Now, this may just be my very specific social media algorithm, and you may not have even seen this. But there is a new subculture that is rapidly growing where people are creating girly DIY tech objects.

I can’t open my phone without seeing ‘girlified’ tech creations like camera hair clips, Polly Pocket laptops, seashell laptops, or even Tamawatchies – (a DIY Tamagotchi watch).

I am aware that if you have not come across this section of TikTok or Instagram, it may seem a bit ridiculous or crazy. But I personally think there is a lot to say about the “girlyfication of tech gadgets” and its relationship to how we express our personal style and taste through fashion.

So first, the trend.

I only discovered DIY whimsical girly tech on social media about a month ago. However, it really started gaining momentum earlier this year. A lot of sources, including Forbes, Teen Vogue, The Cut, and many others, credit young TikTok user @ubeboobey as the catalyst for making this type of content a thing. For instance, Teen Vogue writes:

“The 22-year-old Londoner, whose real name is Annike Tan, went viral earlier this year for her “mermaid cyberdeck,” essentially a DIY computer built out of a repurposed clutch, wood, gilt hardware, and a handful of chips and wires. The terminal’s idiosyncratic look hit a nerve. Why shouldn’t a laptop look like it was scavenged from a shipwreck? And why couldn’t you make your own?”

@ubeboobeyAs for learning, there’s a cyberdeck playlist on Youtube that really helped me out when I built my one! https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLL_LJbvALwvO0SkM3YjE5O2rs6sPIkBoA&si=-ZnXqpzIgu-7QTXK #electronics #technology #futuristic #cyberpunk #fy

Tiktok failed to load.

Enable 3rd party cookies or use another browser

Since then, other girly tech creators have amassed hundreds of thousands of followers for similar creations. Some of my favourites include @mewtru, @meshtimes, @computer___angel, and @emmaorhun.

It’s worth noting that a lot of this content is focused around girly ‘cyberdecks’ specifically, which Forbes defines as “custom-made computers with a Cyberpunk-inspired design. According to The Cyberdeck Cafe, most projects involve a single-board computer (such as a Raspberry Pi) but can also include laptops, tablets, smartphones and smartwatches. The term was originally coined by William Gibson in the 1984 novel Neuromancer.”

However, as creators like Computer Angel and Emma Orhun highlight, DIY girly tech does not need to be limited to cyberdecks specifically. Personally, I think it can be any kind of novel tech gadget that you can customise to your own aesthetic preferences.

Now let’s talk about how this subculture social media trend actually connects to fashion.

Well, firstly, I need to say that there is so much we could analyse and talk about with this movement beyond fashion.

We could pin it down to a collective rejection of cold, corporate tech giants and a new way of taking back agency over our tech devices. We could say it reflects a desire to experience the tech future we were promised during the Y2K futurist era or through the early 2000s media we grew up with that featured so much fun and imaginative technology. We could even argue that this girly DIY tech movement is taking off because it is a way to gain a following on social media – that it simply makes for trendy, engaging content.

There are so many different angles to explore. However, the part I am most interested in is the connection to fashion, and specifically how this trend has become a new avenue for expressing personal style and taste.

In this great Forbes piece, Tru Narla is quoted saying she thinks this trend “makes tech feel more playful, expressive and personal instead of just purely utilitarian,” she says. “For a long time, a lot of consumer tech has been designed to look sleek, minimal and neutral, which also makes it feel cold and repetitive. Seeing electronics integrated into bag charms, accessories and other feminine-adjacent objects makes it feel more inviting and reflective of personal taste.”

Similarly, in the same piece, Jenny Zhang, aka Computer Angel – the creator of the viral chunky white clip that doubles as a fully functioning video camera – is also quoted. She says, “It’s not so much about tech trending more feminine, and more about designing tech that properly integrates into our lives,” she says. “On the surface, making bag charms just looks like adding carabiners, but it’s actually form that enables function. Because when I can hang it on my bag, when it’s cute, when it represents me, I actually use it.”

In this DAZED piece, Zhang is also quoted saying being able to add personal style to our tech gadgets is important because “In the past decade, we’ve seen everything turn more minimalistic. It’s more profitable for these big companies to have tech that can be sold to everyone, but because it can be sold to everyone, it is designed for no one”.

What I take from these quotes is that there has been a collective realisation that our tech gadgets do not have to be homogenised and simple. They can be highly personalised and become an extension of our outfits and aesthetic preferences. In doing so, they allow us to romanticise our lives a little more and spark joy through creating and using these maximalist, girly tech pieces.

I am pretty sure Devon Lee Carlson gave the example of using a cute phone case to elevate an outfit on my guilty pleasure podcast, Better Half.

I see the girlyfication of consumer tech as essentially the same thing, just taken one step further because the technology itself is designed in a fun and expressive way from the start.

So how does this really connect to everyday fashion?

Well, I think girly tech will affect fashion in the same way that the “accessorising your accessories” trend has impacted fashion.

@brooke_behaylo2026 fashion trend incoming… bag charm tour⭐️🫧🍒 #bagcharms #2026trends #fashioninspo #coolcharms #schoolbag @Saie @drinkpoppi

Tiktok failed to load.

Enable 3rd party cookies or use another browser

Non-tech-enabled trinkets and keychains are so popular because they can add personality to an outfit. They can signal what fashion club or community you are a part of, communicate your taste level, offer a way to buy into a brand you love without purchasing a full fashion piece, and act as an analogue way to spark joy – which is such a zeitgeisty concept at the moment.

I think girly tech is almost just a new subcategory or next stage of the trinket trend or the accessorising your accessories trend. Now, not only can you personalise your outfit with a cute keychain, but that cute keychain can now have a built-in camera or some other technological functionality.

To be honest, I think we are already seeing this in mass fashion. For example, we have just seen the Casetify X Tamagotchi collab, and I think I mentioned this in my Cute Tech video, but WGSN predicted that “that Kawaii” culture is set to take off in tech and bring a more unserious and cute vibe to technology in the West.”

To me, this all makes sense. Everyone is loving analogue activities, analogue media, and retro technology like digital cameras, iPod Nanos, and wired headphones. When you couple that with the charm trend and the fact that people love personalised products, it is no wonder that girly tech has emerged as a subtrend within all of this and become a new way to customise both yourself and your devices.

For instance, as this NDTV piece writes, “For many younger creators, cyberdecks function less like practical replacements for laptops and more like extensions of personality. They are the tech equivalent of customising your bedroom, your tote bag or your Pinterest board. In an age where every device looks nearly identical, individuality itself has become aspirational.”

Looking to the future

I do also want to say that beyond just categorising the girly tech trend simply within the trinket trend, I do think there could be deeper implications of this movement for fashion.

We have to acknowledge that this movement offers a way to personalise tech items like never before. As I said in my mini reel on this topic, “Just as our fashion choices communicate aspects of our identity before we ever speak, our technology choices are becoming another way to do the same. Therefore, the earbuds you choose, the tech bag charm you wear – they all send subtle signals about your personality, taste, and attention to detail.”

Therefore, looking ahead, perhaps we may enter a future where offering a variety of aesthetics as well as functionality are valued equally, regardless of the product. We may see more tech products designed specifically for fashion-conscious consumers and more fashion products designed with technology integrated into them.

This could mean more brands emerge like Nothing or iKKO Tech, or that larger technology companies begin offering new and creative ways to personalise our devices to suit different aesthetic preferences.

Overall, I am really interested to see where all of this goes. Will DIY girly tech be a fleeting, novelty content trend, or will it leave a more permanent mark on fashion and eventually hit the mainstream?

Let me know your thoughts!

Maybe this is just my specific algorithm, and probably most of you still think of Google as nothing more than the go-to search engine. However, what I am taking away from all of the Google x fashion headlines is that the tech giant is becoming an even bigger force in fashion.

Basically, you could say that Google’s fashion takeover is heating up because Google is shifting from being just a search engine into a kind of AI-powered shopping assistant.

As Vogue recently outlined, Google’s recent updates are undoubtedly going to have a massive impact on online shopping and, therefore, online fashion shopping. That’s why, for this week’s YouTube video, I wanted to explore whether Google’s fashion takeover is a good thing or a bad thing, and whether we should be excited or concerned about all of this.

Recent Fashion News

The best way to start is to highlight this great Instagram post from @allthingsfashiontech. It highlights some of the biggest fashion news stories from this year alone that Google has been at the centre of.

Some of my favourites include the news that the OTB Group, the parent company of Diesel, collaborated with Google to launch a new personalised shopping experience using Google Cloud’s Virtual Try-On API. There have also been more details released on the designs of the Google, Warby Parker, and Gentle Monster “intelligent eyewear” collaborations. There’s also GAP’s partnership with Google’s Gemini to offer instant checkout, the partnership between Google Pixel and Highsnobiety, and, of course, Google’s own recent updates, including its Universal Cart and Agentic Commerce.

There are probably a handful of other headlines I could highlight, and I expect we are only going to see more and more news like this as the year goes on.

But your first question might be: why are we seeing news like this, and why is it even a big deal?

Well, to explain it in the simplest way possible – because, honestly, I am still wrapping my head around all of this – Google has, of course, been a powerful force in fashion shopping for years. But more recently, fashion brands are increasingly partnering with Google because Google is transforming from just a search engine into an AI-powered shopping and discovery platform.

This Business of Fashion piece by Marc Bain explains it really well, and I recommend reading it. It explains how “Search is getting Its biggest overhaul in decades”. Specifically, “The google upgrades now allow it to respond more like an AI chatbot rather than just returning a list of links.”

So now you can ask follow-up questions directly in the AI Overview, input image or video files to help your search, and Google has also recently introduced a universal shopping cart and expanded its virtual try-on tools.

Now, you might be thinking: great, more updates from Google. No big deal. This happens all the time, and it’s not really going to change anything for fashion brands or us as fashion consumers.

But actually, these updates could change quite a lot.

Because Google has really honed in on its AI and agentic AI features, it means it can do so much more than just help people find products. It can help shoppers discover trends, compare items, receive personalised recommendations, and even complete parts of the shopping journey automatically. Basically, as agentic AI evolves, Google’s systems will increasingly act like personal shopping assistants that can understand preferences, research options, and recommend purchases, making Google an increasingly important gateway between fashion brands and customers.

In other words, these updates are going to have a massive impact on how we shop for and discover fashion products online.

As the McKinsey State of Fashion 2026 report outlined: “AI is transforming how people shop. Customers are turning to large language models to search for products, compare offerings, and receive tailored recommendations. Some are even using agents as style and wardrobe consultants (these agents give advice on what to buy and where to buy it). And these shifts make AI chatbot responses the new SEO.”

This means that if fashion brands don’t adapt to this new online landscape, they could risk not even being discovered by consumers. Therefore, my take is that a lot of big fashion brands could be partnering with Google to ensure they remain competitive.

For instance, this CNBC article about GAP’s partnership with Google’s Gemini is a good example of this. “It says the partnership “comes as more and more shoppers move away from traditional search and toward artificial intelligence platforms for product discovery, forcing retailers to rethink their approach to marketing to ensure they’re staying competitive and not missing out on customer demand.”

It goes on to say, “If a shopper is looking for a sundress on an AI platform, for example, and a company offers a relevant product, but the data isn’t readable by an LLM, the brand could miss out on the sale.”

There are other examples of brands making sure they are equipped for these online changes, including Dick’s Sporting Goods, Nike, Boohoo, and I’m sure the list goes on.

To be honest, all of this makes sense. It’s big business and it’s big tech. But as fashion consumers, should we be worried about this?

The Concerns

If AI shopping assistants become the main way people discover clothing, then Google’s algorithms will have enormous influence over which brands get attention and which ones get ignored. Therefore, one of the most obvious issues with this is that it could become harder for smaller brands that only sell online to be discovered if AI consistently favours larger, better-known companies.

(Worth noting: Google provides the digital shelf space, but all fashion brands must supply the standardised digital labels in the backend to be picked up. If a business does not actively format its data for AI consumption, it effectively becomes invisible to modern search engines.)

Maybe it could also create less diversity in fashion choices if recommendation systems push similar products to large groups of people. Could it mean more people start dressing the same if they searched “what should I wear to a wedding?” and received similar answers?

There is also concern about the impact this could have on trends and fashion consumer behaviour overall. For instance, in the past, fashion trends were shaped by designers, magazines, retailers, celebrities, and consumers. As we move into the future, AI recommendation systems seem set to play a bigger and bigger role. We are already seeing this in the way brands are prioritising Google’s AI experience when it comes to their online presence.

Also, in terms of consumer behaviour, The Interline – where I am now working as a Social Editor, and whose podcast you should check out – actually wrote something really interesting in a recent newsletter. It said “when Google changes anything about the way search operates, it has an impact on the act of storytelling and selling online. And, needless to say, when they basically overhaul search to be something that barely resembles itself, then, well, shopping is about to undergo a radical overhaul as well.”

The newsletter goes on to say there is a fear emerging that “people don’t want to actually interact with the internet any more, and they’d prefer to let AI do it for them.” Also, “the more AI layers the company puts between users and real content on the internet the risk is that more fashion consumers will just allow AI to do shopping for them.”

The concern here is that people become more passive in their fashion discovery.

I would also argue that these kinds of updates are a bit of a shame for smaller fashion tech start-ups, particularly those focused on AI try-on technology that rely on separate apps. For instance, why would a user download and use a dedicated app if they can do something similar through Google for free? Maybe this wipes out some of the need for various fashion app start-ups that could have developed these experiences in different and interesting ways.

However...

This is, of course, only one, somewhat negative, way of looking at the impact these updates could have on fashion, when in reality there is much more nuance to it.

Firstly, it’s still too soon to tell what the real impact on fashion will be.

Not that long ago, Business of Fashion published a piece questioning whether fashion consumers would ever let AI assistants shop for them. In that article, they said, “While consumers might hand over shopping for commodity items like batteries to a bot, it’s less certain they’ll work as well for categories like fashion and beauty, where factors such as emotion, brand perception and personal preference are major drivers.”

Additionally, there was a more recent piece from YouGov.

They surveyed 1,000 US adults, and apparently only 6% of respondents said they would use chatbots like Gemini or ChatGPT to help with their fashion choices. A much larger percentage still preferred more traditional methods, such as getting recommendations from friends, browsing social platforms, or visiting brand websites directly.

Marc Bain again from Business of Fashion also said it is still “hard to predict how significant these changes will be for the way consumers shop for fashion in the long term. He said “Online shopping is a fragmented experience of which search is just one part. Consumers frequently jump back and forth among search, social media and e-commerce, as well as venturing out to physical stores, before finally completing a transaction. That won’t change.”

Personally, my take is that it’s not like people who are into fashion only use Google for inspiration. I get inspiration from physical stores, physical media, friends, people online, social media, and search. That’s not going to change just because Google has made the online shopping experience easier.

To conclude, I think the main takeaway is that it is worth knowing that if you use these new search tools to find fashion online, you may not be seeing all the brands you possibly could.

So, like most things on the internet involving AI, it’s up to us on an individual level to decide how we interact with these updates.

Overall, I personally think there is no doubt that Google’s new AI shopping tools are going to change how a lot of people shop online. To be honest, they are going to facilitate easier product discovery, better personalisation, and more efficient shopping. They could even provide new opportunities for niche brands to reach the right audiences – it’s actually too early to tell what the real impact will be.

Of course, if fashion consumers increasingly ask AI what to wear, what to buy, and which brands are worth considering, then the companies behind those AI systems will have influence in fashion. Long term, that could have a genuine impact on what we wear.

But, like with anything, if we are mindful of it, then I think the short answer is that it’s not necessarily something to be worried about. It’s something to be aware of and something to watch, whether you’re a brand owner or a consumer.

We are only just beginning to see what it means when algorithms become tastemakers in fashion.

Part of that comes from maturing out of high street fast fashion, becoming more drawn to smaller digital-native brands (Gimaguas, Peachy Den, Belle Anna etc.), and simply spending most of my IRL shopping time browsing vintage shops and markets rather than ‘regular’ fashion stores.

I think most 20-something fashion lovers can relate to shopping this way and, for the most part, it works.

The issue, however, is that this approach can often feel scattered and chaotic — screenshotting a small brand from Instagram, then frantically scrolling back through your camera roll when you want to find it again, sending links to yourself over email (something I do regularly), or simply forgetting about brands altogether and missing new drops or sales.

These struggles are complex and universal, but co-founders Ellie Konsker and Sreya Halder believe they have created a solution with their new fashion tech application, The Mall App.

An app where users can save any fashion brand, receive updates on new drops and sales, and discover new labels all in one place.

Ellie actually reached out to me after reading my first Substack post to explain more about what she and Sreya are building, and I have to say I was instantly intrigued.

Today, there are plenty of fashion-tech startups offering shopping solutions ranging from virtual try-ons to digitised wardrobes. However, even with a keen interest in the space, many of these applications can feel overly complex or disconnected from how people actually shop. What struck me about The Mall App, however, was its simplicity. It’s a digital space where users can manually save all the brands they love, making shopping feel easier, more organised, and genuinely more fun.

Sreya used a handful of fitting analogies when describing the platform: a Wikipedia for brands, Shopify for shopping, Letterbox for shopping. But essentially, as Ellie summarised, they are building “the world’s first online shopping mall”.

As well as being tech entrepreneurs, both founders are genuinely tapped into fashion.

Though Sreya – the more tech-focused of the pair, yet still very much a certified fashion girl online – has a degree in computer science and could have easily gone into a “traditional role of just being an AI engineer at Google,” she explains. Her personal interest in aesthetics and art pushed her towards bringing tech into the creative world instead.

She has worked across film, VR, and AR at brands like DreamWorks. “The thing that I loved the most is that I got to work with highly creative people, like artists, animators, creative directors, and I got to build technology that actually empowered them.”

Ellie comes from a more direct fashion background, with experience spanning marketing at Tom Ford to celebrity styling. Her motivation for creating the app stems from her own frustrations with shopping and the desire to create real value in the world through fashion. “The fashion industry is very outdated,” she explains. “It’s also very fragmented, so from a consumer perspective it’s very frustrating. The app makes the shopping experience genuinely fun and interesting, and before it was a massive headache for me.”

The aesthetic eye of both founders also stands out to me and seems to be a huge part of what will make the app resonate with a fashion audience – it’s clean, simple, and fashion-forward.

“What I’ve learned in my fashion experience is that people will never buy based on one aspect alone,” says Ellie. “What they really resonate with is aesthetic.”

Prior to founding the mall Ellie had a sustainable fashion start up and even admitted that when consumers would buy from the platform, “it did not matter how sustainable the piece was, people were going to prioritise what the piece looked like”. Therefore she knew that the aesthetic appeal of their app, branding and content needed to shine and be aspirational to resonate with their target consumer.

“In the first prototype of the app I wanted it to feel very gamified and futuristic,” Sreya admits. “The first iteration was inspired by Pokémon, it had pixels everywhere. I wanted to create something that felt like an immersive world that you existed in. However, that’s so different to how the fashion industry likes to brand themselves, which is much more elevated, chic, simple. So it actually took a lot of refining. When Ellie and I started working together we went through the entire brand. She really understands the industry and what actually sells to fashion lovers, so we married the two worlds into something that felt more tangible and magazine-like.”

In addition to the clear solution and aesthetic appeal that The Mall app holds, from my perspective, this kind of organised shopping experience also feels perfectly suited to the current state of fashion – particularly in offering better solutions for discoverability, ease, and IRL connection.

Discoverability:

It’s no secret that digital media right now is incredibly fragmented, algorithm-driven, and oversaturated. In fashion specifically, this has created a culture where people are constantly collecting inspiration but rarely organising it in an intentional or searchable way – often leading consumers to stick to the same familiar brands or simply miss out on discovering new ones.

“I didn’t really love the idea of having to follow everything that I cared about Instagram and check their pages constantly for updates, it was just a very manual process and I was honestly kind of jealous other creative outlets having their own platforms, like Spotify, Letterboxd, Goodreads,” explains Sreya.

The Mall App, however, utilises several AI systems to create a highly specific algorithm that matches every brand to similar ones users may not have discovered otherwise. “So you might start out only knowing maybe a handful of big names. But as soon as you enter the app we surface the most interesting names with our wild card feature and you can shuffle through that and find brands you have never heard of.”

Ease:

Within this ever-growing sea of content, consumers are also increasingly turning to technology to make fashion discovery feel less overwhelming and manual. Rather than endlessly scrolling, many are leaning towards AI-powered recommendations and more curated shopping experiences to simplify the process.

With the Mall, “there’s no longer a need to screenshot Instagram or TikTok posts, instead you are able to take control. What tracking a brand looks like right now is following them on Instagram, missing things because of the algorithm or signing up for newsletters which you also don’t see all the time. This is now a way to track your favourite brands in real time,” says Ellie.

IRL Connection:

Probably the most exciting thing is that, though the app is digital, it has the potential to act as a vessel to facilitate IRL shopping experiences and activations that can benefit both brands and consumers.

Looking ahead, the pair want to build a place where people can connect with the brands they love and fellow shoppers, and where this connection can lead to in-person experiences.

“Although we are an app we are very big on in-person activation and community building. Eventually we’d like to bring a brand’s top customers to them IRL or something along those lines – Really the opportunities are endless,” Ellie explains.

Only a few days after speaking with the pair, Google announced its new “Universal Cart” feature – a new AI-powered shopping tool designed to bring consumers’ entire online shopping journey into one place. I couldn’t help but wonder what both Ellie and Sreya might make of this announcement given it happened almost at the exact same time as their launch. So it felt fitting to get the pair’s take on how their app differs for fashion lovers.

The Universal Cart “doesn’t solve the core problem of the fact that shoppers (and specifically fashion lovers) have no place to organise the physical brands they shop from. They still have to remember a brand, type it into Google, and browse on their site. We are eliminating that entirely by making it simple to save a brand to your mall (no messy browser bookmarks or links in your notes app) and surfacing updates on sales and restocks that you would have missed, so going through their catalog is much easier. Multiple carts saved in one place is a feature in our product, not the product,” says Sreya.

Ellie shares the same sentiment, adding: “Google’s Universal Cart is simply a checkout tool, helping you buy something you’ve already found. But there’s still no way to track all the brands you love in real-time. Right now, that looks like a mess of Safari tabs, hundreds of email newsletters, notes apps, and random screenshots in your camera roll. The Mall is an entirely different category as it’s the first shopping destination built entirely around the shopper.”

Learn more about the Mall App on their socials.

It’s not exactly new news that Instagram has completely changed fashion – from the way it’s communicated to the way it’s understood and even designed. But one of the changes I find most interesting is how digital media and content have birthed this entirely new category of fashion brand: specifically, the Instagram-first “it-girl” fashion brand.

I’m talking about brands like Paloma Wool, Peachy Den, Gimaguas and NHO Girl – the list goes on. In many ways, these brands came from Instagram, as they were able to accelerate their growth monumentally through content.

Not only did these brands build cult communities through social media, but they did it so successfully that they now hold real authority – at least within my corner of fashion. They are now the ones dictating what we consider cool or desirable.

For this week’s YouTube video, I wanted to talk about what we can learn from these brands about building a cult fashion label online. But I also wanted to question whether the window to create an “it-girl brand” through Instagram has already passed… because given the current changes within the intersection of media and culture, maybe it has.

So first, let’s briefly talk about the Instagram pipeline.

Pre-digital media, the barriers to building a successful fashion brand were incredibly high. An old Fashionista article estimated that a designer would need between $2–3 million just to get a clothing line off the ground. And beyond the money, you also needed the co-sign of editors, department stores, celebrities, and traditional fashion gatekeepers just to gain visibility.

But when Instagram arrived, aspiring designers and brand owners suddenly had a way to bypass all of that and gain global exposure at a fraction of the cost and time. And honestly, that’s still true today.

What I find increasingly fascinating – and this is also something I’ve learned from working in fashion media – is that digital content can give life to a brand universe that barely even exists yet. You can curate this incredibly aspirational world that people become obsessed with, when in reality it might just be one person behind a screen building an idea.

But, to be fair, that’s probably a whole separate video. And it’s also not something I want to reduce these it-girl brands to, because brands like these do have real products, communities, and sometimes physical spaces behind the content – so it’s not all smoke and mirrors.

But essentially, Instagram gave brand owners the opportunity to build fully realised brand universes using little more than iPhone photos and a strong visual language.

And the success of these brands has been huge. Paloma Wool is now a regular on the fashion week calendar, Gimaguas is stocked in Selfridges, and Peachy Den opened a store in one of the hottest locations in London.

@peachydenour soho girlies ootd <3

Tiktok failed to load.

Enable 3rd party cookies or use another browser

Again, I really do think these brands hold a lot of authority in fashion now. Like honestly, Gimaguas could release the most random product imaginable and suddenly everyone would decide it’s cool.

So firstly, let’s talk about what we can learn from these brands.

I honestly think these lessons apply whether you want to grow a fashion brand, a creative project, or even just your own fashion profile online. There are also a lot more lessons I could have mentioned, but these are the ones that stood out to me.

1. First, build a world, not just a clothing line.

Brands succeed because people connect emotionally to the mood, lifestyle, or archetype they represent. Personally, I love brands like Peachy Den and Gimaguas because I love the type of girl they represent and what I imagine her lifestyle to be.

2. But how do you actually build a world?

Well first, decide on your point of view. (Honestly, this applies to almost everything now because there’s so much noise and competition online.) You need to know what you want to say, stick to it, and communicate that through a strong visual language.

3. Moodboarding.

And this is where moodboarding becomes so powerful. Some fashion brands have practically been built from moodboards alone. Something these it-girl brands have shown is that content does not need to be perfectly polished. We already know that iPhone imagery can perform just as well – if not better – than traditional glossy campaigns.

4. Then, of course, consistency is everything.

Repeat the POV visually, but also in every part of the content – because repetition is what creates recognisability.

5. Create an “in-group” feeling.

When I first discovered NHO, they felt niche, culturally ahead of the mainstream, and slightly hard to access – which is exactly what made them feel cool. You can build this “in-group” feeling by casting interesting real people instead of traditional models, leaning into founder personality, and developing a visible point of view and taste identity.

6. With product: start small, but focus on creating recognisable silhouettes.

Then showcase those products repeatedly across different forms of content, because repetition builds brand memory.

7. Celebrate your community from the start.

Repost customers, feature friends of the brand, encourage organic styling.

8. Operate like a media company.

Share playlists, art references, interviews, travel imagery, and cultural inspirations that communicate your perspective beyond just the product itself.

HOWEVER, even though these lessons brought it-girl brands success, is this kind of growth even still possible in today’s media and culture climate?

There is so much changing right now in media and culture. There is so much more competition, so much more content, plus social platforms are constantly updating to better sell to us – for instance, Instagram recently introduced affiliate links to Reels. On top of this, we are all so sick of empty content, and all of this is really changing culture.

This great Vogue article from Amy O’Brien sums it up well. It talked about how culture is beginning to push back against algorithm-driven internet culture, and the article references the rise of third spaces, community, anti-AI slop, intellectual influencers, long-form content, the return to craft, and even the idea that having no followers is becoming aspirational.

And one of the most interesting points was this idea that in 2026, “appearing to transcend the algorithm” has become the ultimate luxury – for both brands and consumers.

The piece also discusses how Gen Z increasingly feels constantly marketed to online, and this has created distrust in social media and the brands that rely too heavily on it.

Also, I loved this YouTube video by Rian Phin.

She opens by discussing how “dematerialisation” in fashion is finally over and there are no more “phone clothes” on the runway.

Phin is referring to the fact that there was a long period where designers would create highly visual and over-the-top looks, knowing they would be consumed via a phone screen. Phin’s take is that these designs were specifically targeted at Gen Z consumers to get them to become loyal to the brand and one day buy from them.

However, now consumers really recognise this runway gimmick and we are no longer sold simply by bold aesthetics or novel social media content – for the most part.

In 2026, we want the content to lead somewhere actually good or to a product that has actually been created with incredible craft.

So with all of this happening, how do you take the lessons of the Instagram era while adapting to the cultural shifts happening right now?

Personally, I don’t think brands are going fully offline anytime soon. But I do think there’s a shift away from obsessing over the algorithm and towards quality over quantity, intentional storytelling, and creating things AI can’t easily replicate.

With this, the main thing I’ve been thinking about is craft.

Honestly, the biggest flex right now is craftsmanship, quality, process, and physical skill – because not everyone can do this. Anyone can have a viral image; only a few have the patience to hone a craft. Even if a product is simple, if it’s beautifully made and backed by genuine craft, people can feel that.

I also think good content increasingly needs to lead to something tangible: a physical product, a real-world experience, a pop-up, an event, or at least some kind of offline IRL connection. As journalist Sara McAlpine said: “You only become immune to the volatility of algorithms when your brand is grounded in something real.”

Fundamentally, I think digital media is still great marketing and is still the number one tool to propel a brand, but it can no longer be the entirety of the brand itself.

Trail Sonified is the UK’s first club night powered by trail running.

Using ‘sonification’ – the process of converting raw data and metrics into non-speech audio or musical elements – Merrell gathered Strava data from run clubs across the country and sonified that data into a set-list. Meaning the music of the activation was not produced, but literally written by nature and the trail itself.

Creative director at London-based creative agency Brandnation, Joe Murgatroyd, was responsible for bringing the sonification concept to Merrell for Trail Sonified.

“Technology is so deeply integrated in running culture,” he tells me. “From Strava to curated playlists on Spotify, there is a fascinating intersection between tech and the trail.”

Exploring this intersection “led us to data sonification,” he explains. “But it also came from a real question about what trail running feels like from the inside. There’s so much energy in the sport that never gets communicated in traditional brand marketing – the burn of a climb, the rhythm of pace finding, the way your heart surges on a descent. Sonification gave us a mechanism to make that felt rather than just described. The data wasn’t decorative; it was the creative material. Every beat came from a real run, a real body, a real landscape.”

Senior Marketing Manager Simon Sweeney led Trail Sonified internally from Merrell’s side. He explained to me that the event was created with Merrell’s ‘Experience Seeker’ consumer in mind – a group obsessed with trail running, of course, but also highly creative and deeply passionate about music.

“We worked with a run club called Tempo, who are a London-based run club,” Simon tells me. “It’s a run club of DJs essentially. We reached out to them and worked with a data analyst (Jess Bartlet) who was able to give us data points like heart rate, elevation, cadence, things like that, which we could then transfer into music and frequency.”

The sonification technology was, in some ways, the connector that allowed Merrell to speak to its community in a way that truly resonated. Trail Sonified is trail running celebrated through the lens of music and nature – all made possible through a novel use of technology.

In other words, Trail Sonified is a strong example of an authentic brand activation. “Trailheads don’t just love to run, they love a party too, and that insight shaped everything,” Joe continued. “This audience would see straight through anything that felt manufactured, so the idea had to be genuinely rooted in their world.”

Key individuals at the event, for instance outdoor-orientated creative and DJ Advanced Rock, are “almost like friends of the brand,” Simon explains. “We align with how they see the outdoors and how they use the outdoors. They live and breathe it. So it’s always nice to work with people like that, who I think have a genuine and meaningful relationship with the brand.”

When I asked both Joe and Simon why it is important to connect nature and technology together in creative work, they both agreed that this tension is where culture lives right now.

“People are spending more time outdoors, running clubs are booming, there’s a genuine appetite for the physical and the analogue. At the same time, the tools available to capture and transform that experience are more sophisticated than ever. If you only lean into the technology, you get something cold and abstract. If you only celebrate nature, you can struggle to find a new way in. When you bring them together well, you create something that feels both visceral and inventive. The Trail Sonified club night worked because the underground car park in Kendal held both things at once. The outdoors powered the room, and the room made the outdoors feel like culture.”

Simon agreed, explaining that the post-Covid interest in the outdoors has opened up many creative opportunities for Merrell’s lifestyle arm – 1TRL. A key aspect of his role is envisioning how Merrell can connect with key tastemakers who are passionate about ‘outside’ rather than just ‘outdoors’ – Aka, Merrell consumers who love trail running while still living in the city and having multiple creative interests.

“With trail running being one of our key opportunities for growth, we were looking at how we really merge that into the culture of our target audience,” he explains. “I think the trail running market, or running market in general, is definitely saturated. There’s a lot of run clubs, so of course we could have done that. But we also had to be realistic and ask, if we do a trail run club, what is the difference? What else are we doing to make it different? Is there a new story to tell?”

This thinking is what led to the Trail Sonified concept.

Merrell already has plans to continue exploring the technology. While still in the early stages, Simon teased that another Trail Sonified event is already in the works, alongside new ideas for how sonification technology could create an even more immersive experience for the community.

“Something we did at Love Trails that worked really well and sort of blew everyone’s mind – well, it blew my mind anyway – was that we went on a foraging run and we were picking up things like leaves and twigs and stuff like that. And then we almost had a synth-type device back at our brand activation area at the festival. We were able to plug things like, say, a leaf into this machine. Because of the water content and the molecules, it plays a noise. So you can hear a noise through nature. It makes you think about things around you slightly differently,” he said.

“I think that was the beauty of Trail Sonified. You’re not just looking at your Strava for a time or you’re not just looking at elevation things. It’s another point of perspective that you possibly haven’t thought about already. So that’s where I really think it opens things up and could potentially take us in new directions. The next event is quite close to the sea, so we’re looking at whether there’s anything we can do with water to bring in other elements.”

You can stay up to date on any information on the next Trail Sonified event on Merrell’s socials.

There’s no shortage of niche fashion content on social media in 2026, but Emily’s perspective felt genuinely fresh – a rare combination of material knowledge, sportswear history, and a refined aesthetic taste. Her point of view felt less focused on glorifying archival pieces for views and more interested in what those past innovations can teach us about the future of technical sportswear design.

I was hooked and I wanted to learn more, and Emily was kind enough to answer a few questions for ‘What’s Fashion Technology’.

Read her perspective below.

Who are you and what do you do?

I’m Emily Nabnian. I’m a designer and product consultant working with brands and founders to translate ideas into taste-led product lines, whether they’re launching their first pieces, entering a new category, or trying to sharpen what already exists.

My path has been a little nonlinear. I started in graphic design, moved into art direction and brand strategy, and was always working on physical product in parallel. Over time, those things started to converge. A lot of what I do now bridges product, image, culture and business.

Why are you so interested in sportswear and materials?

It might sound weird, but I think of materials a bit like ingredients in a dish. You can do clever things with construction and design, but the base material sets the terms. That’s where a lot of the real value lives. Something I find so delightful is that you can make the simplest design in the world extraordinary by choosing the right material.

Beyond that, I think material innovation, or even using materials in unexpected ways, is one of the clearest ways to be modern. While I understand why fashion and culture are so referential and nostalgic, materials open up a more future-facing question: what can or should be made now, and how will our era be defined by what we create?

In your opinion, what is the coolest aesthetic style that exists in fashion today that has been born from technological innovation?

I’d say Issey Miyake’s Pleats Please as it’s so visually distinct. What’s equally compelling is that the technology isn’t just used to make a design idea possible; it becomes the design principle itself, and the aesthetic is the outcome.

With Pleats, the garments are sewn first and then pleated after, so the visual language flows directly from the process. When we think about technological innovation, there’s often a sterile connotation to it, yet Miyake used industrial technology to make clothing more human, not less. Form follows technology, if you will, and the result is something that embodies freedom, lightness and ease.

Aesthetics born through constraint can be just as interesting though. Take vintage sportswear, for example. It’s a popular “aesthetic” right now that frequently goes viral, but in many ways, sportswear was designed to be a visual hook long before TikTok.

Several “sporty” design cues like stripes, colour-blocking and contrast piping emerged from the limits of early manufacturing and the need for visibility while athletes moved quickly, especially as sports began to be televised. What we now deem a “sporty aesthetic” wasn’t an arbitrary visual preference, but often the result of practical constraints.

I think the role of a designer is to make the best of what’s available. Sometimes that means getting very creative within constraints, and sometimes it means deciding how to harness open-ended possibilities. The rate of technological innovation today is quite astounding and I’m excited by the prospect of entirely new aesthetics emerging from it.

What’s one material tip every fashion lover should know?

Look at fabric composition in context, not isolation.

Natural versus synthetic is a hot topic right now, and I jokingly call myself a fabric moderate. Compositions are more nuanced than “natural good”, “synthetic bad”. I prioritise natural materials in my wardrobe but I also try to be realistic about where a synthetic might be necessary. There’s a lot of innovation happening around bio-based materials, lower-impact synthetics and biodegradable options so even within that category, not all materials are equal.

My main tip when considering purchases is to decipher whether the use of a synthetic is necessary (or even enhancing!), or whether it’s gratuitous. A synthetic fibre in a high-performance running short often has a legitimate purpose, but a polyester dress masquerading as silk at a luxury price point is a different story.

What can mainstream fashion design learn from technical sportswear pieces?

Mainstream fashion needs to elevate its functional game, not just from a practical standpoint but because utility has really become an essential part of what makes a garment desirable.

Mainstream fashion usually optimises for optics first, but once you get used to clothing that actually works for your body and life, it becomes harder to justify garments that predominantly work as an image.

People are living more fluidly now and consuming more carefully. Clothing needs to move seamlessly (no pun intended) between various contexts and climates while also justifying its long-term value in the wardrobe. We need more mileage from the same garments which naturally redirects attention back to materials, construction and actual use, all of which are at the heart of technical sportswear.

Technical sportswear has become a solid fixture across the broader fashion landscape, including luxury. What’s cool is that it has shown that functional clothing doesn’t have to compromise refined aesthetics. Increasingly, utility is becoming a marker of taste.

How do you find creative inspiration from vintage sportswear?

Creative inspiration comes from everywhere, and vintage sportswear is no exception. There’s such a rich archive.

At face value, I’m drawn to the experimental silhouettes, unusual use of colour and sense of nonchalance in the garments. I think some of that comes from the period in which these pieces were developed, when people weren’t constantly being witnessed in the way we are today. The offbeat nature of vintage sportswear feels like a breath of fresh air amongst the streamlined language of modern activewear.

On a technical level, it’s essential to break down the construction of vintage garments. They give such insight into production methods, and how those techniques or ideas could be furthered or reinterpreted today.

While vintage sportswear is trending and we’ll definitely see more vintage-inspired collections, I’m not interested in directly replicating its surface aesthetic. I find the logic behind references far more generative.

Someone like Andre Agassi fascinates me, for example, not because I want to dress like him, but because his infamous mullet and neon pink shorts felt like an extension of a very specific attitude that was genuinely particular to him.

That feels especially relevant now, when the question of “personal style” continues to dominate conversation, yet also feels flattened by algorithms. The current refrain around vintage sportswear is that it’s “bringing personality back to activewear”, but “personality” often gets reduced to bright colours, capris and nostalgic styling. Many campaigning for individuality end up dressing interchangeably, just in vintage sportswear now instead of matching sets.

This is a pattern we see with many trends, not just vintage sportswear, and it makes me question whether we’re observing an enduring cultural shift or a momentary reprieve from the sameness that preceded it. When everyone has access to the same references, and those references travel so quickly, inspiration becomes less about discovery and more about digestion.

While we can’t help being products of our time (and internet consumption) to some degree, vintage sportswear still represents a confident, carefree, high-exertion existence to me. That’s the spirit I want to carry forward.

What are your future plans for your brand?

I’ve been working on bringing my mainline and sportline under one umbrella since both flow from the same root. The plan is to release some new and restocked items towards the end of the summer.

I’ve been focusing a lot on running gear because it’s a significant part of my life, but the pieces in general coalesce around motion. I’ve lived between very opposite cultures, even out of a suitcase for six years, and that has deeply informed my approach to function and beauty. Extreme editing and utility are non-negotiable to me, but the joy I get from a beautifully designed object is also useful. I have a water bottle, for example, with such precise proportions that I feel a wave of appreciation every time I use it. That feeling matters to me.

The brand naturally lives in a state of contrast: sensuality and utility, playfulness and discipline, practicality and emotion. I draw a lot of inspiration from my sense of being an outsider, and that tension manifests aesthetically in what I’d describe as technical glamour. The pieces themselves are tools for autonomy. Toward what is up to you.

Ultimately, this is a long-term endeavour. The thought of vast collections and inventory piling up gives me anxiety, so I want to build deliberately through small runs, manageable operations and a tight feedback loop between product, use and iteration. I want to create things that people genuinely want, refined over time.

What do you hope the future of fashion x sports will be?

I hope the future of fashion x sports has more divergence.

Both fashion and sport contain so much emotional charge, yet when I think of the ads, athletes and outfits that have really imprinted on me, many of them aren’t from the last five to ten years. I think that says something about how consensus-driven culture can feel right now. I’d love to see more experimentation, and openness from both brands and audiences to receive new ideas.

More than switching back and forth between sporting cues and fashion cues, I’m obsessed with the process: creatives who treat their discipline like a sport, and athletes who treat their sport like an art.

Alysa Liu is a recent example of an athlete who feels like a true artist. What does a deeper mode of collaboration with someone like her look like, beyond a campaign image or picking a colour swatch? Those captivating inner lives behind performance are what I’d love to see fashion x sports explore in more depth, both in storytelling and design.

Subscribe now

Of course, I don’t need to write a piece agreeing with all of the headlines or over-explaining the controversy, because I know it’s already been covered enough.

However, I do have my own speculative ideas and personal takes, which I explored in this week’s YouTube video, and I wanted to share them here as well.

So firstly, what is the “Tech Bros in Fashion” situation?

Despite big tech funding the fashion industry behind the scenes for years, over the past year or so the relationship has become a lot more visible. For instance, we’ve seen Mark Zuckerberg at Prada, along with other tech bro appearances at fashion shows.

But the thing that sparked the most controversy surrounded this year’s 2026 Met Gala, with Jeff Bezos and Lauren Sánchez Bezos becoming key sponsors and partners – and seemingly now a part of the fashion world itself.

Now, to already interject with my mini take on the Met backlash – politics and creativity aside, of course – and FYI, this whole take isn’t accounting for the wider politics of it all because I don’t think I can do it justice. I’m simply looking at it purely through a culture and fashion lens. – In a lot of ways, I think it is understandable why Anna Wintour might want to befriend big tech.

It’s no secret that fashion media desperately needs money right now, and big tech has it and is willing to give it. So, on a business level – despite the questionable ethics – it does make sense why Anna would do this. (Rachel Omonde speaks about this, and probably explains it a lot better, on this episode of The Cutting Room Floor if you’re interested in listening.)

At the end of the day, Anna has done her job of getting money for the Costume Institute and, in a way, Vogue. The issue is just how visible these tech bros are becoming in fashion.

Another interesting part of this whole situation is that, in addition to big tech infiltrating fashion on a business level, it’s also showing up in fashion aesthetics.

For instance, in this Substack titled “Tech Billionaires Are Ruining Fashion Week,” it explains that “Fashion has always had a weakness for the power suit.” But for the recent Autumn/Winter 2026–27 season, this corporate look “returned with unusual severity.”

The writer notes that ‘corporate aesthetics’ showed up on the Tom Ford, Saint Laurent, Stella McCartney, and Victoria Beckham runways, and describes these collections as being “unmistakably fascinated with the notion of control.” She says, “The clothes carried a discipline, were sharp and almost austere – evoking a procedural, corporate authority rather than the relaxed, bohemian ease we saw at AW24.”

Essentially, the writer’s take is that these looks could be dominating the runway because fashion now finds itself “sharing oxygen with Silicon Valley.”

As I alluded to, Jeff Bezos attended the Christian Dior show, while Mark Zuckerberg and his wife, Priscilla Chan, appeared at Prada in Milan. Even biohacking longevity entrepreneur Bryan Johnson walked the runway for the avant-garde fashion label Matières Fécales.

Could these examples subtly signal that a cold, optimising tech bro mindset is creeping into fashion?

@gala.fr#jeffbezos #laurensanchez #dior #tiktokfashion #pfw

Tiktok failed to load.

Enable 3rd party cookies or use another browser

But, why is all of this an issue for fashion?

Well, firstly, above everything else, tech bros trying to get into fashion is just annoying for fashion people.

Fashion Roadman summed it up well when talking about Lauren Sánchez in his video, saying:

“To put it bluntly, she is never going to be a fashion person. We are never going to look at Lauren Sanchez as a fashion person. She needs to give up. Lauren Sanchez has no contribution to fashion, other than the fact that she is rich by proxy of being married to Jeff. Meaning, no one looks at Lauren Sanchez for style, she is kind of a meme in fashion, the looks she wears are ghastly, her wedding dress was ghastly, she’s not even a tastemaker in fashion so I don’t get why they are trying to force Lauren Sanchez down our throats. Why are they trying to force her on us? She is not a fashion person.”

@gala.fr#dior #jeffbezos #laurensanchez #tiktokfashion #fashiontiktok

Tiktok failed to load.

Enable 3rd party cookies or use another browser

There’s a similar response from the fashion crowd whenever any tech billionaire shows up in a fashion space and, to me, this reflects the second issue:

Tech bros can never create true fashion culture. Therefore, any fashion brand or publication that is partnering with or co-signing them could risk diluting their magic beyond repair.

As this FashionUnited article writes about this years Met Gala, “When access becomes so restricted that only corporate entities, particularly those outside the traditional fashion ecosystem, can participate, the balance shifts.” (Referring to the fact that the majority of attendees at the Met were backed by big tech companies like OpenAI, Meta, and Snapchat because fewer fashion houses can afford tables, while more tech companies can.)

The article goes on to say, “Fashion, at its core, is a dialogue between creators and culture. But if the room is filled with those who consume rather than contribute, what happens to that dialogue?”

In other words, as more tech bros outside of fashion enter the space, surely it dilutes the creativity and magic of the industry as it becomes increasingly corporatised.

@vogueitalia#LaurenSanchezBezos #AnnaWintour e #NicoleKidman sul red carpet del #MetGala

Tiktok failed to load.

Enable 3rd party cookies or use another browser

Perhaps this year has simply solidified the Met as a super-corporate event and therefore less ‘cool’?

The Met was probably already becoming less culturally relevant, but it feels like “Tech Bros” could be the nail in the coffin because, at the end of the day, it is impossible to buy culture or creative respect, no matter how much money you have or can generate.

Diet Prada has similar thoughts:

“This year’s Met Gala didn’t feel as fun as it used to. That’s in no small part due to the involvement of the Bezoses, for whom the event has been dubbed the ‘Tech Gala.’ But is the Tech Gala just a symptom of a disease that’s been festering for a long time now?”

Perhaps the Met now sits in the same category as the Victoria’s Secret Fashion Show or even commentary shows like Fashion Police – things that once sat at the height of culture, but no longer do. A sign to perhaps move on or mix things up to stay relevant.

Another parallel issue that the tech bro infiltration is having on fashion is within actual fashion design and trends.

I think fashion people find it disappointing that tech bros are at shows because, famously, their preferred way of dressing is this anti-fashion look.

As this Substack also writes, Tech bros are known for their “indifference to clothing: a hoodie, grey T-shirt and badly cut jeans – the anti-fashion uniform of engineers who claimed to have transcended the trivialities of appearance. The old story held that technology concerned itself with systems and ‘deep’ ideas and not frivolous things like, you know, fashion.”

Personally, overall, I don’t see anything wrong with fashion or creative industries partnering with tech for funding or to improve the behind-the-scenes business and production side of fashion. But it’s a shame that tech bros want to be visible in fashion and are trying to have cultural impact or influence, because that’s really not the point.

So what are my closing thoughts?

Overall, I actually really don’t think tech bros are ruining fashion… Fashion people have made it very clear that they don’t want them in the industry, so in a way they literally can’t.

Of course, it’s annoying that they are trying to become visible within the space, but I do think fashion will eventually create something new that feels exclusive and cool again, as shows and events become more corporate. And these will be spaces that tech bros can’t get into for the wrong reasons.

But in terms of the fashion business, sadly, tech money is probably just what’s needed right now.

Let me know your thoughts.

And they’re doing it by moving away from the cold, clinical look we’ve come to associate with new technology – toward something softer, more colourful, and more human.

As I mentioned on YouTube, I personally think that this emerging trend is so much more than just clipping a Tamagotchi onto your belt to be cool, or recreating the playful tech aesthetic of the 2000s.

What’s happening now feels bigger and more permanent.

It could even be the start of an entirely new category of product and devices that are functional – like fitness trackers or headphones – but also stand on their own as genuinely cool fashion pieces.

Okay, so first things first – what is ‘cute tech’?

For the purposes of this conversation, let’s define cute tech as any kind of technology or gadget designed to feel emotional, playful, and personal instead of cold and functional.

Now, to fully understand the cute tech trend’s impact on fashion today, we do have to look back at a bit of historical context.

(The last thing I want to do is go into a full history lesson here, but I do have to briefly touch on the original cute tech.)

Think the organic, blobby-shaped, brightly coloured hardware that dominated the Y2K futurism years, or the hot pink flip phones and bedazzled Sidekicks of the early 2000’s McBling era.

This fun tech design – particularly at the peak of Y2K – actually reflected the era’s massive sense of ‘techno-optimism’, fuelled by the new millennium, the dot-com boom, and rapid advancements in computer technology.

At that time, ideas about the future and technology felt hopeful and fun. The ‘technological future’ was promised to be full of community and connection, and that positive energy was reflected in the design of new gadgets, as well as the marketing that surrounded them.

What I find really interesting is that this sense of techno-optimism was also reflected in fashion trends of the time as well.

For instance, as the aesthetic fandom website explains, the fashion of the Y2K futurism era was characterised by a “techno-utopian” philosophy that mirrored the hardware design. For instance the fashion featured a lot of iridescent fabrics, holographic vinyl, sheer mesh, and lots of chrome or silver leather.

In everyday dress, this showed up through “techwear” accessories and athletic gear – like Oakley wraparound sunglasses, digital watches like the Casio G-Shock, metallic puffer jackets, and nylon cargo pants that emphasised utility.

(It’s worth noting that fashion at this time mostly imitated the aesthetic of technology rather than being functional in itself – and I want to come back to this point in a bit.)

However, this optimism of course quickly faded, and fast forward to today in 2026, you’ll know that the dominant conversations around new technology are often filled with fear and rejection. Particularly within the fashion industry, where a common concern is that technologies like AI will take jobs, stifle creativity, and ultimately make fashion more boring, homogenised and soulless.

However, it’s exactly this rejection of modern technology that is causing ‘cute tech’ to trend in 2026.

As Vogue writes in this really great piece titled “AI’s Maturation Point and Cute Tech: 2026 Fashion-Tech Predictions,” Amy O’Brien explains that “in a world where brands and consumers are grappling with AI-driven futures, experts predict a shift toward the ‘cult of cute tech’ as a counter-trend.”

In other words, brands are creating ‘cute tech’ products to counterbalance the creepiness or coldness of advanced technologies like AI – making them feel more emotionally appealing and easier to use.

Of course, one of the most obvious examples is the new MacBook Neo.

Apple’s press release describes it as having “soft, rounded corners and a more playful personality, available in colours like blush, indigo, silver, and citrus… creating a more expressive and cohesive design aesthetic”.

Now, there’s a lot you could say about this release – good and bad – but fundamentally, I do really like the overall concept and design direction.

Some more niche examples of ‘cute’ or fashion-forward tech include the Gentle Monster and Warby Parker partnership with Google to develop AI-powered smart glasses that plans to directly target Gen Z fashion consumers. Additionally, there are Gucci smart glasses rumoured to release in 2027 as well.

However, one of my personal favourite examples is the brand Nothing – the London-based consumer electronics brand founded by Carl Pei – known for its transparent, design-led products aimed at creative Gen Z users.

I’m sure there are plenty of other cool examples I’m missing, but these are the ones that have come onto my radar naturally, without actively searching for them. This makes me think they’re genuinely entering mainstream fashion culture, which is important if brands to want to create genuinely cool tech products that appeal to ‘fashion people’.

Of course, you’ve also got another sub-trend within this space that’s linked to kawaii culture – similar to the accessorising your accessories trend that blew up last year – with novelty tech items becoming fashion statements.

For example, WGSN’s 2026 trend report highlights how accessorising with retro tech like Tamagotchis and flip phones – long popular in the Asia-Pacific region – is expected to spread to the West even more this year.

With this, we may see more fashion brands experimenting with consumer tech as statement accessories, just like Coperni’s Tamagotchi collaboration or other nostalgic tech moments that have appeared in fashion before.

However, this kind of fleeting novelty is not my main take or main interest with all of this.

What I really think this signals, is that the cute tech today is carving out a completely new category of fashion product – one that is also a tech product, but designed in a way that fashion consumers genuinely want to wear day-to-day.

And in my opinion, we haven’t really seen this before.

Like I mentioned earlier, in the 90s and early 2000s, fashion took aesthetic inspiration from technology – but it wasn’t functional. Like as the aesthetic fandom website states, Y2K fashion appeared mainly in media – like music videos and marketing campaigns, rather than in everyday fashion.

Then, of course on the flip side, we have wearable tech like fitness watches – but most don’t feel very fashion-forward. Personally, I don’t wear one because I don’t like how they look. And I know a lot of people share that opinion, for instance even in a recent episode of Lauren Sherman’s Fashion People, Lauren and Brynn Wallner express their desire for a more fashion-led and chic fitness watch.

To me at least, truly cool fashion and truly useful tech has always felt separate or like a distant speculative future that will probably never actually manifest.

But now, with the ‘cute tech’ trend emerging. It feels like tech companies are embracing fashion – and fashion is embracing technology – in a way that actually aligns with what fashion people actually want to wear.

I have to use Nothing again as an example here.

As revealed in a Vogue article titled “How Nothing Plans to Become the Go-To Tech Brand for Gen Z Creatives, ”the company hired ex-Loewe CMO Charlie Smith to help position the brand toward fashion-conscious Gen Z consumers through branding, communication, and design.”

A standout quote from the piece is from Charlie himself. He says: “I think a lot of fashion brands and technology companies have been taking themselves a bit too seriously… this is an opportunity to be the brand for a generation that wants to have fun expressing their personalities through the tech they use.”

Another key point is that Nothing focused heavily on aesthetics from the beginning –even creating a visual inspiration book before building products – and has already experimented with fashion through its own apparel drops.

They are a tech brand but they are truly tapped into fashion culture and see it’s importance when creating product.

And to me, this is really the crux of it.

‘Cute tech’ and the renewed focus on fun and highly aesthetic design – is paving the way for wearable technology that genuinely works as fashion.

Because right now, there’s still a disconnect. For example, I wouldn’t wear most smart glasses – they feel a bit intimidating and creepy, and honestly, I don’t think they look that good.

But if a strong fashion brand created something visually compelling, with subtle, well-integrated tech that actually brings value to peoples lives as the world is right now and that isn’t built for some weird utopian future, I think that’s something I – and a lot of people – could actually get behind.

And maybe that’s where the future of fashion is heading…

Imagine genuinely beautiful fashion pieces that also have useful technology built in –without feeling gimmicky or unrealistic.

It feels right to bring up a quote from an interview with the Collison Brothers (the founders of Stripe.) In the interview, one of them says: “If Stripe is a monstrously successful business, but what we make isn’t beautiful, I’ll be much less happy… The world is uglier than it needs to be. People like beautiful things and for rational reasons. Because beauty shows that someone cared.”

To me, that quote really captures the opportunity here.

It suggests that craftsmanship in fashion and technological innovation don’t have to compete – they can actually enhance each other.

So how do I want this to show up?

We don’t need to copy the same Y2K aesthetic or stick to ultra-clean minimalism. Why not create something completely new?

I really hope brands push creativity – both with the aesthetics and the tech. Like a fitness watch you could wear to a glamorous dinner and no one would question it. Or smart glasses you’d actually want to wear on holiday.

I know we’re still at the beginning of this trend, but personally, I’m really excited to see where it goes.

Subscribe for free to What's Fashion Technology?