If you already share useful advice for free, can you still turn it into a product? Refactoring UI offers one answer: organize scattered tips about the same problem into learning materials with a clear deliverable.
The audience is particularly well defined: developers who can write code, want better-looking interfaces, and would like to make the improvements themselves. That description guides the examples, the free content, and the paid offer.
Who it serves
Developer Adam Wathan and designer Steve Schoger created Refactoring UI to help developers improve their interface design. The product website offers a free sample and sells a book, videos, and related resources.
For anyone running a personal site, the useful question is: what can readers already do, and where do they get stuck? Following that gap makes it easier to choose topics worth developing.
How free content leads to the product
On his personal website, Steve describes sharing design tips on Twitter and demonstrating interface redesigns on YouTube. Both formats let readers see how he diagnoses and solves a design problem before buying anything.
A possible reader journey is see a tip → decide whether it applies → examine the complete resource → compare packages. This explains how the content and product pages connect. We do not have the backend data needed to say how many purchases each channel generated.
My interpretation is that a free tip delivers a small, complete piece of value. Readers can judge whether the explanation works for them before deciding if they need a more comprehensive resource. A personal site could likewise publish one complete example before packaging a larger set.
What $99 and $149 bought
On September 14, 2026, the official site listed a $99 base package with a PDF book and three videos. The $149 complete package added component references, color and type guidance, icons, and other resources. Both prices were shown before applicable local taxes.
The distinction, as I read it, is how much help the buyer gets while doing the work: one package teaches the method; the other adds materials to consult during implementation. When offering tiers of your own product, ask which specific step the higher price saves the buyer.
How it began, and what it required
In his 2018 year-end review, published December 27, Adam wrote that the two began collaborating that summer and launched between July and December. Production occupied nearly all of his full-time work; he wrote the material while Steve did much of the visual work.
The same retrospective reports more than 6,000 copies sold in the first two weeks. That is the creator's account of sales at that time. It also describes Adam's earlier courses, articles, talks, and podcast work. This was a substantial project built on an existing body of work.
For a first attempt, a smaller deliverable is more realistic. Finish one result a reader can use independently, then record how long it took to make, where readers struggled, and what revisions cost.
One experiment for a personal website
Pick an existing article with a complete process and turn it into a downloadable example pack: sample input, a finished result, a checklist, and clear usage steps. Ask people with the same need to try it. Note where they stop and what further help they request.
That experiment tests whether the material is usable. It can also help you decide whether the next offer should be a template, a setup service, or a tool. The question I take from this case is: which problem I have already solved could become something another person can use immediately?
Original sources
- Refactoring UI product and pricing, checked September 14, 2026.
- Steve Schoger's website, checked September 14, 2026.
- Adam Wathan, 2018 Year in Review, published December 27, 2018; checked September 14, 2026.
This study uses public pages and the creator's retrospective. We did not buy or test the paid materials.
English translation published October 19, 2026. The original Chinese study was published September 14, 2026; dated facts and prices above retain their original verification dates.