Apple's Liquid Glass: When Aesthetics Beat Function(maxvanijsselmuiden.nl)
maxvanijsselmuiden.nl
Apple's Liquid Glass: When Aesthetics Beat Function
https://www.maxvanijsselmuiden.nl/liquid-glass
180 comments
The transparency, blur and contrast issues are stupid but so obviously stupid that I assume they’ll be fixed. What worries me more about iOS 26 is the continuing trend of platforms being so ashamed of any visible UI that they feel the need to hide it. More ‘…’ menus everywhere, some of them only appearing after certain scroll gestures, which means tools that used to be ever-present and immediately tappable now require three gestures to activate. This desire to squash every UI down into one barely visible drop of glass isn’t ridiculous because of the glass, it’s ridiculous because UI is important. These devices have big screens and tons of pixels (not to mention hardware buttons) but somehow we only have room for the main content pane in any app. I agree with the article that skeuomorphism has gone too far, beyond mere analogy and now into the realm of completely impenetrable metaphor. Give me a brutalist UI that isn’t embarrassed to show itself. Gimme things that both explain and enable the app’s features. By all means make them shiny and lickable but please stop trying to take them away.
I hear you, but for most applications I don't want a lot of UI because it wastes screen space. It really depends on what I'm doing, but I feel the opposite that you do - most applications I use are full of widgets, separator bars, dots, mini buttons while I just want an empty canvas for work. When I add everything, I lose 1/3 of my workplace to UI alone and I don't like it.
That's one thing I miss from menu+hotkey UIs - the menu bar is all you have to worry about.
That's one thing I miss from menu+hotkey UIs - the menu bar is all you have to worry about.
I'm the opposite, screens are huge these days, there's enough space for both a decent amount UI and the work.
(Not so much UI that it's distracting, of course)
(Not so much UI that it's distracting, of course)
> I just want an empty canvas for work
I want more than that. I want some sort of visual guidance for what's possible to do and how to do it. A blank canvas means that I have to focus more on "how do I do this?" than actually doing it.
I want more than that. I want some sort of visual guidance for what's possible to do and how to do it. A blank canvas means that I have to focus more on "how do I do this?" than actually doing it.
Yeah, discoverability is getting worse. It would be slightly more okay if there were one canonical menu system for an app that you could summon immediately and unambiguously. But every app is a mess of inconsistent layout and hidden gestures.
> But every app is a mess of inconsistent layout and hidden gestures.
This is what happens when we decide that the web is the end all be all of application delivery platforms, even for desktop (Electron).
Call me old man yelling at clouds, but when native apps would use the operating system's components and APIs, they looked just like every other app or utility in the OS, behaved the same way, shared the same shortcuts, etc. You could just learn how to use the OS and that intuitively expanded into any native app written for that OS.
We decided to throw all of that out the window for custom branded "experiences" and lowest common denominator cross platform UIs.
Now things appear simple on the surface, but are much more difficult to use because instead of just learning your OS's conventions, you have to learn each individual application and its quirks.
Letting marketing people dictate app design was one of the biggest mistakes this industry has made.
This is what happens when we decide that the web is the end all be all of application delivery platforms, even for desktop (Electron).
Call me old man yelling at clouds, but when native apps would use the operating system's components and APIs, they looked just like every other app or utility in the OS, behaved the same way, shared the same shortcuts, etc. You could just learn how to use the OS and that intuitively expanded into any native app written for that OS.
We decided to throw all of that out the window for custom branded "experiences" and lowest common denominator cross platform UIs.
Now things appear simple on the surface, but are much more difficult to use because instead of just learning your OS's conventions, you have to learn each individual application and its quirks.
Letting marketing people dictate app design was one of the biggest mistakes this industry has made.
Things are slightly better on macOS because it still has that mandatory main menu in every app. Which app developers can still ignore, but then it looks like a sore to the user, so they're incentivized to fill it out.
Unfortunately even there I increasingly see apps with features that aren't exposed through that menu at all.
Unfortunately even there I increasingly see apps with features that aren't exposed through that menu at all.
> It really depends on what I'm doing
To me that's the part we're really missing on mobile. There's times a lot of controls are needed and other where they need to disappear.
We have that in classic UIs with collapsible tool bars and optional panels, things that will stay where they're set until explicitly hidden or moved away.
Having that kind of option to pin back the buttons when/as long as needed would make minimalist designs a lot more useable IMHO.
To me that's the part we're really missing on mobile. There's times a lot of controls are needed and other where they need to disappear.
We have that in classic UIs with collapsible tool bars and optional panels, things that will stay where they're set until explicitly hidden or moved away.
Having that kind of option to pin back the buttons when/as long as needed would make minimalist designs a lot more useable IMHO.
I got by just fine with a 5" screen and old cluttered Android. If the manufacturers have decided I'm no longer allowed to have a phone smaller than 6.5", least the developers can do is use that space to give me controls
I do get that, and I use my editor with basically no ornamentation, but that’s because I have a key combination for everything so it’s quick and discoverable. I’d accept voice commands that worked quickly and reliably maybe? Or fine, give me a burger menu but let me configure it (it used to be common with iOS apps to let you configure the toolbar, but not so much these days).
That's what full screen mode is for. But it should be opt-in, not the default, and definitely not something you can't even opt out of.
Separately, given the size and pixel density of your typical desktop screen today, if anything I find the "100% content" apps to look kinda bare because of all the empty space. Which makes sense, given that the UI paradigm with lots of toolbars etc dates back to the days when your typical desktop monitor was 14-17". For laptops, I'm more sympathetic to the sentiment.
Separately, given the size and pixel density of your typical desktop screen today, if anything I find the "100% content" apps to look kinda bare because of all the empty space. Which makes sense, given that the UI paradigm with lots of toolbars etc dates back to the days when your typical desktop monitor was 14-17". For laptops, I'm more sympathetic to the sentiment.
I couldn't agree more. I didn't even like when Windows started adding those little transitions when you minimized/restored windows, because it delayed the presentation of the window for pure aesthetics. For a work machine, give me a Windows 2000 interface any day over the form over function approach of so many modern UIs.
> The transparency, blur and contrast issues are stupid but so obviously stupid that I assume they’ll be fixed.
lol
I thought the same when ios 7 came out - hidden menus requiring multiple taps, touch targets that don't look like touch targets, small targets, terrible contrast, silly unreadable fonts, on and on...
but not only didn't this get fixed, the SAME designs leaked into the rest of the world.
for example, the tesla car UI adopted ALL the same deficiencies. Hard to read center display? critical functions that require multiple taps? all while you're driving... wow
sigh
lol
I thought the same when ios 7 came out - hidden menus requiring multiple taps, touch targets that don't look like touch targets, small targets, terrible contrast, silly unreadable fonts, on and on...
but not only didn't this get fixed, the SAME designs leaked into the rest of the world.
for example, the tesla car UI adopted ALL the same deficiencies. Hard to read center display? critical functions that require multiple taps? all while you're driving... wow
sigh
> Give me a brutalist UI that isn’t embarrassed to show itself. Gimme things that both explain and enable the app’s features. By all means make them shiny and lickable
[...or not, according to user preference. -- my addition /CRC]
In other words, give me Windows 7. Where I could select everything from the "Classic" (Win 95/NT4/2000) via the XP to the Vista UI "themes" (and then modify to my exact preference from there).
With apps from ~the XP era, when their UIs too were still useful.
[...or not, according to user preference. -- my addition /CRC]
In other words, give me Windows 7. Where I could select everything from the "Classic" (Win 95/NT4/2000) via the XP to the Vista UI "themes" (and then modify to my exact preference from there).
With apps from ~the XP era, when their UIs too were still useful.
> The transparency, blur and contrast issues are stupid but so obviously stupid that I assume they’ll be fixed.
I find your confidence here strange, because something so obviously stupid never should have been implemented in the first place, yet it was.
Never underestimate the incompetence and obliviousness of powerful people.
I find your confidence here strange, because something so obviously stupid never should have been implemented in the first place, yet it was.
Never underestimate the incompetence and obliviousness of powerful people.
Yes. And if OP needs a confidence decrement, we went through another off design with iOS 7 and macOS Yosemite, and it was rough for a few years until course corrections were made.
This is a design that should have sat in a research lab and been researched further. And yes, I'm dogfooding it on test devices.
This is a design that should have sat in a research lab and been researched further. And yes, I'm dogfooding it on test devices.
I wholeheartedly agree. There are two great examples of this in the latest iOS beta:
In Safari, there used to be a button at the low right to reveal all the open tabs, allow, allowing you to close the current tab, or any other others using just two taps. Now you have to hit a “…” button, followed by ”all tabs”.
Also, I noticed in the podcast app there used to be a skip 15 seconds button always available at the lower right when content started playing. Perfect for avoiding those obnoxious loud ads at the very first sample of audio. Now it’s two clicks away. Incredibly frustrating.
In Safari, there used to be a button at the low right to reveal all the open tabs, allow, allowing you to close the current tab, or any other others using just two taps. Now you have to hit a “…” button, followed by ”all tabs”.
Also, I noticed in the podcast app there used to be a skip 15 seconds button always available at the lower right when content started playing. Perfect for avoiding those obnoxious loud ads at the very first sample of audio. Now it’s two clicks away. Incredibly frustrating.
The fact that the "switch cameras" button isn't immediately visible in the Camera app but slides in after ~2s is beyond "mildly" infuriating.
That's fixed in the latest beta.
That is insane
> The transparency, blur and contrast issues are stupid but so obviously stupid that I assume they’ll be fixed.
They won't be fixed. At least not quickly, and not easily.
Because Liquid Glass is literally not designed to be fixed, and has literally never been tested in real conditions.
We've seen that with Apple's flailing in the first few betas
They won't be fixed. At least not quickly, and not easily.
Because Liquid Glass is literally not designed to be fixed, and has literally never been tested in real conditions.
We've seen that with Apple's flailing in the first few betas
This particular approach has been tried many times before. I remember back when Microsoft introduced Aero transparency effects in Vista, and then had them dialed down substantially in Win7, in the same exact way ("frosted glass") that Apple seems to be speedrunning through in iOS betas right now.
So yes, it will be fixed, and the fix is easy. They just have to accept the fact that the "liquid" part needs to be strongly de-emphasized in favor of readability. It would be nice if they just did that and saved us all the grief, but worst case we'll just end in the same exact spot moving there step by step.
So yes, it will be fixed, and the fix is easy. They just have to accept the fact that the "liquid" part needs to be strongly de-emphasized in favor of readability. It would be nice if they just did that and saved us all the grief, but worst case we'll just end in the same exact spot moving there step by step.
> So yes, it will be fixed, and the fix is easy. They just have to accept the fact that the "liquid" part
They tried it in betas. De-emphasizing "liquid glass" just turns everything into a dirty blur.
The difference from Aero is that Microsoft was smart and never applied the effects to contents of things: it was always in windows chrome, and never in the controls or toolbars.
Liquid Glass boasts glass/transparency/translucency/distortions basically everywhere. As betas show, they didn't test it even with the most basic real-world scenarios, and they cannot easily fix it without turning it off or making it quite ugly.
They tried it in betas. De-emphasizing "liquid glass" just turns everything into a dirty blur.
The difference from Aero is that Microsoft was smart and never applied the effects to contents of things: it was always in windows chrome, and never in the controls or toolbars.
Liquid Glass boasts glass/transparency/translucency/distortions basically everywhere. As betas show, they didn't test it even with the most basic real-world scenarios, and they cannot easily fix it without turning it off or making it quite ugly.
It wasn't just chrome in Vista. The taskbar was translucent, large parts of the Start menu were translucent, window titles were translucent (including minimize/maximize/close buttons). And controls and toolbars were bleeding into the chrome part of windows, so while the widgets themselves were opaque, they were placed on translucent background. And for some apps they went all in, e.g. Media Player. Here's a random screenshot from image search:
https://live.staticflickr.com/90/245324637_1e615ef573_b.jpg
I remember going into settings and turning it all off because of how annoying it was. But then Win7 came and turned up the frosted glass effect throughout, and that largely fixed all the outstanding issues.
https://live.staticflickr.com/90/245324637_1e615ef573_b.jpg
I remember going into settings and turning it all off because of how annoying it was. But then Win7 came and turned up the frosted glass effect throughout, and that largely fixed all the outstanding issues.
It's funny because I saw this image side by side with Liquid Glass (can't find the tweet right now), and Vista looked almost opaque in comparison :) Hence my comment.
Memory is a funny thing
Memory is a funny thing
[deleted]
My iPhone mini does like this trend of hidding UI elements I have to say =)
Absolutely. JetBrains are, as one HN commentator put it "speedrunning enshitification" -- in no small part by attempting to ditch their classic GUI for some absolute piece of shit minimalist rip off of VS Code.
The sad part about this is how many other products will likely blindly follow suit.
The sad part about this is how many other products will likely blindly follow suit.
At least a bit of credit to jetbrains, In the new interface you can pull all the gutter buttons off the side and put them in the top tool bar. That got it to be "good enough" for me. So many apps put in a double sized gutter to hold a half dozen icons.
All being said, my preference is still to the old interface.
All being said, my preference is still to the old interface.
This problem is endemic to the industry. All mainstream operating systems have been done products for quite a while. But because full-time designers need to be designing something even when nothing in the company needs designed any more, they start redesigning existing products. And the more radical and courageous the redesign, the better for their performance review.
I hear this complaint about designers wanting radical redesigns or chasing trends, but the actual UX designers I've worked with seem to prefer spending time on usability testing, eliminating workflow steps, clarifying hierarchy, making consistent design systems, that sort of thing. True, some of them make things too minimal or rearrange the layout for minimal gain.
However, in my experience the mandate to drastically redesign a product or "make it look more modern" have always come from sales and/or product owners, and in turn they're driven by competitors and customer choices.
However, in my experience the mandate to drastically redesign a product or "make it look more modern" have always come from sales and/or product owners, and in turn they're driven by competitors and customer choices.
Well, whoever is responsible, there's far too much "change for change's sake" going on. And the vast majority of those changes are degradations of the user experience.
I'm not sure I entirely agree. The design of smartphones has largely been unchanged for a decade. Prior to that there was a renaissance of various designs, shapes, folds, panels, buttons, keyboards, etc. Today everyone carries around rectangular slab.
What is happening here is Apple is unifying their product lines. All OS versions have converged to 26, 27, 28. The M processor runs iPads, Laptops and Vision. You can install iOS apps on macOS.
The headset is not a hit but it's a sign of things to come. The hardware will get better and I'm expecting seamless handoff between all your apple devices. Start a facetime call on your laptop in your office? Transfer that to your visionOS headset and start walking. Move to the living room and toss that app at your apple TV and finish up the call from the couch.
We've seen apple move toward unifying their various OS interfaces for a long time. People were forecasting this when OS X 10.6 started using the app store and app icons taken straight from the iPhone.
As the article says, liquid glass works best for spatial computing. That's apple's next big bet and the whole ecosystem is going to cater to it.
What is happening here is Apple is unifying their product lines. All OS versions have converged to 26, 27, 28. The M processor runs iPads, Laptops and Vision. You can install iOS apps on macOS.
The headset is not a hit but it's a sign of things to come. The hardware will get better and I'm expecting seamless handoff between all your apple devices. Start a facetime call on your laptop in your office? Transfer that to your visionOS headset and start walking. Move to the living room and toss that app at your apple TV and finish up the call from the couch.
We've seen apple move toward unifying their various OS interfaces for a long time. People were forecasting this when OS X 10.6 started using the app store and app icons taken straight from the iPhone.
As the article says, liquid glass works best for spatial computing. That's apple's next big bet and the whole ecosystem is going to cater to it.
> What is happening here is Apple is unifying their product lines.
Who asked for this? What do the end users have to gain from this? So far, I've seen the macOS design steadily regress for no good reason whatsoever. The new settings app in particular is a disaster. Not only is it a UI that scrolls, a big no-no in desktop UI design, it also severely lacks affordances, and the hierarchy of the settings themselves feels rather arbitrary. What I've seen of macOS Tahoe goes even further with this touchscreenification.
I've never used an iPhone as my main phone and never owned an iPad so I don't feel qualified to speak about them.
I've also never seen a Vision Pro in person, but I treat it as a cool tech demo that solves no real practical problems. So far, VR has been mostly used for gaming, but Apple doesn't seem very interested in that use case.
Who asked for this? What do the end users have to gain from this? So far, I've seen the macOS design steadily regress for no good reason whatsoever. The new settings app in particular is a disaster. Not only is it a UI that scrolls, a big no-no in desktop UI design, it also severely lacks affordances, and the hierarchy of the settings themselves feels rather arbitrary. What I've seen of macOS Tahoe goes even further with this touchscreenification.
I've never used an iPhone as my main phone and never owned an iPad so I don't feel qualified to speak about them.
I've also never seen a Vision Pro in person, but I treat it as a cool tech demo that solves no real practical problems. So far, VR has been mostly used for gaming, but Apple doesn't seem very interested in that use case.
It's obvious iOS will become the desktop OS in the next 5 years or so. I've been worried since Lion that MacOS will become iOS, but with the recent changes on iPad it's clear the opposite will happen. That's why I'm getting out now. MacOS has been going downhill anyway. It still has no great way to manage windows or workspaces. It doesn't have tiling built in or even a clipboard manager. The only way to make the OS usable is turn on accessibility reduce motion, but that still doesn't allow multiple workspaces to be usable.
> It's obvious iOS will become the desktop OS in the next 5 years or so
Again, who asked for this?
Again, who asked for this?
Not only who asked for it, but who believes it? This tired line has been the same drum for well over a decade with no proper evidence to support it other than “tHeY lOoK tEh sAmE”.
All desktop OSes are getting rid of desktop design patterns in favor of touch ones for some stupid reason. At least for Windows it can be explained by the fact that Microsoft is very desperate about putting touchscreens into everything that runs Windows. But for macOS there is no such explanation because there are no touchscreen Macs.
And yet macOS Tahoe reverses a lot of "getting rid of desktop design patterns", such as Launch Pad (which emulates the iPadOS home screen) being replaced by a more generic list of apps using the same interface as Spotlight.
Again, I think what people see as "getting rid of desktop design patterns" in macOS is mostly aesthetic. Mac apps remain Mac apps, they retain all the aspects of their interfaces that make them Mac apps.
More evidence in the way iPadOS 26 adopts certain aspects of the macOS interface, but does them in an iPadOS-oriented way that you wouldn't really say the two OS are converging, more that they're doing really weird impressions of each other — but underneath the grease paint, the same actors as always remain, each with their strengths.
(In saying that, System Settings is an abomination)
Again, I think what people see as "getting rid of desktop design patterns" in macOS is mostly aesthetic. Mac apps remain Mac apps, they retain all the aspects of their interfaces that make them Mac apps.
More evidence in the way iPadOS 26 adopts certain aspects of the macOS interface, but does them in an iPadOS-oriented way that you wouldn't really say the two OS are converging, more that they're doing really weird impressions of each other — but underneath the grease paint, the same actors as always remain, each with their strengths.
(In saying that, System Settings is an abomination)
> Again, I think what people see as "getting rid of desktop design patterns" in macOS is mostly aesthetic.
Have you seen the settings in the new Xcode? This iPad-ass crap keeps infesting various apps.
Overall, the current Apple seems to be very scared to lay things out in two dimensions. Every new UI they build and almost every old UI they redesign is just a sad vertical stack of stuff.
The combined title bars and toolbars that were introduced in Big Sur are not an aesthetic change. It's a very visible downgrade. Tahoe further downgrades that by removing the bottom border of that top bar.
> such as Launch Pad (which emulates the iPadOS home screen) being replaced by a more generic list of apps using the same interface as Spotlight
That is a welcome change. But that's about the only one. They also made the alerts denser, reverting part of the Big Sur redesign, but, again, because they are so afraid of horizontal layout, the icon is just awkwardly above the text instead of to the left.
Have you seen the settings in the new Xcode? This iPad-ass crap keeps infesting various apps.
Overall, the current Apple seems to be very scared to lay things out in two dimensions. Every new UI they build and almost every old UI they redesign is just a sad vertical stack of stuff.
The combined title bars and toolbars that were introduced in Big Sur are not an aesthetic change. It's a very visible downgrade. Tahoe further downgrades that by removing the bottom border of that top bar.
> such as Launch Pad (which emulates the iPadOS home screen) being replaced by a more generic list of apps using the same interface as Spotlight
That is a welcome change. But that's about the only one. They also made the alerts denser, reverting part of the Big Sur redesign, but, again, because they are so afraid of horizontal layout, the icon is just awkwardly above the text instead of to the left.
> Have you seen the settings in the new Xcode? This iPad-ass crap keeps infesting various apps.
Yes, and I agree that it's bad. Though, I did say the System Settings app was crap, and it's taken a leaf from that.
To be honest, I think that Apple could do this split view settings window well in macOS. Other operating systems have had something like it for years. Apple just shits the bed repeatedly here for some reason.
> Overall, the current Apple seems to be very scared to lay things out in two dimensions.
I'll grant you this to be true. Though, I noticed this a much longer time ago than just now. Specifically, the way that they removed the context-sensitive toolbar in Pages, Keynote, and Numbers '09 and shoved it all into the sidebar. When they revealed the iPad and web interfaces, though they look similar, much of the mobile interface is actually radically different from the macOS design.
> The combined title bars and toolbars that were introduced in Big Sur are not an aesthetic change. It's a very visible downgrade.
I'm not sure that those are particularly iPad or iOS inspired, though. That feels more like Dye doing his "trying to get rid of the UI" thing rather than anything indicating a platform merge.
That said, I'm a bit scared we'll get the iPadOS '26 traffic light window controls (that are tiny until you hover them) in macOS…
I take your point that this change was functional, not just aesthetic, but I still don't see it as part of any conspiracy to displace the Mac. Just a lack of care.
> That is a welcome change. But that's about the only one.
Ironically, it's one I can't stand! I missed being able to do the pinch gesture to bring up Launchpad and then find my app icons without having to type or scroll a ridiculously long list in a teeny tiny window.
Launchpad made sense to me, but it should've had an option to automatically sort or tidy up the icons in the style of the App Library or the new Spotlight-based interface.
Yes, and I agree that it's bad. Though, I did say the System Settings app was crap, and it's taken a leaf from that.
To be honest, I think that Apple could do this split view settings window well in macOS. Other operating systems have had something like it for years. Apple just shits the bed repeatedly here for some reason.
> Overall, the current Apple seems to be very scared to lay things out in two dimensions.
I'll grant you this to be true. Though, I noticed this a much longer time ago than just now. Specifically, the way that they removed the context-sensitive toolbar in Pages, Keynote, and Numbers '09 and shoved it all into the sidebar. When they revealed the iPad and web interfaces, though they look similar, much of the mobile interface is actually radically different from the macOS design.
> The combined title bars and toolbars that were introduced in Big Sur are not an aesthetic change. It's a very visible downgrade.
I'm not sure that those are particularly iPad or iOS inspired, though. That feels more like Dye doing his "trying to get rid of the UI" thing rather than anything indicating a platform merge.
That said, I'm a bit scared we'll get the iPadOS '26 traffic light window controls (that are tiny until you hover them) in macOS…
I take your point that this change was functional, not just aesthetic, but I still don't see it as part of any conspiracy to displace the Mac. Just a lack of care.
> That is a welcome change. But that's about the only one.
Ironically, it's one I can't stand! I missed being able to do the pinch gesture to bring up Launchpad and then find my app icons without having to type or scroll a ridiculously long list in a teeny tiny window.
Launchpad made sense to me, but it should've had an option to automatically sort or tidy up the icons in the style of the App Library or the new Spotlight-based interface.
Who is MacOS even for anymore though? It reminds me of the touchbar, removing ports and Macbook Pro. Know your audience. Professionals use MacOS, everyone could get by with a $200 Chromebook. Why cater to the wrong crowd.
Professionals use macOS. They also use iOS and iPadOS. I think Apple's success is their own poison in that the definition of who or what a professional is has expanded with their market share.
Yet, in their eagerness to transition their newer fanbase of loyal bicycle riders to the Mac mega-truck, they didn't so much as add oomph to the bike as attach pedals to a lorry.
Yet, in their eagerness to transition their newer fanbase of loyal bicycle riders to the Mac mega-truck, they didn't so much as add oomph to the bike as attach pedals to a lorry.
It's happening. They've probably had iOS on Mac laptops for 5 years at this point. Similar to when they had been compiling MacOSX on Intel for 5 years before switching off PowerPC. The cursor on iOS on iPad is the nail in the coffin. I'll make sure to ping you when it does.
Only ping me if it's in the next five years, which was the claim from the other poster. ;-)
We have until 2030!
That said, if macOS continues to receive such shoddy treatment from its design team, I may not be using macOS by then to even care if it's going out the door. I may already be gone.
We have until 2030!
That said, if macOS continues to receive such shoddy treatment from its design team, I may not be using macOS by then to even care if it's going out the door. I may already be gone.
> It's obvious iOS will become the desktop OS in the next 5 years or so.
It is obvious that Apple is moving in that direction. I have never met a single person who actually wants this, however.
It is obvious that Apple is moving in that direction. I have never met a single person who actually wants this, however.
> UI that scrolls, a big no-no in desktop UI design
Is it?
I like a UI without a minimum screen size. I am livid when I can't use a fixed-size-settings dialogue because a driver/monitor is misbehaving so I'm at min resolution. The sort of issue where you have to find another machine so you can "count tabs" for keyboard navigation to get at things off-screen.
Many other cases: e.g. I like to use VMs or RDP in small windows. I also like to resize a settings window into something tiny or tiling it when doing something I need to do toggle something back and forth.
I agree it's bad if it's a long list of barely related things you have to scan each time to find what you want. The "categorised scroller" type dialogue vscode uses for settings in in theory the best of both worlds... but I keep finding myself accidentally scrolling beyond my intended category causing myself much confusion.
Is it?
I like a UI without a minimum screen size. I am livid when I can't use a fixed-size-settings dialogue because a driver/monitor is misbehaving so I'm at min resolution. The sort of issue where you have to find another machine so you can "count tabs" for keyboard navigation to get at things off-screen.
Many other cases: e.g. I like to use VMs or RDP in small windows. I also like to resize a settings window into something tiny or tiling it when doing something I need to do toggle something back and forth.
I agree it's bad if it's a long list of barely related things you have to scan each time to find what you want. The "categorised scroller" type dialogue vscode uses for settings in in theory the best of both worlds... but I keep finding myself accidentally scrolling beyond my intended category causing myself much confusion.
The right way is to design your dialogs such that they fit into the minimum screen resolution that the OS runs at. Some of the Windows ones are optimized for 640x480 because that's what the basic VGA driver runs at. If I remember correctly, macOS requires either 800x600 or 1024x768.
640x480 was the minimum resolution in Win95 days. It was upped to 800x600 in WinXP, I think? And more recently, to 720p in Win11.
> We've seen apple move toward unifying their various OS interfaces for a long time
1. They claimed they would never do that. But we know how much words corporate bullshit carries
2. You cannot unify interfaces that are operated in completely different ways.
There's no "unified interface" that works well on a single-app-at-a-time smartphone with touch and on a 5k screen with multiple apps, a keyboard, and a mouse.
> As the article says, liquid glass works best for spatial computing. That's apple's next big bet and the whole ecosystem is going to cater to it
No, it doesn't work best for spatial computing. This idiotic statement started as a way to justify Liquid Glass on Twitter.
On top of that, if it "works best for spatial" means that literally every other device will work worse because of the unification no one asked for.
---
However, the answer is simple: it's a vanity project by a person with next to zero design experience thrust into a position of power
1. They claimed they would never do that. But we know how much words corporate bullshit carries
2. You cannot unify interfaces that are operated in completely different ways.
There's no "unified interface" that works well on a single-app-at-a-time smartphone with touch and on a 5k screen with multiple apps, a keyboard, and a mouse.
> As the article says, liquid glass works best for spatial computing. That's apple's next big bet and the whole ecosystem is going to cater to it
No, it doesn't work best for spatial computing. This idiotic statement started as a way to justify Liquid Glass on Twitter.
On top of that, if it "works best for spatial" means that literally every other device will work worse because of the unification no one asked for.
---
However, the answer is simple: it's a vanity project by a person with next to zero design experience thrust into a position of power
I love applying the solution that works best for the least used case to the most used case, where it decidedly does not work best
>As the article says, liquid glass works best for spatial computing.
God I hope not, the last thing I want is having to put on a stupid VR headset everyday for work. Either we stick to good ole screens or we skip straight to neural links, none of this VR bull-shieet. And I used to own a Quest device, fun for some games, but not for prolonged work.
>As the article says, liquid glass works best for spatial computing.
I'd love to see proof of that. Because I feel like it's the exact opposite. Imagine all the street and traffic signs being also translucent and made of glass, the accident rates would spike. It looks cool in sci-fi movies, but IRL accessibility is severely lacking.
God I hope not, the last thing I want is having to put on a stupid VR headset everyday for work. Either we stick to good ole screens or we skip straight to neural links, none of this VR bull-shieet. And I used to own a Quest device, fun for some games, but not for prolonged work.
>As the article says, liquid glass works best for spatial computing.
I'd love to see proof of that. Because I feel like it's the exact opposite. Imagine all the street and traffic signs being also translucent and made of glass, the accident rates would spike. It looks cool in sci-fi movies, but IRL accessibility is severely lacking.
Not introducing any changes can lead to becoming “uncool” among the younger generation, which can be detrimental to the longevity of the business. Generally I agree with you, but it’s not that simple as our (HN crowd’s?) attitude of “function over form” is not that common out in the wild. People will spend money on stuff that makes them feel or look better. However, designers can screw that up too, and make the new”thing” uncool.
At least when it comes to smartphones, they're basically commodities these days. Everyone has them. It's hard to see what "wow" factor a mere UI redesign has when everyone and their mother (quite literally) will get it.
If Apple wants to make iPhones cool again, my suggestion would be to loosen their iron grip on it and let people customize and build wacky new experiences around it with no corporate oversight. People on the ground know what's cool better than some trillion dollar company. Similar to the Windows theming and shareware scene of the 90s. But that would kill Apple's golden goose, and they'll have none of that.
If Apple wants to make iPhones cool again, my suggestion would be to loosen their iron grip on it and let people customize and build wacky new experiences around it with no corporate oversight. People on the ground know what's cool better than some trillion dollar company. Similar to the Windows theming and shareware scene of the 90s. But that would kill Apple's golden goose, and they'll have none of that.
This is a tired take, not unlike when people bash web developers to make slow and bloated web pages. Completely disregards how little say the individual has in the final product, and especially in the design of that product.
What's actually happening is that companies are expected to a different standards, by customers and other companies alike. By trying to anticipate these expectations, companies go ahead and do the changes that they think will strengthen the brand that they are trying to project. That's all there is to it, the rest is implementation.
What's actually happening is that companies are expected to a different standards, by customers and other companies alike. By trying to anticipate these expectations, companies go ahead and do the changes that they think will strengthen the brand that they are trying to project. That's all there is to it, the rest is implementation.
Huh??? Have you actually tried talking to non-tech people? Customers hate software updates. Especially the kind that change the design for no reason and/or break their established muscle memory by rearranging the UI layout.
And third-party app developers hate OS updates too, especially, again, the kind that change the UI design. Apple is the most expensive company in the world so the cost of these redesigns is a rounding error for them. For smaller app developers, this incurs significant extra costs for the only reason of Apple just feeling like it.
And third-party app developers hate OS updates too, especially, again, the kind that change the UI design. Apple is the most expensive company in the world so the cost of these redesigns is a rounding error for them. For smaller app developers, this incurs significant extra costs for the only reason of Apple just feeling like it.
Insult aside, consider the following. Are almost all companies doing this much effort just because of some rouge elements within the company, or are they doing it because they see a direct benefit from it with regarding to sales?
What people tell, and how people act are two very different things. For multiple reasons too, I'm not meaning this in a malicious way at all. Feedback is very useful, but needs careful interpretation. Tangential, but this is why telemetry works very well: it paints a more realistic picture compared to what people report.
What people tell, and how people act are two very different things. For multiple reasons too, I'm not meaning this in a malicious way at all. Feedback is very useful, but needs careful interpretation. Tangential, but this is why telemetry works very well: it paints a more realistic picture compared to what people report.
Competition forces innovation, but in the absence of real innovation you get this crap. Change for changes sake. Nobody is really competing anymore - oh a ANOTHER camera? It's 10 nm thinner! Literally almost all these features are who cares to users, they are just creating an update treadmill for a product that proxies as a social status symbol.
If consumers make their choices according to features like this - then the competition is real and the innovation must happen, otherwise the company is left behind. Exactly as you say: "they are just creating an update treadmill for a product that proxies as a social status symbol" - that is exactly what's happening. Not just "full-time designers need to be designing something", as grandparent put it. Companies live or die by these developments.
There might be competition, but competition for status symbols is not actual innovation. You seem to have got your concepts muddled by corporate marketing-speak.
> Insult aside
What freaking "insult"?
What freaking "insult"?
As a designer I can say that the truth is that customers expect things to get remade and updated and if you wait too long the stale aesthetic begins driving away new AND existing users who want to try out shiny new things. Nice hallucination though blaming it on designers, the folks with no decision making abilties who are often blocked by PMs and devs.
As a useer I can say that the truth is that customers expect things to stay put and keep working, and if you futz around with that just because you think "the aesthetic" is "stale", that sure as fuck begins driving away existing users who don't want to "try out shiny new things" but just want their shit to work. (And whaddoIknow, perhaps also potential new users who also want just that, but have caught wind of your software having unneccesary UI design changes all the time.)
Nice hallucination though, thinking that re-designs for no other purpose than re-designing are and should universally be acknowledged as the bee's knees.
Maybe the world really just doesn't need as many designers as you seem to think it does.
Nice hallucination though, thinking that re-designs for no other purpose than re-designing are and should universally be acknowledged as the bee's knees.
Maybe the world really just doesn't need as many designers as you seem to think it does.
[deleted]
Performance review driven development is the bane of the whole industry. People inventing bullshit work for absolutely no reason other than to pad their yearly reviews. I've been through two large useless rewrites at my current job just so a bunch of folks could get promoted.
Well, if the big tech mass layoffs go as planned, the problem should work itself out naturally.
You can't have designers messing with the UI every performance review cycle, if you have no designers.
Win-win for the shareholders who want to save money and for the consumers who want the UI to stay the same as they got used to.
You can't have designers messing with the UI every performance review cycle, if you have no designers.
Win-win for the shareholders who want to save money and for the consumers who want the UI to stay the same as they got used to.
IMHO it's not specific to design - in big companies incentives (for unknown to me reason) set in a way that small incremental improvements are discouraged by managers and delivery of a big shiny project is the best way to get a bonus/promotion. Managers don't want designers and developers to keep improving things, they want something completely new (a project they can attach their name to) or at lest some big change - the bigger the better.
It doesn’t even look particularly good? And I’m not even a design-Luddite – generally a fan of a lot of Apple visual design and I hate old windows 98-style buttons. I’m the type of person who should enjoy it. (Only speaking about the visuals here)
The only wow feeling I get is the refraction effect. Like, it’s a ”novel” effect in GUIs. But when elements are still it looks the same as regular glassomorphism which we already had years ago. Buttons look totally different depending on what’s underneath, and in 90% of cases it’s messy and blurs together. The wow feeling will fade quickly, but the clutter will remain…
The only thing I like is that it makes layering a bit clearer (groupings, buttons vs indicators) compared to ultra-flat design of the last years. But that could have been achieved with subtle 3d/parallax effects, eg based on gyro.
My theory is that Apple specifically wanted an effect that can’t be replicated in webviews, to drive more devs towards native, out of FOMO for looking ”cheap”.
The only wow feeling I get is the refraction effect. Like, it’s a ”novel” effect in GUIs. But when elements are still it looks the same as regular glassomorphism which we already had years ago. Buttons look totally different depending on what’s underneath, and in 90% of cases it’s messy and blurs together. The wow feeling will fade quickly, but the clutter will remain…
The only thing I like is that it makes layering a bit clearer (groupings, buttons vs indicators) compared to ultra-flat design of the last years. But that could have been achieved with subtle 3d/parallax effects, eg based on gyro.
My theory is that Apple specifically wanted an effect that can’t be replicated in webviews, to drive more devs towards native, out of FOMO for looking ”cheap”.
> It doesn’t even look particularly good? And I’m not even a design-Luddite – generally a fan of a lot of Apple visual design and I hate old windows 98-style buttons. I’m the type of person who should enjoy it. (Only speaking about the visuals here)
Same, and liquid glass so far is just...bad, in a way. I don't mind it nearly as much on the iPhone but it's particularly bad on macOS. Excessive padding, lack of clean information density. The transparent menu bar doesn't adjust text for the wallpaper, so if you set a white background you still get (now unreadable) white text, but everywhere else the text changes colors based on the background. There's not even a glass effect in the menu bar, it's just transparent.
Honestly macOS 26, still as of Beta 4, looks like a bad GNOME/GTK theme. I'm incredibly disappointed in Apple here - a company that said they would never converge their interfaces together have basically morphed macOS into iPad OS.
Meanwhile on the mobile side of things, Material 3 expressive is actually looking really nice, aesthetically and I'd prefer that but then I'm giving up all of Apple's other conveniences.
Hurray for no competition.
> My theory is that Apple specifically wanted an effect that can’t be replicated in webviews, to drive more devs towards native, out of FOMO for looking ”cheap”.
I get this vibe too - they want something that can only be made using their toolkits, drive more to the app store and that sweet sweet 30% commission.
Same, and liquid glass so far is just...bad, in a way. I don't mind it nearly as much on the iPhone but it's particularly bad on macOS. Excessive padding, lack of clean information density. The transparent menu bar doesn't adjust text for the wallpaper, so if you set a white background you still get (now unreadable) white text, but everywhere else the text changes colors based on the background. There's not even a glass effect in the menu bar, it's just transparent.
Honestly macOS 26, still as of Beta 4, looks like a bad GNOME/GTK theme. I'm incredibly disappointed in Apple here - a company that said they would never converge their interfaces together have basically morphed macOS into iPad OS.
Meanwhile on the mobile side of things, Material 3 expressive is actually looking really nice, aesthetically and I'd prefer that but then I'm giving up all of Apple's other conveniences.
Hurray for no competition.
> My theory is that Apple specifically wanted an effect that can’t be replicated in webviews, to drive more devs towards native, out of FOMO for looking ”cheap”.
I get this vibe too - they want something that can only be made using their toolkits, drive more to the app store and that sweet sweet 30% commission.
> The transparent menu bar doesn't adjust text for the wallpaper, so if you set a white background you still get (now unreadable) white text, but everywhere else the text changes colors based on the background. There's not even a glass effect in the menu bar, it's just transparent.
This is weird, given that the menu bar already was translucent before, but it did adjust the text color if the background underneath would be bright.
This is weird, given that the menu bar already was translucent before, but it did adjust the text color if the background underneath would be bright.
Turns out it was a bug. After updating to beta 4 the text now correctly changes to black when you use a white/lighter wallpaper.
> My theory is that Apple specifically wanted an effect that can’t be replicated in webviews
This makes a lot of sense to me. I was also under the impression that all these lighting effects would be rather computationally expensive. This could encourage people to upgrade devices and make it hard to replicate this design on other brands’ less powerful hardware.
This makes a lot of sense to me. I was also under the impression that all these lighting effects would be rather computationally expensive. This could encourage people to upgrade devices and make it hard to replicate this design on other brands’ less powerful hardware.
That's where they're mistaken. This stuff can definitely be done. It's gonna be clunky and messy but it can be done.
The lede is buried at the end of this article.
> Later iOS 26 beta releases show Apple reducing transparency and adding blur effects for better readability.
This is a beta release. It is a work in progress. When iOS 7’s betas came out the reaction was similarly negative. I would suggest we wait and see what the system evolves into; by the time we get to iOS 27 I am quite sure that Apple will have found the right balance.
> Later iOS 26 beta releases show Apple reducing transparency and adding blur effects for better readability.
This is a beta release. It is a work in progress. When iOS 7’s betas came out the reaction was similarly negative. I would suggest we wait and see what the system evolves into; by the time we get to iOS 27 I am quite sure that Apple will have found the right balance.
I've observed that some people like to gatekeep others from being allowed to criticize the beta, but then when the final version releases they gatekeep criticizing that too because "you should have given feedback during the beta!"
It is just a way people try to shutdown being critical of Apple's stuff in general. It is tiresome.
It is just a way people try to shutdown being critical of Apple's stuff in general. It is tiresome.
[deleted]
When Apple is dropping press releases trumpeting their "meticulously crafted" design that "makes even the simplest of interactions more fun and magical", it is not persuasive to cry "beta!"
Even the screenshots in the press release - Apple's best foot forward - were criticized more or less immediately; it's not like the problems with the design are rare edge cases.
Apple clearly owns the decision to go this route. No one forced them to announce it before refining it internally. It remains to be seen how drastically they will have to walk it back. Whether or not they rework it enough to reduce complaints, I can't see how they can call it a win in the end. They will anyway.
Even the screenshots in the press release - Apple's best foot forward - were criticized more or less immediately; it's not like the problems with the design are rare edge cases.
Apple clearly owns the decision to go this route. No one forced them to announce it before refining it internally. It remains to be seen how drastically they will have to walk it back. Whether or not they rework it enough to reduce complaints, I can't see how they can call it a win in the end. They will anyway.
Beta 3 walked it back and added frosting.
Beta 4 went back again.
As for being "sure" Apple will find the right balance, they never fixed usability regressions in macOS introduced in the last redesign. And they have ~10 weeks to fix all this.
Beta 4 went back again.
As for being "sure" Apple will find the right balance, they never fixed usability regressions in macOS introduced in the last redesign. And they have ~10 weeks to fix all this.
It’s going to be another apple intelligence aka “how the fuck do I make it go away?”
Ah. So they're reducing transparency to get better readability... If reducing transparency increases readability, then wouldn't the best readability occur at zero transparency?
Readability is obviously good for something. Is transparency?
I am quite sure that "the right balance" is zero transparency, but only about 99% sure Apple won't "find" that.
Readability is obviously good for something. Is transparency?
I am quite sure that "the right balance" is zero transparency, but only about 99% sure Apple won't "find" that.
iOS 7 remains to this day a common meme among Apple developer community regarding design going too far, so naturally finding the right balance is kind of questionable.
Yes beta is a work in progress.
But so is alpha, which is where looniness gets to live without judgement. Beta is supposed to be polished and working well, except where there are explicit warnings of incomplete or sketchy functionality. I.e. small areas that are still alpha.
Which is the opposite of how Apple framed "liquid glass" in the beta.
Apple lowered the bar on its beta. Strong feedback is how customers suggest a course correction at a higher level.
But so is alpha, which is where looniness gets to live without judgement. Beta is supposed to be polished and working well, except where there are explicit warnings of incomplete or sketchy functionality. I.e. small areas that are still alpha.
Which is the opposite of how Apple framed "liquid glass" in the beta.
Apple lowered the bar on its beta. Strong feedback is how customers suggest a course correction at a higher level.
Cool, so I will wait for iOS 27.
All the friggin' shaders we have to run to waste GPU cycles, just to get those blobs pretending to refract light. Don't even get me started about the ever-increasing border radii!?
> All the friggin' shaders we have to run to waste GPU cycles,
The GPU compute used by this is trivial for modern SoCs.
There is so much power and efficiency in a modern iPhone processor that these simple shaders are entirely negligible.
The GPU compute used by this is trivial for modern SoCs.
There is so much power and efficiency in a modern iPhone processor that these simple shaders are entirely negligible.
Then why is battery life terrible on iOS 26 and the device is heating up just doing basic stuff with the UI. And it stutters a lot too in places even with a 16 Pro.
Because it's a beta. That's normal. It's often been the case. The stuff gets optimized by the actual release.
Betas aren't meant for use on your main phone where you want reliability and battery life.
Betas aren't meant for use on your main phone where you want reliability and battery life.
I'll bet you a dollar that a bit older phones will definitely get slower and get a battery life hit. Definitely helps Apple with the upgrade cycles.
It would be an interesting napkin problem to do. Yes it's relatively trivial, but multiply it by 1B smartphones running for many hours every day and how many cities worth of power are you wasting on extraneous shader cycles?
It’s still very little energy. Probably way way less than a bedside lamp per phone.
Phones aren’t a good place to try to save aggregate energy use at a population level. They already use vanishingly small amounts of energy compared to just about anything in your house.
Phones aren’t a good place to try to save aggregate energy use at a population level. They already use vanishingly small amounts of energy compared to just about anything in your house.
One could suppose that they need to justify the GPU/NPU hardware bloat originally intended for "Apple Intelligence" now that "Apple Intelligence" seems overblown and under-delivered. Though they'd need a lot more shaders beyond just "glass" to really make a dent in the cycles available from all that hardware.
This rounded corner change feels very off. Since Apple has that same radius across all its products (software and hardware), it could be signaling a broader upcoming shift in their hardware, perhaps driven by industrial design needs for future AR/VR/MR glasses.
Those huge rounded corners do waste a lot of screen estate.
What I find comical is that the same people praising this on various networks are often the same that hate on cryptocurrencies such as bitcoin or AI because of the energy usage.
Apple has 1bio devices out there, if each of them consumes 10% more energy due to this change, that's a massive energy consumption increase - and this change offers no functional benefit at all.
Apple has 1bio devices out there, if each of them consumes 10% more energy due to this change, that's a massive energy consumption increase - and this change offers no functional benefit at all.
This doesn't check out. Bitcoin uses 100-150 TWh per year. Charging 1 billion phones 365 times uses 3-4 TWh, so a 10% change here would be .3-.4 TWh.
The idea that this change would consume 10% more energy seems completely unrealistic too.
The idea that this change would consume 10% more energy seems completely unrealistic too.
I’d just like to state my hatred of all those things is logically consistent on that basis.
Big if.
My question is: Given Apple is one of the most valuable companies on the planet, they can (and surely have) hired some of the best designers in the world. Articles like this one and many others are virtually sharing what we all think and every time a new beta comes out, it's strange to see some of the decisions that are made. The first beta came out and it was _very hard_ to see the lock screen if you had notifications. How was that missed? Or keep liquid glass, but don't make the text bright blue, so it's so hard to see. Or trigger frosted glass if dependent on whatever the background is? I sincerely do find designers to be in a hard position (especially having worked with so many of them in the past directly), but a lot of these things seem like novice mistakes. Maybe it's not even in the designing, it's on the QA front? I'm not even sure here. I'm by no means a designer, but I have to believe that they are testing this as much as we are internally and have been for a long time now... I'd like to believe they aren't just changing UI elements on the fly based on what X / Twitter feels is good or bad.
Two theories are that Apple had to put something together quickly as a headliner because Apple Intelligence was clearly going to be a dud. So this is basically a hacked-together panic project.
Or someone high up has a Vision™, and they're so set on that Vision™ they're not listening to what underlings and users are saying.
Consider a parallel reality in which Apple did the next round of updates as a maintenance release and added some minor new features and UI tweaks. Would that have been a more positive outcome for the company?
My guess is there would have been some grumbling about not having anything new to offer, but also relief that bugs were being fixed. It would have been a bit of a non-event.
This seems more like a seismic negative event, with a lot of criticism from all quarters. (And some stanning, but less than usual.)
Or someone high up has a Vision™, and they're so set on that Vision™ they're not listening to what underlings and users are saying.
Consider a parallel reality in which Apple did the next round of updates as a maintenance release and added some minor new features and UI tweaks. Would that have been a more positive outcome for the company?
My guess is there would have been some grumbling about not having anything new to offer, but also relief that bugs were being fixed. It would have been a bit of a non-event.
This seems more like a seismic negative event, with a lot of criticism from all quarters. (And some stanning, but less than usual.)
> My guess is there would have been some grumbling about not having anything new to offer, but also relief that bugs were being fixed. It would have been a bit of a non-event.
Depending on what Google has to say about Pixel & Gemini in August, I think it would have been much more than grumbling. Apple is in a damned if they do damned if they don't situation. Under the surface of liquid glass, there really isn't even anything new coming unless they have some hardware limited features planned for the iPhone 17 launch.
It's clear this "redesign" was as you said, a panic project to cover for not delivering on AI, again for a second year and having nothing to show for WWDC. Just coming out with "we fixed some bugs" would cause a PR shitstorm. Even more so if Google gets any further ahead integrating Gemini into Pixel w/ personal context like what Apple wanted to achieve with Siri/AI, plus their own redesign (Material 3 Expressive, which is actually looking really nice IMO).
> This seems more like a seismic negative event, with a lot of criticism from all quarters.
Except from normal users/non enthusiasts. My kids and her friends all installed the dev beta and are absolutely enamored with liquid glass and think it's the coolest thing ever. Mind you, these are generations of folks that weren't around for Vista/7 Aero, etc and are now obsessed with that era from a fashion and design POV. "Fruitigier aero aesthetic" and all that. These are also people that would never switch platforms no matter what Apple does because of iMessage and social status/social pressure, so Apple is in no danger of losing any marketshare over this unless Google/Android somehow becomes "cool" again and can generate enough social pressure amongst the youth.
Depending on what Google has to say about Pixel & Gemini in August, I think it would have been much more than grumbling. Apple is in a damned if they do damned if they don't situation. Under the surface of liquid glass, there really isn't even anything new coming unless they have some hardware limited features planned for the iPhone 17 launch.
It's clear this "redesign" was as you said, a panic project to cover for not delivering on AI, again for a second year and having nothing to show for WWDC. Just coming out with "we fixed some bugs" would cause a PR shitstorm. Even more so if Google gets any further ahead integrating Gemini into Pixel w/ personal context like what Apple wanted to achieve with Siri/AI, plus their own redesign (Material 3 Expressive, which is actually looking really nice IMO).
> This seems more like a seismic negative event, with a lot of criticism from all quarters.
Except from normal users/non enthusiasts. My kids and her friends all installed the dev beta and are absolutely enamored with liquid glass and think it's the coolest thing ever. Mind you, these are generations of folks that weren't around for Vista/7 Aero, etc and are now obsessed with that era from a fashion and design POV. "Fruitigier aero aesthetic" and all that. These are also people that would never switch platforms no matter what Apple does because of iMessage and social status/social pressure, so Apple is in no danger of losing any marketshare over this unless Google/Android somehow becomes "cool" again and can generate enough social pressure amongst the youth.
> Except from normal users/non enthusiasts.
My wife is emphatically not a tech enthusiast. She hates what she's seen on the screenshots and demos so far, and is dreading the moment when it's out and she'll have to update.
My wife is emphatically not a tech enthusiast. She hates what she's seen on the screenshots and demos so far, and is dreading the moment when it's out and she'll have to update.
> It's clear this "redesign" was as you said, a panic project to cover for not delivering on AI, again for a second year and having nothing to show for WWDC.
Hm... So is their current system universally regarded as absolute shit, or what? Or does everyone[1] think it's pretty great now, but will switch to "it's shit!" immediately as of the WWDC?
Like, WTF is wrong with "We have a great system, it's still just as great, and even better now that we've worked mostly on stability and bugfixes."?
Are corporations nowadays all freaking Cinderella, or what?
___
[1]: Well, everyone who would consider buying into the Apple ecosystem.
Hm... So is their current system universally regarded as absolute shit, or what? Or does everyone[1] think it's pretty great now, but will switch to "it's shit!" immediately as of the WWDC?
Like, WTF is wrong with "We have a great system, it's still just as great, and even better now that we've worked mostly on stability and bugfixes."?
Are corporations nowadays all freaking Cinderella, or what?
___
[1]: Well, everyone who would consider buying into the Apple ecosystem.
> someone high up
Has to be. It has that Musky smell of banning yellow safety paint i.e. too stupid to be a team effort.
Legibility issues with translucency is such a basic thing and I expect Apple designers have gone deep on the topic e.g. mathematical models using human colour perception to determine hard limits for different type weights. I don't think the heavy frosting in past versions was an accident.
Has to be. It has that Musky smell of banning yellow safety paint i.e. too stupid to be a team effort.
Legibility issues with translucency is such a basic thing and I expect Apple designers have gone deep on the topic e.g. mathematical models using human colour perception to determine hard limits for different type weights. I don't think the heavy frosting in past versions was an accident.
But form over function is the core of why Apple is such hugely successful company with just few products. Focus on emotions rather than technical aspects. Design over usability. Less choices for users, just compare how much you can tweak in android vs ios. Removals of buttons, 3.5mm jack, sim card, removable batteries and so on and on just in phone area.
You may not like it (certainly I don't) but its extremely well received behavior. Humans are mostly emotional beings, just look at politics if you think otherwise.
You may not like it (certainly I don't) but its extremely well received behavior. Humans are mostly emotional beings, just look at politics if you think otherwise.
> The first beta came out and it was _very hard_ to see the lock screen if you had notifications. How was that missed?
It’s a beta for a reason.
Past betas have also had graphical weirdness in certain new features, too. They iterate on it before release.
Why has everyone suddenly forgotten what beta means?
It’s a beta for a reason.
Past betas have also had graphical weirdness in certain new features, too. They iterate on it before release.
Why has everyone suddenly forgotten what beta means?
I understand betas very well, but something as critical as that seems more fitting for an alpha. Liquid glass notifications on top of a bright wallpaper, bleeding together so you couldn't read or see anything shouldn't be in a beta.
The initial beta design had so many obvious issues that it's wild that it made it as far as it did. Hell, the readability of many UI elements was obviously terrible in the initial reveal, where you'd expect everything to be shown in the best possible light.
Obviously Apple can improve things for the final release (and it seems like they're taking some steps in that direction). But these issues should have been identified long before the beta was released, and the fact that they weren't does not inspire confidence.
Obviously Apple can improve things for the final release (and it seems like they're taking some steps in that direction). But these issues should have been identified long before the beta was released, and the fact that they weren't does not inspire confidence.
The first beta often ships with core features missing or broken. It exists to get as many new features in front of third party developers as soon as possible, because Apple has very little time to accept feedback before they are locked in for shipping.
At the same time, there seems to be precious little time between when Apple decides a feature is going to ship in the next release, and when WWDC happens.
Even if there was common knowledge inside the company that a new UI was coming, it may have not been merged into mainline until closer to WWDC. At that point, individual teams will need to alter their code to build and be usable on top of the UI as part of continuing their own development - but were likely still focused on the death march for their own WWDC-launched features.
At the same time, there seems to be precious little time between when Apple decides a feature is going to ship in the next release, and when WWDC happens.
Even if there was common knowledge inside the company that a new UI was coming, it may have not been merged into mainline until closer to WWDC. At that point, individual teams will need to alter their code to build and be usable on top of the UI as part of continuing their own development - but were likely still focused on the death march for their own WWDC-launched features.
This isn't the first beta, though.
So are we not supposed to criticize a beta at all? How are they to know what to fix unless someone actually looks at it and makes clear what's wrong? Obviously they missed a pretty critical readability issue here.
You apparently have. Beta releases are supposed to be "we believe this to be ready to ship, but need to sort out bugs." What you describe has traditionally been alpha or even pre-alpha releases.
I've recently picked up writing again, and decided to share my thoughts about what most designers (developers, tech people) have been thinking about lately: Liquid Glass. It makes sense, consistency-wise, but I wonder if it's the right direction. Let's hope Apple fixes the readability issues soon. Is this the new Windows Vista?
> Apple is prioritizing visual consistency over readability
It's a bit like someone saying "To view this website, enable JavaScript in your browser settings and reload the page" to read a simple piece of text ;)
It's a bit like someone saying "To view this website, enable JavaScript in your browser settings and reload the page" to read a simple piece of text ;)
As a typeface and legibility enthusiast I obviously have my problems with it.
I've found that in the creative work I do, lots of things moved away from skeuomorphism too far. Yes it's easier to read the text on a flat black background with all the controls in a grid. but you lose some intuition compared to when it actually resembled a hardware unit that has logical places for things.
I'm in the market for a new vehicle so I'm particular interested in that last line: which companies are bringing back physical controls in cars?
I've found that in the creative work I do, lots of things moved away from skeuomorphism too far. Yes it's easier to read the text on a flat black background with all the controls in a grid. but you lose some intuition compared to when it actually resembled a hardware unit that has logical places for things.
I'm in the market for a new vehicle so I'm particular interested in that last line: which companies are bringing back physical controls in cars?
I would adore a new car that has no digital displays or touch screens.
I have a feeling I will need to settle for finding and restoring a car from before 1990.
I have a feeling I will need to settle for finding and restoring a car from before 1990.
> I have a feeling I will need to settle for finding and restoring a car from before 1990.
You don't have to go back that far. I'm with you, I'm actively repulsed by newer cars because (in part) of the touch screens and other such nonsense, so I expect that I'll never be buying a car that was manufactured too recently.
But my current car is acceptable, and it was made it 2008.
You don't have to go back that far. I'm with you, I'm actively repulsed by newer cars because (in part) of the touch screens and other such nonsense, so I expect that I'll never be buying a car that was manufactured too recently.
But my current car is acceptable, and it was made it 2008.
My car has suffered through 20 salty winters, and I'm not sure it's going to be acceptable much longer. Which is unfortunate, because it seems like new cars mostly aren't.
That can't happen now that backup cameras (and a display for it) are mandatory. And they're never going to leave a big screen in the dash unused except for when driving in reverse.
> And they're never going to leave a big screen in the dash unused
They could, at the very least, only use the touch screen for things that you don't want to adjust while driving.
They could, at the very least, only use the touch screen for things that you don't want to adjust while driving.
> They could, at the very least, only use the touch screen for things that you don't want to adjust while driving.
My 2019 crosstrek is like this, and I dread the day I need to retire it. Physical controls for everything, supports carplay+android auto, and the only thing the touch screen is used to adjust are sound balance, and auto-headlight sensitivity.
My 2019 crosstrek is like this, and I dread the day I need to retire it. Physical controls for everything, supports carplay+android auto, and the only thing the touch screen is used to adjust are sound balance, and auto-headlight sensitivity.
That sure would be nice.
Look at the slate truck. I hope they succeed!
Bugatti has chosen with the new Tourbillion to go for an all analog gauge + button setup. Because handcrafted gauges and buttons (these days) shows of luxury. https://www.bugatti.com/en/models/tourbillon
A flat touchscreen in a car is something that is now used in anything from a base Fiat Panda to the most expensive Mercedes S class. And it all looks cheap because visually there is little visual difference between that and a 25,- dollar AliExpress tablet.
At some point in time the luxury car brands must be getting this feedback from their customers.
A flat touchscreen in a car is something that is now used in anything from a base Fiat Panda to the most expensive Mercedes S class. And it all looks cheap because visually there is little visual difference between that and a 25,- dollar AliExpress tablet.
At some point in time the luxury car brands must be getting this feedback from their customers.
Mazda has embraced physical touch controls for the most part.
I don't want skeuomorphism personally, but the problem isn't with the lack of that, it's with the lack of any consistent way to differentiate the various controls in general. Is it just a bit of text? A button? A checkbox? Who knows when it's all the same kind of flat.
Win95 was very much not skeuomorphic, but it had very strong visual cues in UI even so.
Win95 was very much not skeuomorphic, but it had very strong visual cues in UI even so.
My new Toyota is all physical interfaces for everything except infotainment.
It's nice to have frivilous things in our life where form overtakes function. But with a GUI, it's a tool and they work best when there are no frills. Nobody makes a fancy looking hammer (looking forward to the fancy hammer replies).
Here you go: https://tftools.com/en-us/collections/martinez-hammers
(I'm not a customer or an owner.)
(I'm not a customer or an owner.)
Martinez hammers are fancy, but they're not a case where form overtakes function. They have a reputation for excellent weighting and every part is replaceable. The colors are functional too in the sense that they make it easy to tell your hammer from someone else's on a job site.
I was just a few hours ago at the National Museum of Denmark, and they had a whole exhibit on ceremonial hammers in their prehistory floor. So there's that, I guess.
My fear is that we are in a world were there can only be a couple of unique device types, and thus only a couple of unique operating systems and UIs. So that even for professional (metaphorical) “hammer” users, the function will end up performed by the same device/os/ui that is also handing more consumer oriented functions. There will be tension in the UI needs of different functions, but the market for consumer functions is just so large, that the hammer function will lose and be forced to adopt an unsuitable ui.
“Your colleague Joe just hammered an 8d nail!” <Like> <comment>
“Your colleague Joe just hammered an 8d nail!” <Like> <comment>
>But with a GUI, it's a tool and they work best when there are no frills.
That must be why everyone is using CDE...
That must be why everyone is using CDE...
This will be the second Apple UI redesign where aesthetics trumps function. We've strayed so far from the intuitive interfaces in iOS <7.
> Early signs suggest they're already realizing this. Later iOS 26 beta releases show Apple reducing transparency and adding blur effects for better readability.
That statement on July 20 didn't age well, because beta 4 released yesterday, July 22, doubled down on transparency, undoing some of the minor improvements in beta 3.
That statement on July 20 didn't age well, because beta 4 released yesterday, July 22, doubled down on transparency, undoing some of the minor improvements in beta 3.
I gotta say, ever since i first saw screenshots of this, I've been even more glad to be an android user. It looks awful imo
I'm pretty sure it will come to Android as well. But I wouldn't be surprised if the transparency could be turned off for example.
> I'm pretty sure it will come to Android as well.
With material 3 expressive, Android seems to be going in the total opposite direction and it's a breath of fresh air and I'm even considering switching over if I can ever get over the loss of some Apple conveniences and an inferior smart watch.
The two OSes have largely followed each other over the years but no we are actually starting to see a divergence, at least in look and feel.
With material 3 expressive, Android seems to be going in the total opposite direction and it's a breath of fresh air and I'm even considering switching over if I can ever get over the loss of some Apple conveniences and an inferior smart watch.
The two OSes have largely followed each other over the years but no we are actually starting to see a divergence, at least in look and feel.
I think this totally depends on the reception of the glassy ui Apple is doing. If it proves to uphold Apple's aspirational goods status, I'm sure the other brands will follow suit - even mainline Android.
Liquid glass makes so much sense in an AR/VR context but it seems horrible in pretty much every other context
It kind of makes sense…
Although, I suspect if AR really becomes a thing, it will be in a form-factor with actually physical transparency. Nreal is the design to beat, not the gaming headsets.
If the display is already transparent, adding a layer of pseudo-transparency to the interface seems kinda pointless.
Although, I suspect if AR really becomes a thing, it will be in a form-factor with actually physical transparency. Nreal is the design to beat, not the gaming headsets.
If the display is already transparent, adding a layer of pseudo-transparency to the interface seems kinda pointless.
The thing is that passthrough and optical AR compete and might always compete as each one has advantages.
The optical AR system is always going to be transparent to the outside world so perhaps a vendor that expects to sell both kinds of device will add transparency to the passthrough device so it looks "the same" as the optical device.
The optical AR system is always going to be transparent to the outside world so perhaps a vendor that expects to sell both kinds of device will add transparency to the passthrough device so it looks "the same" as the optical device.
In that case the UI should have all-over transparency, rather than some limited transparent elements, right? And none of the complicated optical effects.
[deleted]
> Instead, it introduces readability problems without any of the spatial computing benefits.
> Apple's Liquid Glass may win design accolades, but history suggests it will join the long list of beautiful solutions that made computing harder, not easier, for the people who actually have to use it every day. Unless they get it right.
> Early signs suggest they're already realizing this.
Succinctly written.
How can the third most valuable company on the planet with computing being the core of their DNA not realize this pre launch?
I have no experience with either SF/ SV or culture in large US enterprises.
Does someone has a hypothesis?
> Apple's Liquid Glass may win design accolades, but history suggests it will join the long list of beautiful solutions that made computing harder, not easier, for the people who actually have to use it every day. Unless they get it right.
> Early signs suggest they're already realizing this.
Succinctly written.
How can the third most valuable company on the planet with computing being the core of their DNA not realize this pre launch?
I have no experience with either SF/ SV or culture in large US enterprises.
Does someone has a hypothesis?
>How can the third most valuable company on the planet with computing being the core of their DNA not realize this pre launch?
Large companies have lots of mediocre people making decisions and the larger a company is the further away those decision makers are from the experts that can guide them towards making the correct decision.
Large companies have lots of mediocre people making decisions and the larger a company is the further away those decision makers are from the experts that can guide them towards making the correct decision.
> How can the third most valuable company on the planet with computing being the core of their DNA not realize this pre launch?
They haven’t launched it. The version with the exaggerated effects was an early beta. The more recent betas are already far more refined.
Everyone is raging over some early pre-release screenshots and videos because they’re unfamiliar with how Apple works: The early betas of a new UI are always refined and adjusted significantly before launch.
They haven’t launched it. The version with the exaggerated effects was an early beta. The more recent betas are already far more refined.
Everyone is raging over some early pre-release screenshots and videos because they’re unfamiliar with how Apple works: The early betas of a new UI are always refined and adjusted significantly before launch.
If Apple wants the benefit of building buzz by having splashy pre-release presentations they also have to deal with the times those initial reactions are negative. WWDC is as much a marketing event as a developer event.
Um, I am on iOS Beta 4 and stunned at the sometimes decreased legibility.
This effect has markedly worsened from Beta 3, where using Freeze, the glaring and lack of contrast around icons and letters was decreased.
This effect has markedly worsened from Beta 3, where using Freeze, the glaring and lack of contrast around icons and letters was decreased.
Liquid Glass seems like a big step backwards. It's new for newness' sake and hardly brings any UI improvements.
I suspect it was UI work done to coincide with the assumed (at the time) forthcoming dominance of the Apple Vision, if you consider the timeline. Cant waste that work even if Vision flopped. If you cant get society to embrace Vision, integrate it into their 2d UI as a trojan horse to make it more familiar and try again with the next generation when AR comes back after the AI fervor dies down.
This same strategy is what brought coffee and starbucks to Japan using a ten year plan, first they had to start with coffee flavored candy to get the kids used to it, then 10 years later only then you can begin bringing in more coffee flavors, soon you have a Starbucks here and there.
This same strategy is what brought coffee and starbucks to Japan using a ten year plan, first they had to start with coffee flavored candy to get the kids used to it, then 10 years later only then you can begin bringing in more coffee flavors, soon you have a Starbucks here and there.
Maybe, but I don't think visionOS can fully explain the move towards more transparency. Older macOS versions (in the Mac OS X days) used a lot more transparency, and the first iterations of Aqua around 2001-2005 actually had a lot in common with Liquid Glass. Transparency everywhere was abandoned for obvious usability/accessibility reasons as well as changing standards for aesthetics.
iOS 6 -> iOS 7 was a huge improvement, moving towards simplicity and minimalism. Liquid Glass feels more like bloat and a lot of wasted screen estate.
iOS 6 -> iOS 7 was a huge improvement, moving towards simplicity and minimalism. Liquid Glass feels more like bloat and a lot of wasted screen estate.
> iOS 6 -> iOS 7 was a huge improvement
It was not. Probably one of the biggest UI regressions of my lifetime on par with Windows 7 -> Windows 8. The iOS 7 design is so limiting in what it can communicate that it took Apple several major releases to make the iOS shift key's state legible to users. Arguably, they still haven't nailed it. I also find the idea that's iOS 7 is minimalistic comical, since information density dropped in most applications after the transition in favor of white space padding (necessary because the boundaries between UI and content were no longer obvious).
It was not. Probably one of the biggest UI regressions of my lifetime on par with Windows 7 -> Windows 8. The iOS 7 design is so limiting in what it can communicate that it took Apple several major releases to make the iOS shift key's state legible to users. Arguably, they still haven't nailed it. I also find the idea that's iOS 7 is minimalistic comical, since information density dropped in most applications after the transition in favor of white space padding (necessary because the boundaries between UI and content were no longer obvious).
I found iOS 7 to be a long overdue cleanup in the skeuomorphic design that had gone too far. I agree that revisions were necessary – but at least it was a step in the right direction. Liquid Glass seems like a step towards bloat and gloss with obvious usability downsides and no obvious advantages to the current design system.
Just because skeuomorphism had gone too far, doesn't mean that ditching it completely was the right move. A step in the right direction would have been removing the rich, corinthian leather from the calendar app. What we got was a total obliteration of affordances that made the UI easy to understand and intuit.
This problem persists to this day, probably because there is no clear way to indicate intractability in the post iOS 7 design language. For example, I was recently confused by where a setting in macOS had gone until I realized the (i) icons in some settings panels are clickable and bring up an additional setting modal (example from the Battery settings [1]). WTF!? There's no indication that this is a button at all - you either know this is a button or you don't.
And there's my perpetual bugbear - information density. Apparently it's getting worse again[2] with liquid glass, but iOS 7 was the original sin here. Removing affordances necessitated using whitespace to separate controls from each other and from content in many places because you have nothing else - but this means a dense, compact UI is often no longer possible.
[1] https://support.apple.com/en-us/108376
[2] https://mjtsai.com/blog/2025/07/04/ios-26-information-densit...
This problem persists to this day, probably because there is no clear way to indicate intractability in the post iOS 7 design language. For example, I was recently confused by where a setting in macOS had gone until I realized the (i) icons in some settings panels are clickable and bring up an additional setting modal (example from the Battery settings [1]). WTF!? There's no indication that this is a button at all - you either know this is a button or you don't.
And there's my perpetual bugbear - information density. Apparently it's getting worse again[2] with liquid glass, but iOS 7 was the original sin here. Removing affordances necessitated using whitespace to separate controls from each other and from content in many places because you have nothing else - but this means a dense, compact UI is often no longer possible.
[1] https://support.apple.com/en-us/108376
[2] https://mjtsai.com/blog/2025/07/04/ios-26-information-densit...
> iOS 6 -> iOS 7
Never in my life has an operating system update decreased usability as much as this step.
iOS 6 in some ways felt a bit dated at the time, sure, certainly flourishes were unnecessary… But iOS 7 was worse in every regard that mattered such as readability, discoverability, content density, visual consistency, and so on.
I’m glad we are moving on finally. But I am afraid we are moving further in the wrong direction.
Never in my life has an operating system update decreased usability as much as this step.
iOS 6 in some ways felt a bit dated at the time, sure, certainly flourishes were unnecessary… But iOS 7 was worse in every regard that mattered such as readability, discoverability, content density, visual consistency, and so on.
I’m glad we are moving on finally. But I am afraid we are moving further in the wrong direction.
overthink. there is no master plan. if Tim Cook had a master plan, you would have been driving an Apple Car by now
I've been using the iOS26 beta and I HAAATE the transparent/blurry navigation bar.
I'm curious what the impact is to a11y users though—it's been a while since I had to think about it but I remember having pretty strict requirements on background/foreground font and color differences for users with suboptimal vision.
I'm curious what the impact is to a11y users though—it's been a while since I had to think about it but I remember having pretty strict requirements on background/foreground font and color differences for users with suboptimal vision.
Great article. It cannot be said enough that sometimes physical interaction is just better than digital. Airline pilots, when they reach for certain levers, that lever has a certain feeling. So they don't have to think about it. Making too many things Digital is just way too confusing for the human mind.
For Apple aesthetics is function. Apple generates enormous value from branding as a premium product.
> "Unified design languages across platforms"
apple is an inverted pyramid:
from legal and finance there is a call for streamlining (cost cutting)
apple is an inverted pyramid:
from legal and finance there is a call for streamlining (cost cutting)
marketing comes up with the liquid ass strategy by "research"
technicians slap it together on tight deadlineThe recent big new initiatives by Apple has been all kind of failure? Apple Intelligence, Apple Vision, now this?
I don't know. I don't want to be doomsdayer because even during its heyday Apple made lot of mistakes - remember Ping? - but they never felt like this.
I don't know. I don't want to be doomsdayer because even during its heyday Apple made lot of mistakes - remember Ping? - but they never felt like this.
Yesterday I dusted off my iPhone 4 that was on iOS 5 (skeuomorphic) and it was lovely to use. Like a bonehead I wiped it and let iTunes update to 7.1.2 and now it has the flat design similar to what we have today and it sucks!
This may be the first time I will stay on an older iOS version. I can’t understand how they figured it would be an improvement over what we had lol.
> This may be the first time I will stay on an older iOS version.
[deleted]
Two things happen with an iOS release:
- they add a new menu view
- the menu views design get updated
When you run out of menus to add you’re left with design updates for the sake of design updates.
- they add a new menu view
- the menu views design get updated
When you run out of menus to add you’re left with design updates for the sake of design updates.
Apple: When Aesthetics Beat Function
Like Stockholm syndrome with dongles hanging out of the laptop, because having too many ports like PCs is bad for aesthetics, having a dongle hanging out of the laptop is much better.
I only use Macs on project basis, otherwise I am on PC, and is quite fun to see almost everyone on Apple side around the office carrying such dongles.
I only use Macs on project basis, otherwise I am on PC, and is quite fun to see almost everyone on Apple side around the office carrying such dongles.
To me, this signals that Apple is invested in Vision which is a great sign
….all this to try to get us to buy their stoopid goggles….what a travesty.
I mean, are they trying to make the phone UI so bad that people finally give up and say “well I might as well get the goggles cause the phone sucks”?
I mean, are they trying to make the phone UI so bad that people finally give up and say “well I might as well get the goggles cause the phone sucks”?
A waste of compute. Locks up. Glitches. Sluggish and as author said, difficult to read.
I’m glad that I hesitated and didn’t buy a Mac just before this new design. It’s really a blocker to me now because I freaking hate it and I know I can’t stand using it for every day
It seems that many people criticising transparency also think that it does make sense in AR. I never understood why.
AR is old. We have things like street signs, road markings, advertising and all sorts of other signage. Almost none of it is transparent, and why would it be?
No one can focus on a thing and what's behind it at the same time. There is no correct level of blur to fix this (but I'm sure they are going to spend years trying to find it anyway).
What I would like to be able to do sometimes is to make something transparent when it's blocking my view. It shouldn't be semi-transparent or blurred. It should be a faint wireframe outline so I know that something is there.
AR is old. We have things like street signs, road markings, advertising and all sorts of other signage. Almost none of it is transparent, and why would it be?
No one can focus on a thing and what's behind it at the same time. There is no correct level of blur to fix this (but I'm sure they are going to spend years trying to find it anyway).
What I would like to be able to do sometimes is to make something transparent when it's blocking my view. It shouldn't be semi-transparent or blurred. It should be a faint wireframe outline so I know that something is there.
YouTube recently made this change too where fullscreen controls are blurry-transparent and i said out loud yesterday "omg YouTube if it's blurry enough to read the foreground text it's too blurry to read the background text, what is the point"