (and simple fairness!) so I think we'd better change the url. If anyone wants to make a case for the opposite, we can always change it back.
[1] http://designrope.com/design/find-stock-photos-dont-suck/
[2] https://medium.com/design-ux/62ae4bcbe01b
Edit: there is other, much more obvious blogspam at [1], so I think this is the right call. Thanks dirtyaura.
This is another Medium article about cognition and user interfaces that seems to be based on speculative assertions about user behavior. And they aren't convincing.
https://www.google.com/search?&q=cognitive+load+site:medium.com
Claims about UI/UX regarding 'cognitive load' based solely on conjecture sound like pure pseudoscience. The 'Hollow Icons' article was an egregious example:
https://medium.com/design-ux/a93647e5a44b
If you've accepted the premise that cognitive load theory is going to be a major part of your design/ui decisions, and you're going to invoke it, then I think some meaningful testing is necessary.
It seems like Medium has become a magnet for articles that reference some science and then go on to draw conclusions that simply do not follow from that science, yet present the conclusions as if they do. The hollow icon article is another good example: https://medium.com/design-ux/a93647e5a44b.