Translucent layers generally make software unusable for me. In the video, I saw several instances that would be really really bad for me, where I’d be straining to understand the text. Looks really cool and futuristic though. Just like a movie. Big whoop.
I’m autistic, but this won’t only affect autistic people. A lot of people are going to have problems with this. I hope there’s a very prominent way to turn it off.
At a previous company, we were forbidden from using translucency (with a few exceptions) because of the performance cost of blending. There are debugging tools we'd use fairly often to confirm that all layers were opaque.
Apple at the time created their own 'approximate gaussian blur' algorithm specifically to enable this, and it ran crazy fast on devices where a simple gaussian blur would barely achieve double digit FPS. Even if this 'liquid glass' effect is heavier to compute, on the hardware we have today it will be a negligible performance concern.
"Without any performance issues"? Entirely false - reviews at the time noted iOS 7 dramatically reduced battery life - all across the board for Apple devices, even for the then latest iPhone 5S and 5c (https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2013/09/ios-7-thoroughly-rev...).
The abuse of transparency/translucency in the UI was the primary reason - you could go to Accessibility settings and disable animations + transparency/translucency and get notable increases in both runtime speed of the OS UI and battery life.
I's also true that iOS 7 made the 4/4S seem much slower, but the frosted glass effect still ran at 60FPS - that was my point. It was really impressive at the time. Though unless you spent hours sliding the control center up and down, it's hard to blame the blur effect for the reduced battery life, as it rarely appeared inside apps. Most likely the result of increased OS bloat and proliferation of background services.
It has been like this for every Apple release for over 20 years.
WebKit sounds like the kind of scrappy startup Apple might want to acquire and gain some hard-earned engineering knowledge.
But apparently they still welcome app-crashing bugs and UI-stalling code!
Also, they do listen to feedback and do gather it. They won't change entire design language now tho.
Screwing with the battery life on a mobile device would be a showstopper bug if Steve were still around.
And all of this just to make the whole UI white and generic.
I just want everything to look like Windows XP. I don't get it.
The demos only show a very limited array of shapes. Precompute the refraction, store the result in a texture, and the gist should be sample(blur(background), sample(refraction, point)). Probably a bit more complicated than this—I’m no magician of the kind that’s needed to devise cheap graphics tricks like this—but the computational effort should be in that ballpark. Compared to on-device language models and such, I wouldn’t be worried.
(Also, do I need to remind you of the absolute disdain directed by 95/98/Me/2000 users at the “toy” default theme of XP? And it was a bit silly, to be honest. It’s just that major software outfits don’t dare to be silly anymore, and that way lies blandness.)
Great observation! We need some of that sillyness back. Everything is all serious and corporate nowadays, even 'fun' stuff like social media or games. Even movies can't be silly anymore.
Myself, I can appreciate corporate stuff presenting corporate. More truthful, feels a little less manipulative.
Okay, but what about the battery connected to the GPU? The battery in my iPhone has already degraded below 80% health in the 2.7 years I've had it, so I'd rather not waste its charge on low-contrast glass effects.
3:30–3:45 in the video is painful. Describing “giving you an entirely new way, to personalise your experience”, while showing… white. White white white. Oh, and light tinted backgrounds to set your white on. I hope the personalisation you wanted was white.
But it is worth remembering that dark mode does actually get you some things; it’s not all bad: the restrictions do have some value.
Full customisation became paradoxically limiting: when you give too much power to the user, the app is essentially operating in a hostile environment. Of course, a lot of it was laziness on app and UI framework developers’ parts, but it really did limit innovation, too.
Dark mode gets you a pair of themes that you can switch between easily, and an expectation that there are only two themes you need to consider, with well-defined characteristics. This is a much more practical target, a vastly easier sell for app and framework developers.
The funny thing with monochrome icons is that in some ways they were actually a better fit for a full-customisation environment, where you had arbitrary background and foreground colours. Once it’s just mundane light and dark themes, you could more safely have full colour in two variants.
Certainly light mode and dark mode does not mean things need to be monochrome.
I don’t know, just kidding :-)
If GPUs can handle it, I guess why not. It’s some people will notice and say “wow, looks pretty, glad I upgraded”
And yes, later iOS on early hardware was huge PITA and slowdown.
I made a comment about this a couple of years ago, but I fudged the explanation of it. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34937618
I suspect that their new technique implements the existing fast gaussian blur, and since the patent is about to expire, it was a good time to spice it up.
I suspect as others have mentioned here, they use a "Liquid Glass" shader which samples the backing layer of the UI composition below the target element and applies a lens distortion based on the target element's border radius, all heavily parameterized so as to be used with the rest of the system's Liquid Glass applications like the new icon system.
I don't know how long you've been following Apple but with previous "high cost on old hardware" features they just disabled them for old hardware.
Apple loves their battery life numbers, they won't purposefully ship a UI feature that meaningfully reduces them. Now bugs that drop framerates and cause hangs, they love shipping those.
For devices currently being sold, primarily.
It's the first iPhone I bought and has lasted longer than any of the three Android phones I had before it.
...under pressure of consumer protection and e-waste laws. As it should be, I hope the other phone manufacturers are experiencing the same pressure.
Unlike previous GDI acceleration, DWM.EXE could composite alpha channel quickly with the GPU, and generally achieved much higher fill rates on the same hw - if the drivers worked properly.
Even on modern devices though which have more computation and graphics power to the point that they aren't going to actually lag or anything while rendering it, why waste cycles and battery animating these useless and distracting things? There's no good justification.
I have been using 8 year old iPhone just fine, but features like these over time will make the experience slower and slower and slower, until I am forced to refresh my iphone
If we want to take increasing device lifetimes seriously we need to normalize testing and development against slow/old models. Even if such testing is automated, it’d do wonders for keeping bloat at bay.
And yes, “looking different” doesn’t have to mean “requires faster hardware”, but picking something that requires faster hardware makes it less likely that you will be accused of being a copy-cat of some other product’s UI.
To be clear, these are new features that will likely have a setting to turn off. There’s no conspiracy, nothing “forcefully” added for the purpose of driving upgrades. (Ah, ninja edit): There’s not even a guarantee these features will be supported on an eight year old phone. EDIT: wait a minute...your eight year old phone won't even be supported.
(EDIT: reworded first paragraph to account for the ninja edit.)
It’s a legitimate concern even assuming good intent.
But Apple has had to publicly admit bad intent specifically with their batteries and had to offer people money etc.
Strange to criticize people for something Apple publicly admitted they did wrong.
When is the last time a company has admitted wrong-doing? No, Apple admitted to slowing down phones when the battery was shot so it wouldn’t just suddenly shut down.
The worst part was that during the boot sequence, the CPU ran at full-throttle for a few moments until the power-management components were loaded. So I couldn't restart it. As long as I didn't open a game or YouTube or a wonky website with super awful javascript, I could continue using the phone for another couple hours. But if the phone turned off, it couldn't be turned back on without charging it more ... even though it had "18%" battery left (as determined by voltage, not taking into account increased internal resistance in the battery as it ages).
I was envious of iPhone users that got a real fix for this (Apple slowing down the phone when the internal voltage got low). I would have greatly preferred that Samsung had done the same for my phone too.
That said, Apple _significantly_ erred in not over-communicating what they were doing. At that point, the OS would pop warnings to users if the phone had to thermal throttle, and adding a similar notification that led the user to a FAQ page explaining the battery dynamics wouldn't have been technically hard to do.
which I am doing exactly, but still new iOS version make my phone slower and slower and I cannot even opt out of updates.
because some apps are forcing me to use the latest version of iOS (Authentication, Okta 2fa, etc)
And you can use third parties as well which Apple now officially supports.
It is just a lie to say you need a new phone.
There is literally a zero percent chance it was anything to do with batteries. This is not a conspiracy theory. It's an objective fact.
I'd much rather us have progress and people with 8 year old phones suffer than ensure that everything continues to run smoothly on any old device for eternity.
Apple absolutely effed up by not communicating the specifics well, but that’s corporate policy. Apple docs have always been targeted at the non-technical user and therefore inadequate for others.
Otherwise saying it is definitively true is misleading to put it mildly.
Whatever is it that you're saying that Apple does, it's either not obvious or they're shit at it.
like Charlie Munger have said: "Show me the incentives and I will tell you the outcome"
Reality is that designers, product managers, engineers — they all wanna build cool things, get promoted, make money etc.
You don’t do that by shipping plain designs, no matter how tried and true. The pressure to create something new and interesting is ever present. And look we have these powerful Apple silicon chips that can capably render these neat effects.
So no I don’t think it’s a shadowy conspiracy to come after your iPhone 8. Just the regular pressure of everyday men and women to build new and interesting things that will bring success.
You have what an iPhone 6? 1GB of RAM vs 8GB for modern devices, the first A chip came out 2 generations after yours as has 2% of the power of a current chip so modern chips are likely close to 100x as powerful as your phone.
Why should we hold back software to support extreme outliers like you?
What are apps and mobile sites doing differently today besides loading up unnecessary animations and user tracking? How has user experience improved for those operating on devices fast enough to make up for developer laziness?
I can now do on-device transcription without issue, security improvements at the chip level, HD graphics for video streaming, etc.
You can't choose when to use your OS, and you need to 'update your os' to stay secure.
For what? So a designer can get a promotion? This is not progress, this is pure fashion. As if the planet being literally on fire needed more fuel.
So that we can have better features and functionality in our future systems. Backwards compatibility is an anchor. If you want new things then expect to get new platforms to run them on don't expect everyone to limit their possibilities to support you.
We are not talking about new features. Of course no one expects to run a LLM on an ten year old phone, again we are talking about fashion. It is change for change's sake. It is not providing value to users it is so the the designer gets to eat and management and shareholders are kept happy.
There is a difference between actual technical progress and you throwing out your skinny jeans because baggy pants are now in fashion.
Why shouldn't we build phones that last ten year, twenty years, or even more?
>We are not talking about new features
We are, you are just choosing to ignore them and call them fashion. There have been immense changes in capabilities over the past 10 years.
>Why shouldn't we build phones that last ten year, twenty years, or even more?
We do, dumb phones, why don't you own one of those instead of trying to limit progress in the phones pushing progress?
Laggards cost society by running insecure devices that generally impact the rest of the world besides just complaining about no one continuing to support them long after the useful life of their devices.
Maybe there's also a cost to updating phones as frequently as people do, and inefficient software running across billions of devices.
I wouldn't blame people who make their hardware last longer and call them "laggards". And it's not their responsibility to write security patches for their device, that falls on the manufacturer.
For these people, me included, they don't need the latest hardware features to ray trace a game or run some local LLM. We're just taking some photos, making calls, getting map navigation, messaging, interacting with CRUD apps, and web browsing. None of that requires the latest hardware, and especially Apple hardware from 8 years ago is more than capable of handling it smoothly.
If you're running an insecure device past it's support life it's your responsibility and your fault if it's used to attack others. You are fully to blame for choosing to use something past it's serviced life. You cannot expect companies to support old software forever.
It’s in beta so ofc I’m getting a ton of frame hitches, overheating, etc. but my summarized initial thoughts are “it’ll take some getting used to, but it feels pretty fast”
I have a feeling the whole smooth animations thing contributes to this a lot. Obsessing about the reaction time and feeling of how stuff comes on the screen. But yeah iPhone 16 pro is probably a bad performance test case
> It’s in beta so ofc I’m getting a ton of frame hitches, overheating
The overheating is a common occurrence, but it doesn't persist. It seems to be certain things (setting the animated backgrounds in iMessage is a good example), but the moment I'm not doing one of those things the temp feels fine. My battery does drop a percent or two during those cases (which sucks), but my typical use of the phone hasn't yielded any noticeable battery life loss compared to 18.5
I imagine this was on mobile devices.
Blending was relatively expensive on GPUs from Imagination Technologies and their derivatives, including all Apple GPUs. This is because these GPUs had relatively weak shader processors and relied instead on dedicated hardware to sort geometry so that the shader processor had to do less work than on a traditional GPU.
Other GPUs vendors rely more on beefier shader processors and less on sorting geometry (e.g. Hierarchical-Z). This turned out to be a better approach in the long term, especially once game engines started relying on deferred shading anyway, which is in essence a software-based approach that sorts geometry first before computing the final pixel colors.
I had "Reduce Transparency" check-box in settings turned on because I distaste semit-transparent interfaces. Was not noticing performance problems except one application - Ogranics Maps which were unusably slow after switching to another app and returning to maps so I had to restart it freqently (swipe up). I was thinking that the problem is with Ogranics Maps code.
After seeing this comment re-enabled transparency (iOS default) and Ogranics Maps working fast even if I switch between Organic Maps and other apps!
Also reported here for example:
https://www.reddit.com/r/iphone/comments/1d2ncvu/if_your_old...
Also reported here for example: https://discussions.apple.com/thread/255911835
Re-enabling transparency improved this a lot, also keyboard still hangs a bit from time to time. I’m always in power save mode, on an iPhone 12, running iOS18.
Not sure if it is planned obsolescence but it certainly is an upsell to upgrade.
For older models, on the other hand, it would be an issue, and will put pressure to people to buy a new one.
I feel like a few years back when I still used an Intel macbook i noticed an increase in battery life and less frames dropping (like during 'Expose' animations) by disabling transparency in Accessibility settings.
I think this was after the BIg Sur update.
They're going to backport this? I seriously doubt it.
Plus, vista was released in 2007, XP SP2 (the most popular version) was in 2004. so its like ~3 years diff. So its not like hardware has progressed in 3 years, its more like new software got significantly slower
They WAY overreached in their goals with Longhorn. When they finally decided to cut back features to something actually attainable, they didn't have enough time to make a high-performance OS.
Windows 7 was a well-loved rebrand of what was essentially just a Windows Vista service pack and improved performance (though it was still too heavy for a lot of the older machines people tried to upgrade to Vista). If they'd have cut back on their goals earlier, Windows 7 is likely a lot closer to what would have shipped as Vista.
Windows 7 benefited from coming later with Vista being the battleground in which vendors were forced to update to NT6.0 models.
oh wait. it's not like they did. they did say it.
It's straight from the 2000s, with Linux users using Compiz and... Amethyst(?), stuffing their entire desktop full with gaudy transparency, transforms, jiggles and bounces.
More of a nit, but the sentence
The new design extends across iOS 26, iPadOS 26, macOS Tahoe 26, watchOS 26, and tvOS 26 to establish even more harmony
I can barely cope with their being no option to turn them off on Mac, especially for windows. I literally had to make my background pure black because the few pixels of backgrounds always showing pissed me off so much.
Just kidding: Yeah, it's just that when I think about a digital glass effect it feels more right with square corners than rounded corners. Because glass windows which we look through usually have square corners. Says I, who spend most of my time looking through a curved motorcycle helmet visor.
That's why we have round glass coasters, round lenses, round glasses for drinking, etc.
I'm very curious which items you went through before concluding that glass almost never has rounded corners.
Yeah, this really looks like an Apple temper tantrum of "Nobody wants to program for the Vision Pro? Fine. We'll MAKE you program the iPhone like the Vision Pro. Take that developers. Now get back to doing our job for us, you lazy slobs."
So, you can either assume that Apple are blundering, incompetent dolts who have completely lost the plot (certainly possible) or that Apple has an actual purpose behind this.
If you ask for the purpose and the look at the GUI, you see Apple cramming a UI update targeted with the design language from AR (transparency behind everything, motion cues to activate orienting reflex, etc.) down the throats of all developers as opposed to just those on the Vision.
https://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Scree...
I don't know that a redesign was called for at all. I guess they needed to show something if Siri still isn't ready, but this is just not it.
I'd have personally hoped for them to beef up iCloud+ but I know it doesn't sell devices to the general user.
This certainly is not that. Like it or not, a huge multi-OS redesign is not something you rush out for a keynote because your first choice didn't pan out at the last minute.
(I don't particularly have an opinion that this was their line of thinking, just pointing out that for a company like Apple they would have been thinking "what if X isn't ready in time" months or even years before the point of actually knowing if X is it isn't ready on time.)
Why would you design readability and visibility to depend on chaotic, highly varied and probably sometimes bad underlying backgrounds?
I fail to see any systematic approach/ consistent design language at play here.
Let's hope this does not survive for long.
"And this is how easy I can replace this custom component with a new glass component...".
The whole thing is just wild.
There was plenty of UX enhancements which looked solid, but just for them to be paired with a design choice of N=1 elements is... well let's see if it pays off I guess?
O no, there is a systematic approach.
1. Bosses in UI division get promotions & raises for their new implementation of shiny
2. Marketing guys get to use their bird brains to promote shiny
3. Apple UX guys get to have their med prescriptions renewed
To me, being socially awkward is kind of a secondary, less important trait, but that’s the one everyone seems to notice. We’re weird on the outside because inside, we’re dealing with overwhelming sensory input.
Curse HackerNews' narrow indents!
Thank you.
Alegria, flat design, pastel colors, or unholy amounts of whitespace. It's been the story of the last 15 years of UI design at least.
Well, this is what Apple does, and the reason I hate their devices with a passion. It always was style over substance.
It honestly saddens me how far Apple has fallen.
When I was at NeXT, Steve Jobs told me that if it was up to him, Apple would get rid of the Human Interface Group. (Steve was rather hostile to Larry.)
Later, when it was up to Steve, he did exactly what he said: he got rid of HIG.
I think it’s easier to sell visual design than it is to sell usability because people see visual design immediately, but it takes time and experience to see and understand usability (and some users never seem to consciously notice it at all).
A dream desktop OS for me would be something with a classic Mac interface and with conformity to the Apple human interface guidelines of the 1990s, but with Lisp- or Smalltalk-like underpinnings to support component-based software. It would be the ultimate alternate universe Mac OS, the marriage of Smalltalk (with Lisp machine influence) with Macintosh innovations. Of course, there were many projects at Apple during the 80s and 90s that could’ve led to such a system.
Now that I’m a community college professor, I have more free time in the summer months for side projects...
Same. For just one example, consider how submenus work. You don't notice when they're done right, but when they're done poorly, they will disappear when you try to choose a submenu item, or stick around when you expect them to go away. Getting them right is subtle; Apple got them right, and plenty of web pages still get them wrong.
That's interface design. Flashy translucency effects are something else.
Hopefully. I wouldn't mind being young. I am also not a designer, so UI/UX history may be lost on me.
I can only say that the only Apple product I genuinely enjoyed from a design perspective was the iPod Nano I bought sometime in early 2000s.
Heavy research indeed
I don't doubt designers spent a lot of time researching it. It still reads like an incredible amount of carefully crafted bullshit.
The more the design of things "evolve", the more I appreciate designs that simply don't.
I'm a Schrodinger's old man.
You've already judged the system as only good for "looking good on screenshots and marketing materials" when you haven't even seen anything other than the announcement.
Yes, I think they would do that.
Lots of historical examples of Apple making weird design choices for decades now. I'm old enough to remember the hockey-puck mouse on the original iMac.
Also, here's a list of bugs I've personally observed over just the last two months: https://gist.github.com/BenWheatley/29a3c22203d90ae80465cdb1...
3.3 trillion dollar market cap, and the *clipboard* is no longer reliable. The mail badge is an unreliable count. The wallpaper sometimes disappears. The alarms don't play out of whatever speaker or headphones you're using for all your other audio.
Yes, and where have you been for the last two decades? :) The last time Apple did actual UX research must have been in the late 1990s.
If their hardware wasn't so damn good for my professional work, I wouldn't go near this child slavery enabling shitshow of a corporation. I don't know if I've ever felt as trivialized or patronized as watching someone in formal dress talk to me about how many new ways I can express myself to my friends via emoji or whatever else as I have when watching Apple keynotes. It feels like they've tried to commoditize interaction even more than Meta. It all feels so hollow. You can tell Steve is gone.
We are talking about the same company that to make a the MCP a little bit thinner released that crap with only two USBC ports, forcing everyone to carry fucking dongles everywhere.
And let's not forget that awful butterfly keyboard.
So much usability, so much accessibility. No vibes, no sir.
Lord only knows Altman is probably doting on him in the same way. This industry just never learns.
And yes, I am aware those silly toy computers have a couple more ports nowadays, I have to use that on a daily basis for work.
The Apple of today is nowhere near what the Apple of Steve Jobs was.
Bugs galore, UX issues galore. Overall it's a mashup of various staff egos over everything.
It’s simply a matter of “which settings would MOST of our users want enabled by default?”
I do agree that the accessibility settings can make ios pretty ugly though. It’s a real shame. :(
Given the huge change and sensitivity to accessibility I'm going to guess the opposite -- it will be designed to look nice without transparency.
updating ticket to closed
Another bit I'd like to pick on is the speed at which transparent context bubbles spring out. Waiting for a panel to bounce back and forth so that you know where to put your finger next is so bad as a UX choice that I'm losing confidence in Apple.
From a visual point of view, there is now flat design mixed with this voluminous transparent design which is a weird combination of skeuomorphic and abstract designs in one. I really don't know what they were thinking.
Surely anyone who's fiddled with the caption background opacity on their TV or video player knows this is a mess?
Would have been nice for someone to explain why we're getting Windows Aero[1] for main content and not just bezels.
I don't think this design language is mutually exclusive with readability, it actually looks really cool in many ways; I just can't fathom why the examples in the presentation seemed good enough to show.
iOS: Settings -> Accessibility -> Display & Text Size -> Reduce Transparency.
You're welcome.
I’m not just thinking of myself here. I’m concerned that a lot of people who don’t consider themselves disabled will be disabled by this.
It’ll be fine.
When switching between screens, there’s just a long pause instead of the animation. These pauses drive me crazy, it’s simply not possible to configure the device to be responsive.
No, you can not. You can reduce _some_ animations, but most of them actually remain. Including the most annoying ones like the slowwwww screen switching, or the bottom sheet animation.
An amusing anecdote: I have animation turned off entirely on my Android phone, and I was demoing an app on it. People commented how amazingly fast it felt compared to iOS, simply because there were no animations.
This animation slows every transition by one second including entering and leaving fullscreen mode, because on Mac OS fullscreen works by moving the window to a new workspace. There is no justification for this.
My strategy for multiple desktops is to not use them at all. But I'm enjoying the comfort of a 43" screen, so all the windows I need just fit.
IMHO iOS strikes an almost perfect balance. It animates things in response to continuous drag gestures (notification centre, app switching), but almost nothing else. Maybe macOS could take a page from that book? E.g. dragging the menu bar; the animation plays out in direct response to user action.
Transparency confuses me regularly - and I then waste cycles trying to understand why a particular heading has a strange colour before I work out it is bleeding through from some unobvious background thing.
https://preview.redd.it/zzxh77iv906f1.png?width=2358&format=...
That said, Windows 7 had an option to turn off all the translucency, so hopefully Apple ripped that idea, too.
https://preview.redd.it/zzxh77iv906f1.png?width=2358&format=...
I liked webpages in the 1990s before the blink and marquee tags. I wasn’t excited by skeuomorphic design, but it was at least fun. Then there was flat blocky design which really sucked. Then that was undone by putting curves back in, and it was ok. Then people started adding a shit ton of empty space everywhere which was the first time when Millennials started f-ing up design. I still blame them today because they’re still the most opinionated and make terrible, TERRIBLE design decisions. I don’t think I’ll ever be happy again with interface design. It’s super f-d.
It should, however, be as invisible as possible. Being only functional is a compliment.
But for something like a phone or messaging app, I want to see the return of fun, creative, and unique. We had such a great era of design around 2006-2013 and then it all rapidly went incredibly dull since then.
I want to see creative menus back, I want to see whacky UIs like windows media player skins back. Ultimately for basic stuff of low importance like your phone, the most absolutely optimal UI doesn’t matter, much like I don’t care for the most absolutely optimal furniture. Its visual appeal matters.
With that said, my pants' pocket still manages to somehow initiate the "emergency call" procedure every couple of months or so, I have no idea how that happens (I don't even know how I'd do that with the phone placed in front of me).
Yep. I keep making accidental emergency calls too. Another interesting incident which happened only once:
I accidentally opened instagram, a group chat, and changed the background to bubbles or something like that, all with my phone in my pocket. I guess I put my phone into my pocket unlocked by accident because I can't imagine accidentally typing my PIN.
I agree with the huge disagreement. That 2006-2013 era was, in my opinion, horrendous and takes the second spot as an offender just after “peak flat”.
However, I never denied that visual appeal matters. But design is how it holistically works, not how it looks.
Maybe, at some point, some team will get back to Dieter Rams 10 principles and hammer it into an UX experience. We were so close in the 90’s.
Maybe we can agree on: make the os maximally unobtrusive by default but include options to customise to taste?
I am actually Apple-phobic, a diehard linux user and incapable of doing simple tasks on Apple products. However, I think they have got a winner here. Although people talk of Vista Aero, it is more sophisticated than that, and, when this rolls out, Android will look distinctly old fashioned and low status, even if it is better as far as accessibility. I like what they have done here, even if it is not for me.
Meanwhile, Android's Material You/Expressive design language is taking almost an opposite approach. Personally, I prefer it to Liquid Glass by a wide margin.
To me visual noise in user interfaces is a severe distraction and I tend to prefer applications with minimal UIs (not minimal features). I disabled text cursor blinking in the browser and use a program to auto-hide the mouse pointer after a few seconds because it can distract me from reading.
I do like this new UI Apple shows here, though I would probably get tired of the effects if I had to use it for extended periods of time. Just like animations look satisfying until you realize they slow down everything you do on the computer because often their main purpose is marketing and not usefulness.
This will be a massive improvement in usability over flat design, which made UIs only learnable by trial and error.
Besides that huge dealbreaker though, HC mode is amazing for people like me who think UIs should be clear, obvious, and functional first rather than “elegant” and pretty as the main priority.
We’ve had books/scrolls for thousands of years, laid out in beautiful proportion, and now it has all melted in the oven!
On the other hand, I can already tell I'm going to despise this on macOS. I always work with windows maximized on my laptop, because I just want to concentrate on the document I'm editing, or code I'm writing, and have maximum space for that. And the past couple of versions of macOS by default make your menu bar a weird pale purple or pink or green that is hugely distracting because it's a blurred image of your desktop. Fortunately you can turn that off with the "Reduce Transparency" accessibility option, which I do.
But the idea that people using Macs want to always being seeing some colorful desktop image around the edges and at the top just seems bizarre to me. iPhones and iPads are more for consuming, so this makes more sense. And within apps on Macs this seems like it'll be fine. But I hate that it doesn't seem designed to let me "tune out" the desktop image while I use an app. It's taking existing translucency and just making it worse...
It looks so tacky.
I'm just wondering if Apple is going to make matching CSS updates in Safari so web app developers have matching visuals.
color: contrast-color(rebeccapurple);
People pretend this isn't a solved problem.
Even for the current sorry state of Apple's design regime, this is disappointing. It's way beyond a squandering of desperately-needed-elsewhere engineering resources; it's a dated-looking degradation of usability (and potentially performance).
Depressing.
Apple is pretty good on accessibility but sometimes it does involve changing some settings.
I’m usually a big fan of Apple design and UX. Any change faces some initial resistance, but this is first real “Ugh, hard no” reaction I can recall after seeing some of those.
A "hard no" is where I am with this "improvement".
I used to like solid background, but lately screens got so good that it makes sense to put something up.
It’s also annoying, slow you down, and anyway useless if you don’t have a physical issue with them.
i’m not too worried, but let’s see. The new design is super ugly though.
Anyway, I also bet they will tone this transparency stuff down a lot in the betas leading to the stable version in September. iOS 7 all over again…
Interface design is not a place for unlimited creative expression. But recent user interface trends exclude many design idioms and relegate one to a limited range of creative expression also. Some people think they look better. Some do not.
Accessible interfaces have become uglier in ways which did not improve accessibility. And recent trends have made them less accessible in some ways also. Choose not enough contrast or too much. Choose contrast or color where both were before.
[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2003/11/30/magazine/the-guts-of-a-ne...
https://support.apple.com/guide/iphone/zoom-in-iph3e2e367e/i...
https://support.apple.com/guide/iphone/customize-the-text-si...
I want to make things bigger in pixel resolution, not make pixels bigger.
One of the accessibility features included in macOS for visually impaired people lets you reduce transparency for exactly this reason.
If there's a bright blue background behind the control panel buttons (like the wifi button), you can't tell if it's blue because it's on or because it's off but the background is blue.
Slide down the control panel when the blue weather app is open to kinda see what I mean.
How can that possibly be? Didn't he say it will: "bring joy and delight to _every_ user experience"
That means YOU as well. No way he could over-selling something. Inconceivable.
As for accessibility… It’s hell. Have a look: https://imgur.com/a/6ZTCStC
Out of curiosity, I used this site [1] to get the contrast of some text, specifically the artist name on the Apple Music now playing bar (in the "Updated App Design" part of the page). During parts of the video, the contrast of the artist name with the background was 1.7:1, which is terrible. For reference, the minimum recommended contrast by WebAIM is 4.5:1 [2].
Maybe there are accessibility options that improve things, but the defaults seem terrible. The goal for any design should be reasonably accessible as default, with robust options for people with more specific needs. As it stands, this UI is just too hard to read, and Apple needs to make a second pass.
That doesn't sound like a healthy relationship to developers to me.
I’ve long ago accepted that my dev machine will stay a Mac and my gaming rig will stay windows for the foreseeable future. Every 5 years or so I try Linux again and it’s the same deal.
That said, at work I'm using a Windows desktop for the first time in over 15 years. There are so many places I'd like to run scripts to improve this thing. i have come to the conclusion that running scripts to fix small annoyances is a feature of those who are drawn to Linux, not a shortcoming of KDE or Gnome. I'd do the same if it were even possible on this (locked down corporate) Windows box.
I was going to upgrade to an iPhone 16 this week. I might be checking out Google or Samsung devices instead.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43975352
Feels very much like a fruit-colored version of late 1960's early 1970's pop culture design.
Change it to browns and oranges and golds, and it'll be perfectly groovy.
Once you realise what life with a stylus is like, you'll not accept anything less.
I modify my devices slightly to make the stylus easier to remove, if you're interested I could show it off.
Baffling choice.
I think that design triggered me for 2 reasons. First, it really gets to something that's bugged me a lot about technological advancement in general over the past 15-20 years or so. It used to be that I felt like tech advances were great because they actually solved a human problem. Now, so much tech just feels like "tech-for-tech's-sake". Like I get you need to have a lot of designers at Apple, and now that devices have more processing power that they want to do something "cool" with it, but this just seems like someone that literally nobody asked for and nobody wants.
Second, I'm someone who thinks very "linearly". I like to do one thing at a time, and I hate distractions (because I'm easily distracted). I hate these translucent interfaces because they are literally distracting to me even if I'm looking directly and squarely at one single thing. It just seems like another way that tech is constantly fucking with our attention.
> it responds in real time to your content, and your input, creating a more lively experience, that we think you’ll find truly delightful.
“Infuriating” and “horrifying” would both be much more accurate words than “delightful”. Even if you liked it briefly, it would get old really quickly.
This truly is stunningly, spectacularly bad.
>> Meticulously crafted by rethinking the fundamental elements that make up our software, the new design features an entirely new material called Liquid Glass. It combines the optical qualities of glass with a fluidity only Apple can achieve, as it transforms depending on your content or context.
What the fuck does that even mean?
Feature litmus test: if you can't describe why it's better in plain English... it's probably not better.
Nothing. It's corporate bean-counter speak. Some poo-brained exec says a lot of words that sound inspiring but adds up to mean exactly nothing.
This is the kind of garbage I have to listen to in so-very-important quarterly "huddles" with thousands of people. It's nonsensical but makes the speaker feel so very special.
I guess this really gives insight to how Apple got here. It really has been taken over by a bunch of people who like how their own farts smell. Now they're trying to gaslight you and I into liking it.
It had better be possible to turn this crap completely off. Is it?
Fixes it luckily.
Reducing transparency, the entire background gets greyed and the background/ look is much more akin to iOS 18.
And it's not like someone had to go out of their way to find something clashing like that. Pulling up control center from the home screen is something you do all the time.
Like, I genuinely would have assumed that control center would need to be non-translucent precisely because of that. But... nope?
The only reason I ever use google maps is to search somewhere and copy paste the address into Apple Maps.
Can’t speak towards Japan or Taiwan specifically but it’s been fine in extremely rural Africa, India, Brazil, Indonesia, Bosnia, Australia, etc. Much better than Google Maps in most of Western Europe and America these days.
Meanwhile the maps/data quality is quite good, probably 95% there for the things I care about. I've been able to use it full-time for years now.
At this point if I lived somewhere they weren't great, I'd submit improvements for all the places I went
Apple maps is adequate now, but as a map power-user it's been pretty far from great every time I've tried it. I'm happy they finally managed to get an accurate basemap though.
I would still prefer 5x the blur; I really, really, really hate the shapes of the tab switchers; and they use space so inefficiently I feel like I’m using an iPhone SE… but the liquid glass is ok. Gimmicky and ugly but it is mostly usable
I was ok with the system settings redesign, could get used to it. But this whole new design is a different level of bad.
That evokes an immediate visceral reaction hah
Wonder if Apple has any Quality Control department at all.
I mean, a designer comes up with a proposal, someone else ought to check it.
This new liquid glass will lead to liquid brain, because my brain will be melting trying to process all that visual mess daily.
Now of course, I'll have to experience this new design in practice to be sure, but judging from the screenshots it looks really hard on the eyes. Hopefully they'll allow the translucency to be customized.
Apple had a good run, I've genuinely enjoyed using their platforms daily, but I'm afraid they're dropping the ball now.
I guess on a long enough timeline, every company is bound to disappoint. It's hard to get it right, consistently.
That's worse than I expected.
Example: file syncing and password management. Possible, but my Nextcloud and Keepass experience was janky. 3rd party Youtube client, impossible. Adblocking - all solutions I tried were terrible to mediocre (around 2020, but I doubt it improved since). On Android I can run any browser I want and install uBlock. Music: I can just dump my collection of mixed format music files (aac, mp3, mpc, flac, wavpack) over USB and play them with foobar2000. Foobar2000 is available on iphone, but needs dumb workarounds to play files not natively supported by Apple. And so on...
If you're balls deep in the Apple ecosystem, you probably have none of these problems. I never allowed myself to get locked in, which also made it very easy to leave ios behind.
Only thing I miss a little is the ios email and calendar clients. They were alright.
I switched to iOS and despite its flaws, the experience is so much better.
Meanwhile the main reason I stay with Android is because of the ability to sideload, write your own apps, etc. without paying a subscription fee.
I can't say I feel the same about macOS before; as a user since the early 1990s, I'm likely moving to Linux rather than Liquid Glass for my personal computer.
On the Mac it is offensive. Vulgar. Disgusting. Loathsome.
It's like staring into a chrome bumper while trying to use your computer. But also, it's see-through.
I have been using android for maybe 11-12 years and once locked down it great for me. But I suspect less than 1% of users would use these things like this.
The latest Google pixel devices are specifically blocked from using Wyze devices right now due to a typo in the pixel's configuration files, for example. Stuff like that happens constantly with any phone in the super fragmented Android ecosystem.
If you google "ios alarm not working" you'll find out alarms on iOS are absolutely not reliable, they are often silent.
I cannot imagine what it would be like to jump out of the Apple ecosystem nowadays. I left in 2012 and it was difficult even then.
I haven't owned a (personal) Mac since High Sierra. The UI had been going downhill since Yosemite in my opinion, but gradually; it took a nosedive with Big Sur (I think that's the one that introduced all the SwiftUI apps?) to the point that I realized I probably wouldn't own another Mac until they figured out that a Mac is a computer, not an iPad. Looks like they still haven't yet.
That being said, I believe that 10.5-10.9 is probably somewhere close to what peak computing looks like. It's not perfect but it makes sense to some degree. I had no problem teaching people of any technological skill level how to use Snow Leopard or Lion; and not just getting by, properly becoming competent computer users. On the other hand, I've been watching my parents (both of whom have been using computers since the late 70s) slowly lose the ability to "understand" both modern macOS and iOS, and are more and more frequently struggling to find old and new features and functionality (like being able to see all of their emails on their phone).
It's disappointing really. For a while I couldn't stand using Windows and regular Linux desktop distros were too fiddly to be useful, and Mac really was the best option for "I just want to do X" with the least friction. Nowadays, Windows sucks for a whole host of reasons, and the Linux desktop is more usable but still Linux, and apparently Mac has decided to shoot itself in the head. If my grandmother asked me what computer to replace her Mac Mini with if it died right now, I really don't think I'd have an answer.
That's exactly the thing, that's what I don't get. Apple's brand is all about simplicity and visual clarity.
This is a visual mess. We've gone from clean delineated color areas to... slop?
I really expected them to use subtle glass and shadow effects, but with minimal translucency. Heck, a lot of this is barely even translucency, more like transparency.
I'm really surprised, because I didn't expect Apple to produce a design language that so easily turns into seemingly visual chaos.
I don't understand how anyone can act surprised anymore. Seriously. The App Store is an absolute mess, and Apple seems to be okay with it because it makes them money. Same goes for Apple News, Apple Music, AppleTV+, Apple iCloud, Apple Fitness+ and Apple Arcade. To say nothing of the quality of these apps (for their benefit), it's brand dilution. Am I supposed to believe that MacOS and iOS are spared from Apple's attention being divided into a hundred pieces? Am I supposed to expect them to invest in high-quality tentpole software when their logo is the only thing required to make people spend money?
At some point, consumers have to distinguish between the identity that Apple markets to them, and what Apple's actual impact is on the carelessness of modern design. People have been saying this since 2013, Apple's new design languages aren't even close to the HIGs from the Macs of yore. Liquid Glass has been destined to fail ever since, it's an iteration on iOS7 and not an interface people actually like.
(*Looks at Gnome.*)
Hm, they're getting worse faster than Apple does. Never mind.
I agree. It's why I prefer Gnome over KDE, and macOS over Windows.
My main point is: Gnome can't tell simple from simplistic. Terminal cursor blinking. Removing every command until everything fits in one menu and/or title bar. It's so crammed with buttons, I can't tell what is what. But ironically, there's no desktop icons, despite "Desktop" folder being pinned in Nautilus. Everything is so spaced out. Top bar has three interactive elements, but it takes four clicks to log out. There's a dock, but you can't move it to the left/right side, so it takes up even more vertical space. You can fix some of that with extensions, but half of them get disabled on every upgrade.
This is in stark contrast with macOS. If you can't find something in the menu bar, there's a search field in the help menu. If you use some menu bar option often, you can bind it to a custom key. Both of these are provided through standard system APIs, so every application uses them by default. Title bars have buttons, but are spacious enough so that there's always an obvious place to click-to-drag. (Gnome had to solve it by making ordinary widgets draggable... How do you know if you're selecting text in a URL bar, or moving the window?) I could keep going, but macOS has always been more intuitive and more friendly to power users.
I learned to love KDE, but I understand why people don't default to it. All other alternatives are dead and it makes sense. The scope of something like KDE or GNOME isn't really reasonable these days. I learned to install the most minimal version of KDE.
The (maybe) rising solution is "build-your-own-desktop" options like:
- Hyprland (for Window management and other random tasks like wallpapers and lockscreen)
- Waybar (for task bar/menu bar)
- Rofi/Wofi (for Spotlight/Search&Launch)
Then you a la carte your File Manager, photo editor, browser, and whatever apps you like.
While I find that somewhat appealing, and those solution are flexible enough to pretty much build whatever you like your DE to be like, they are also extremely complex. For most things there is no "defaults". You don't get to do anything "by default" other than boot into a GUI environment. You configure a shortcut to launch your terminal or apps, a task bar that also has an empty default. Things that have defaults are gonna be extremely "basic" (think html no css). Just the data dump, and it expects you to style it. They are entirely configured (and styled) through a series of conf/css/ini/yaml/json files.
These apps/environment pretty much dominate all the Linux desktop discussion these days. (At least discussion I can find on here or reddit or Twitter when I used to check it)
It's really hard to tell if anyone is actually using those things or not. They are extremely tedious and a giant pain in the ass for daily use. Maybe it's early days. It's been about 8-6 years now since all the talk has become about new Wayland compositors. There were dozens of them, but Hyprland seems to have the most mindshare? maybe? hard to tell. It's the youngest, but it would take many years to reach KDE or GNOME maturity
My "favorite" Gnome-ism was something that happened a year or two ago. At work there's a machine in the workshop we use to reference technical drawings, charts and so on. So I wanted to set the display to never turn off, because I got annoyed with having to drop what I was holding (and sometimes walk down a ladder) and wiggle the mouse to wake up the machine.
That is impossible on Gnome. You get a dropdown of a few fixed values, none greater than 60 minutes, and you better like what choices the Gnome devs have granted you. The workaround requires some brain surgery in the terminal.
On KDE I can set the timeout to any integer I want.
AFAIK what gnome does is not give you any options above 15 minutes, but they do provide a toggle for disabling screen power saving and toggles for other such power saving features.
I've always been able to disable if fine, what irks me is the artificial 15 minutes limit in the drop down menu, forcing you to edit dconf entries to increase it...
They do.
You're mostly spend a few days on configuring the basics, then tweak things over the next months. Then you don't touch anything for years as everything is working exactly the way you want. Some programs do better with defaults so you can tweak the shipped config.
I don't need GNOME or KDE maturity because what I need is just a fraction of what they can do. And what I concocted is more stable and don't require clickops to get the same version on another computer.
Can you explain why KDE shouldn't be the default?
> The (maybe) rising solution is "build-your-own-desktop" options like
That's not new, people have been doing that with twm, awesomewm, dozens more for over a decade. That's niche though, the majority see Gnome and that's it. They will never even know that there is something else, they probably don't even know that Gnome != Linux.
I am happy as can be running Linux Mint Cinnamon. It just works.
Also there is good old Xfce, in fact there are lot of good alternatives.
This year was the first time I ever used a Mac and I was shocked how bad the desktop was. You can barely be productive without installing ten different apps that allow you to use basic stuff like alt-tab or properly rebind keys..
Linux users have it really good, all things considered.
Wayland will probably still need a few years to mature and actually be viable.
This is not a solution for power users, this is a half-hearted non-solution for people with too much time on their hands. As a power user, I need the computer to do the stupid work for me, so I can focus on the more interesting/important stuff, like playing games, recording a song, building an app, or just making a living.
I play guitar. I tried building one. It was terrible. There's a good reason why there's very few luthiers among guitarists.
> Maybe it's early days.
People have been doing this since before KDE. I started using Linux around 2002, and it wasn't long until I was theming Fluxbox.
If you want a decent and hackable desktop environment, start with matching the functionality of OS X 10.4, then work from there.
They're not a trillion dollar company. Sure, many projects would do well with more decisive decision-making, but the strength of free software comes from community and collaboration.
TL;DR: if you want window decorations, link with libadwaita.
SDL ended up linking with libdecor. You know how when you use a Qt app in Gnome, it looks out of place? Now even the window decorations look inconsistent from one another.
For that reason alone I avoid Qt apps, as almost none draw their own title bar. Qt apps aren't even consistent among themselves in theming/style, for example the only apps that look in place on KDE are specifically made with KDE in mind.
I don't understand where the "consistency" obsession comes from, all these apps use different tool kits and will look different regardless.
Mental overhead. Sometimes Preferences is Ctrl-P, sometimes Ctrl-[,]; sometimes Copy is Ctrl-C, sometimes Ctrl-Shift-C. Sometimes the menu is a hamburger, sometimes a bar. macOS has none of these problems.
Refreshing counter to the brutalist styles that were trending. The problem with brutalist styles is that they tend to be busy, which becomes confusing and unintuitive to new users.
This seems like it would help separate elements for easier focus, to make things more obvious.
What I find surreal is that most comments are exactly like those back in the day, too! (Pinstripes, what were they thinking? Glossiness is distracting! Where's my platinum? This is a stupid toy!)
Anyway, this will be refined and fine tuned and we will all be fine.
How will those same audiences react when they see a glassy squircle pop up on their iPhone? What is it a metaphor for? Is it a button? A notification toast? An entry window? An app? A widget? Did they forget to put on their glasses this morning? Is it interactive, are there gestures or buttons to close it? How do you call someone from this screen?
This is objectively bad design. I would argue you don't know what made Platinum and Aqua great if you're comparing those complaints to this clown vomit.
There were loads of complaints about readability with Aqua, particularly of the menus and the windows title bars, both of which were translucent and had pinstripes. Briefly discussed here for example: https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2011/05/mac-os-x-revisited/ . There was also the uproar at Leopard’s transparent menu bar and glossy dock, discussed here: https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2007/10/mac-os-x-10-5/ . All these were over the top initially and were toned down and tweaked over time.
> How will those same audiences react when they see a glassy squircle pop up on their iPhone?
It’s a button. It has a shape, some physical character, and when you poke it wiggles and does something. It looks miles better than the label-button-links things that looked all identical in iOS 7 and that still plague modern design.
> This is objectively bad design. I would argue you don't know what made Platinum and Aqua great if you're comparing those complaints to this clown vomit.
I did not really like Platinum (I spent quite a lot of time with Kaleidoscope, which I miss very much). I really liked Aqua, though, despite its occasional brushed metal excesses. I would not mind going back to Lion, when they toned down the glossiness they introduced in Leopard. I think that UI was very elegant. But I have to admit there is a kind of playfulness with the concept of liquid UI that is intriguing. I love how the Dynamic Island reacts and behaves as it splits, grows, and shrink. I think I like it better than iOS 5-era glossy everything, and definitely more than iOS 7+. I am willing to admit that I have bad taste, but I am optimistic about the possibilities with the concepts they showed.
That said, I swear I read the clown vomit but about Aqua back in 2001. Some things never change.
I'm willing to give Apple their credit, where due. Mojave and Catalina was polished to a professional sparkle, it was very believable as a professional OS back then. Big Sur wasted a lot of screen real estate without any good way to get it back, and now Liquid Glass is sacrificing visual clarity to Mammon in hopes that it sells more Macbooks. I don't think it makes sense, any way you cut it. Not everything has to be history repeating itself, Apple has proven more than adept at inventing new ways to fail. Apple Car and Airpower both come to mind - sometimes it just doesn't work out.
I know, I went through a couple of real lemons, like the 2nd-hand PowerBook 5400c I had as a kid, or the early MBP with a bad GeForce, and an overheating late Intel MBP with an awful keyboard. I also still have a hockey puck mouse somewhere. And again, Aqua had its excesses and I strongly disliked their turn to flat design.
All I am saying is that the concept of liquid glass is interesting and I am sure they will iterate over time to fix issues. All the legibility and readability concerns could be addressed by tweaking the opacity of the buttons whilst keeping the dynamic and kinetics aspects of it without throwing the whole thing away.
There are many precedents, it would not be really unexpected.
> Not everything has to be history repeating itself, Apple has proven more than adept at inventing new ways to fail. Apple Car and Airpower both come to mind - sometimes it just doesn't work out.
Yes indeed. I am not arguing otherwise.
“Seriously, pseudo-3D? Really? If a compulsion for gaudiness must be quenched, at least try to confine such exercises to more obscure features. Don't scribble all over the second-most visible interface element in the entire OS like a nine year-old girl putting make-up on her dollie.”
It's funny because Apple very brazenly ripped off the glossy 3D Dock from Project Looking Glass: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Looking_Glass
Trying to understand where this is coming from, I guess two sources:
1. It's a fashion update to give GenZ and younger something they haven't seen before. They are too young to remember Windows Vista, and are the most important future target group that spends 12+ hrs / day on their iPhone. Also it is an audience that heavily customizes their UI, and care more for visually communicating cool-ness, than to get work done with efficient UX. Similar to using rainmeter on a desktop PC. Unsurprising, this look a lot like a rainmeter skin.
2. This is a way to communicate unmatched quality. Similar to what AirBnB are doing. When everyone can use icon- and component libraries like material and shadcn to build UI:s, this is a visual language that communicates premium quality is through an interface and iconography that is different and too expensive for others to recreate. Many companies don't have the skill nor the time and money to do custom icons in 3D software, or create elaborate translucent effects. Let's see what multi-plattform apps will look like with this new UI, perhaps the goal is to make them stand out as "outdated"
This makes far more sense as #2 with a flavor of cashing in on zoomer nostalgia.
From context, I'm assuming this is a misnomer and not a jab. XD (Although, admittedly, I'm not sure what the reference is actually to...)
The vaporwave aesthetic is that neon, retro-futuristic, laser-beam-y type look.
EDIT: although perhaps this will allow emulation in webview if performance isn’t abysmal https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/SVG/Reference/E...
I think they really wanted to change their image, and the metaverse thing happened to also be a decent candidate for that.
So they're gambling everything on it; Steve would have shitcanned it a year ago and fired everyone involved.
And if so, then why not work on it? The research in AR has already improved the phones as well.
Same thing Microsoft did with their tablet UI forced on all of their operating systems.
One of the more common “problems” people have is that their devices are so much more powerful than they will ever use.
Also, 20 years ago you're talking about desktops connected to the wall, or laptops with no expectations of battery life. The name of the game for phones is use the hardware as little as possible a down clock asap. The fancier the UI, the longer older hardware need to stay upclocked and the more they have to work to hit 60fps (or more) smoothly.
No, it would be a massive net positive. Everyone would love these new opaque buttons that obscure the noise underneath so that you can easily read foreground text.
In light of AR glasses, this thought experiment is even more relevant...
Why not?
VR glasses like the VisionPRO can add a video stream of your surroundings, but they are physically opaque and thus don't suffer from this limitation.
Agreed with other commenters that crappy electron apps will look increasingly out of place (... slack ...). Too bad LLM's coding efficiencies haven't been used to try to get us back to native UIs from electron yet. Companies would rather pocket the savings.
I don't want to make this an Apple vs. Google comment (Mac user since 2007, iPhone user since 2009), but Google spend a good chunk of time on their Material Design 3 Expressive redesign at the Android event a few weeks ago.
This was design-focused because skin-deep was all they accomplished.
These features, that duck taping llm as parent comment says looks nice but not when your language isn't supported. 13 years pass by since Siri was introduced and I still can make use of it beyond setting timers and managing music playback.
Users can now use AI in Shortcuts, developers can use the various on-device models, I assume the call and text screening uses AI. Those are a few things off the top of my head. We need to some thinking the start and end for AI is a text field with a submit button.
But yes, it is nice to see some incremental AI improvements with suggestions in various apps, etc. Better than nothing.
We have a lot of other options for generic AI chat, so I’d rather them get it right than rush out something that isn’t any good.
Normal people (not techies) see software updates that mention “apple intelligence”, they update, and then everything looks almost the same lol. It’s SO confusing and the average person thinks siri is still garbage.
This topic comes up every holiday i kid you not. An aunt or uncle asks “why does siri still suck?” It gets a bit old.
They need clear and concise product messaging explaining what apple intelligence is, and what is coming soon for siri. Because clearly apple see’s those things as completely different, but complimentary to the same goal.
Apple has fallen behind before; I don't doubt they can recover I just hope it's a good Apple that we get to live with on the other side of what they're going through.
Apple of the last few years hasn't been consumer or developer friendly; their privacy promise being one of the big standouts in their favor.
Either concerning or reassuring depending on your perspective. I for one will be glad if there's a platform left that hasn't been invaded by AI.
What internal issues is a company like this also failing to deliver? A problem like this doesn't come about in isolation.
There's always Linux! ;)
...behind what? Siri doesn't have a meaningful competitor on iOS. Nothing else even has access to my personal data.
Unless you consider unlocking your phone, opening an app like Amazon, and tapping a microphone to talk to Alexa as a fair access for competition.
Now I haven't owned an android in many years, but I haven't heard a peep from google about how they're using AI to improve their basic apps.
I appreciate Siri's privacy features. Full stop. Nothing else about Siri is even close to what Google delivered 2+ years ago. Definitely try Google Assistant and others if you wish to be informed on this; Apple isn't going to be a good source of setting the bar for user experience with automated assistants for a long time.
> Agreed with other commenters that crappy electron apps will look increasingly out of place
Aesthetics is the smallest problem I've had with Electron (or generally non-native) apps.
It's about time we start seeing more physicality in our user interfaces!
We can make things look convincingly like glass, or metal, or even materials that don't exist in reality. One reason for flat design is because it was the lowest common denominator and easy for devs to implement. If Apple makes it easy to implement this liquid glass stuff - Rectangle().background(.glass) or something - then it's going to be really successful.
What makes you think that? Do you have a specific example from the keynote in mind?
There must be something since you've never actually used this design system yourself. Or is this just your pre-judgement?
Their example of the music app. You have a translucent bar showing the currently playing music app.
It gets harder to read when it overlaps with the background music album covers. I can very easily see a situation where you need to scroll to an empty bit, just to be able to read what it is actually playing.
Now, imagine you have a visual impairment. It's already hard to read with mostly normal eyes. This will be impossible for anyone with bad vision, probably even worse if colorblind.
It is genuinely unreadable, and a mess visually.
Almost every button and menu they showed was harder for me to read than the ones on my current generation Apple gear. The icons on buttons are indistinct, the text is hard to read. The buttons themselves seem to sink into the content "below" making both the buttons and the content hard to see.
Some examples:
- the tabs at the bottom left of the photos app
- the address bar in Safari (what a complete mess... you can't see the content beneath because the address bar blurs it, but you also can't read the address bar because the glass effect destroys contrast
- in the colourless "translucent" colour way, all the icons look the same
- the (admittedly cute) "squish" effect when tapping menus and some of the buttons looked like it would slow down all interactions
- the highlights and light/colour bending effects are utterly distracting, catching your eye when you really want to be skimming the content or overview to orient yourself in the UI
True, I've not used it... but I was watching along with the launch video with rapt Apple fan-boi attention and I was surprised by how uncomfortable the new UI seemed to be. I've never felt that before.
This new design style is certainly "fun", but it looks like it'll get in the way of fast use of the tools.
I want my OS to promote clarity of affordances, and then to recede away from my attention so I can get on with doing what I was trying to do. This new design style looks like it's trying to hold on to my attention all the time I'm using the devices. (Admittedly today's keynote was an ad for the new design, so that sense of attention grabbing was hopefully accentuated over day to day use... but I'm skeptical.)
Every single example of the five are hard to read, especially the second.
At least half of the example screenshots and videos I've seen in the keynote and on various Apple website pages are hard to read. The lense effects, only visible in the animations/videos, are technically impressive, visually stimulating, but terrible from a utilitarian perspective (unless you consider convincing people to buy iPhones using attractive visuals in a cinematic sort of way but not actually trying to use the devices as some sort of utility to Apple).
I can personally see how others would find it hard to read, just really doesn’t bother me. I can imagine being unconvinced that anyone really finds it to be that bad, and thinking it’s just HN contrarians being annoying, as usual.
Have you used it yet?
> That's a huge loss to productivity and ease of use
They haven’t used it and haven’t lost any productivity because of it (outside of the time they’ve spent complaining about it online).
Wait until we have some real feedback to complain, at least.
Kinda old hat at this point tbh.
And just because we have all this powerful hardware, does not mean we need to waste it on physically accurate glass surfaces on UIs.
If this rolls out to all iDevices, how much energy (in other words CO2) will be expended worldwide on rendering things like this?
Which is complete idiocy if you ask me. Why update a static screen at 120 fps? Are our batteries too large?
Good thing it doesn't do that then, variable refresh rate displays that go down to 1 Hz are fairly standard now on phones as well as other displays.
The problem with all this - and 'liquid glass' as well - is that far from adding anything to the experience, they take away from it. They muddy and visually complicate what should be a visually clear and simple interface, one that gets out of your way as much as possible while allowing you to reach what you really care about - the content in your apps.
It's actually quite resource intensive to have translucency, in many implementations across the web and mobile.
I'm not sure if this is a joke or not.
We had that, it was called skeuomorphism: https://miro.medium.com/v2/da:true/resize:fit:1200/0*6DRkHp3...
Then we got rid of it because it looked too 2010 now we are bringing it back because flat looks too 2020.
As a Scandinavian: I don't feel like we tried that since Braun. Apple has tried to mimic a Scandinavian sort of minimalism, but only in appearance. The iPhone UI is way to busy and is to hard to navigate for me to classify it as minimalism.
The problem with skeuomorphism in iOS' first design language was that resemblance to real-world objects was taken too far — at the expense of legibility. Users attributed affordances to virtual objects that they didn't have.
The problem with iOS 7's flatter interface was that the anti-skeumorphism went too far in the other direction, again at the expense of legibility. Users couldn't see what controls were supposed to do.
... And now the pendulum has swung back in the other direction, again too far, and missed the goal.
And I agree about liquid glass being successful iff they make the developer tooling for this as easy as additional modifiers to components, or even the default for SwiftUI.
There are reasons why most controls are NOT made of glass in real life.
Glas actually makes sense, given its an extension of the device's hull.
I think it's a nice aesthetic. It obviously needs some tuning (contrast, transparency, etc.), but the idea is nice! I've installed the beta, and it isn't as bad as it looks, just takes some getting used to.
I also theorize this may be some grand transition phase to prepare everyone for the visionOS future apple wants to happen, but that could just be a stretch.
The 3D buttons in Windows 98 (Start button, for example) must have be harder to develop due to the animation involved. Yet, that was perfectly fine on hardware much older than those on which flat UIs were developed. I think you are missing the main point, which is that designers maul designs every season exactly like in the fashion industry due to merely being employed to do so and feeling a need to produce something new all the time (, which is sub-optimal for the humans who have to bear the UX consequences, to say the least).
Transparent UI components always add noise by nature, especially glass that is intended to be realistic - see all the refractions shown in the keynote.
Aqua was also playful and suggested the same feel but never got in the way of clarity and was beautifully implemented almost feeling revolutionary at the time.
What is on point for VR use cases where this is taken from, unfortunately ruins a desktop or handheld experience.
A massive loss of precision, focus and a big step backwards.
except apple dictates to its fans whats right. i feel apple has already begun a slow process of making them similar;
what im more curious about is how they will improve the settings app (it seems the desktop settings is the worst its been design and flow wise - ive never liked the ios settings design - i do hope they change both of these for the better)
edit: more newlines
Actually, even without that, the grouping and the hierarchy don't make sense. Why are some things top-level items and other under "general"? Same for "privacy and security" (I assume that's what it's called in English), for some reason "passwords", "lock screen" and "touch ID and password" are separate top-level items even though they do very much belong to "privacy and security".
The more you look at it, the less sense it makes.
Search isn't the most intuitive and obvious way to everyone. Just adding a search function also isn't an excuse to just totally ignore good UX design and information hierarchy.
I've been a sysadmin my entire career, and still do end-user support occasionally. You'd be surprised how few people use the search function, for anything, on their computers. Just opening the windows start menu and showing them they can search there is like black magic to a frighteningly large amount of people.
I've met fellow Mac users that don't even know spotlight exists, and navigate through the OS and every app via mouse and clicking around.
So yeah, just throwing a search box in your app as an excuse for ignoring the experience of navigating it any other way is bad UX design.
I'm staying with family and just handed my 64 year old mother who has never used a Mac my Macbook Pro with the settings app open, and after explaining the concept of default browser in non-leading language (not mentioning the word default), her first thought was to click Display.
When nothing familiar was there her next thought was to click Search and then type in Browser and she made the connection of "Default Browser" to the concept I mentioned immediately.
-
Non-techies are not going to learn the groupings for OS settings any easier than they'll figure out a UX pattern that's been widely accepted for decades: https://www.nngroup.com/articles/search-visible-and-simple/
Of course, who don't know anything about UX tend to assume personal anecdotes map to a much larger sample size than they actually do.
I do find it amusing how disorganized the app has become, and that has become my favorite example.
I find it even more amusing that you think citing search as a primary UI path is your “smoking gun” of good information hierarchy and interface design.
The original settings app had a nondescript "General" label for this same setting: neither tells me to expect a default browser setting.
Overall the old UI was just the current UI with lower information density.
> Search is always available while the app is open, across all menus and functions.
> Therefore no placement or layout can be singled out as better or worse in the Settings app. All possible hierarchies or arrangements are equal.
> I unroll my Apple UX Researcher Toolkit (contents: blindfold, dart, dartboard, crack pipe), and use it to make my decision: I put the dropdown 3 levels deep under Touch ID, safe in the knowledge that I cannot be criticized, because we've also included a search bar.
It's just bad thinking. Sorry if you're upset I've called it out.
How is that setting spelled? What synonym did they use? Are there multi-work linking hyphens? Will it work with or without them? Is the search fuzzy?
And then localization comes in. Take any translated UI and the search often falls short. Did they translate the setting name? Did they translate it right, or did a google-translate of their localization plist? Will it find the setting if I spell it without accents? Which dialect does it use? Wait I don't know how to say this specific technical work in my native language because nobody actually uses it?
So yeah, please keep categories that make sense.
As for the second part, Apple does a remarkable job at updating all of the OS to a new design language. Unlike Windows, which last time I used it, had three different settings panels and UI controls resembling archaeological layers going back to pre XP.
If Apple makes the right platform-specific affordances (which they have a much better chance of doing) I think it can work.
That was a big part of the problem, but the issues with the UI/UX went far beyond that.
For exemple, if you used the search bar in the "start menu" to get something from the control pannel, it would ONLY show the new W8 Metro dialog box that barelly has 1/5th the features and would refuse to show you the real one. It also took multiple years before the metro apps inlcuded in the OS (eg. pdf viewer) could be used in windowed mode (they were fullscreen mode like a video game, without taskbar), even the ipad at the time had better multitasking than the W8 Metro apps.
During that time they also instituted "anti-leak" measures so teams would develop and commit features internally and keep them behind hidden flags that required special permissions from the org to change (via an app they called "red pill"). That means that by the time many teams saw what was happening with the UX in various places in the OS, it was too late to come to consensus.
The entire cycle for the OS was empire building and emperor has no clothing from start to finish. It wasn't until he was ousted that they started to try and pull things back with 8.1 and eventually 10.
I've also noticed a lot of solutions to issues in windows now adopting the usage of power shell one liners as an easy way to fix it, and some times even the only way to change a setting or disable something in the system.
Meanwhile in Linux land with the more recent distros running Gnome I've noticed less and less need to use the command line. Can still be annoying though, but I guess it's the price to pay when you roll the OS of your choice on a system that wasn't really validated for it. (it's amazing it works as well as it does honestly)
The true difference between Windows and other OSes is that the CLI was thought out. I imagine there are still people out there running headless OSes. The UI is optional. Though this isn't the case for macOS, it tries to pretend it is IMO.
Though Apple has long had a universal design across platforms. Not always in lockstep, but visual traits and behaviours and traits and appearances end up in all of their platforms, which even if it wasn't logical from a design perspective, there is loads of shared code so it's inevitable.
But really a lot of what they showed today reminded me most of Aqua from 25 years ago.
Everyone was keying on the universal design thing, and the seeming importance of "introduces" as if this is a first, and it was such an odd thing for Apple to denote given that they have been using a universal design for a long, long time.
What I find wild is that there were internal W8 releases with a proper start menu but they abandon it at some point to fully embrace Metro.
If anything, we saw the iPad make serious roads towards functioning like macOS.
Knowing that people will be spending hours of the day with these animations, it could be overwhelming. I'm not someone who suffers from videos or video games with photosensitive content warnings, but for many people, this might feel similar, like a friend of mine who can’t play Quake 3 Arena because it gives him nausea. I’m sure there will be an option to turn it off.
I also suspect that Apple, for marketing reasons, felt the need to present something visibly new and eye-catching. They probably turned to flashy design resources meant to impress rather than serve real usability needs. It feels more like a UI concept made for a sci-fi movie than something designed with accessibility and productivity in mind.
When Apple brought a spatial analogy to the Vision Pro, it also felt fair they were thinking in terms of volume and dimensions, after all, they were teaching people how to interact with a new reality.
I can even understand Apple wanting to unify their design approaches, but bringing the “liquid glass” look to everything feels like a massive step backward. The interface looks messy, clunky.
It feels like Apple is entering a design hell, and I don’t know how they’ll get out of it.
Skeuomorphism was on the Apple Lisa in 1983, and they didn't invent it. Apple's first touch device wasn't until ten years later in 1993 in the Newton MessagePad. The MessagePad didn't really have "apps," that wasn't until like 2008 when it was added to the iPhone, but now we're twenty-five years after Apple's first usage of Skeuomorphism. The Xerox Star was in 1981 and had Skeuomorphic elements.
So I'm not really following what you're trying to say in that sentance.
I can be argued that the Xerox Alto (1973) had skeuomorphic elements to it's GUI.
Likewise, I'm not really following what you're trying to say in that sentence.
Nobody mentioned multi-touch at all. We're talking about Apple's first usage of skeuomorphic UI design, and or their first usage on a touch device in particular.
> Also, do you know a bunch of people who were big Xerox Starheads? It doesn't count if you don't have mass adoption.
I genuinely don't understand what you're responding to or trying to say. I'm not following the relevance nor what you mean by "count" (or not-count).
I feel like you're trying to have a conversation about something else, but I'm really not sure what or what it is you thought you read.
The video says: "It beautifully refracts light, and dynamically reacts to your movement, with specular highlights"; ugh, why? Why add dynamic==distracting high-frequency details that supply zero information?
The recent super flat UI aesthetic bugged me for awhile for its apparent lack of affordances, but when used consistently it made sense. Now it seems we still get zero affordances, but also visual noise.
Improvement is always only a single update away! Potentially..
IBM was doing it 10 years earlier.
The new design is so visually overwhelming that I think the only way for users to deal with it is to reduce complexity. I read a statistic that said the average user had 21 apps on their phone. I think that will reduce to 15 now, or less.
As for my app, this basically throws my whole design system out the window. I don't want to add glass to all my UI elements. Remember the visual noise that translucent window borders introduced in Vista? Why would I do that to my UI?
I like the fact that the new design introduces a sense of hierarchy, and that it has more animations. I also like that transition animations are now interruptible by default (watch the "What's new in UIKit" video for that). But that could've happened without the glass nonsense.
It was hard to feel excited in previous WWDCs, but I just took it as a sign of platform maturity. This year, on the other hand, is outright discouraging.
This blog's prediction got remarkably close. I've been a sucker for glass UI since the first Longhorn (later Vista) screenshots.
https://www.lux.camera/content/images/size/w2400/2025/05/Mai...
zoomed out they look blurry and unrefined, but when viewed zoomed in and large (like how a designer probably created them) they look kinda nice. Too bad they will all be small on iphone.
"It’s an exciting time to be a designer on iOS. My professional universe is trembling and rumbling with a deep sense of mystery."
This person is excited that their job designing iOS apps will be more interesting (and the prospect of plenty of work in the pipeline doesn't hurt either).
Fuck the end users who need to adapt to this needless change, suffer newly slow devices or invest in new ones, and put up with a hodge-podge of different UIs. Fuck the orgs who need to fund all this rework if they want their app on new devices. Fuck the waste of energy spent in the extra client-side cycles rendering all the needless new bling.
In this case I am lucky, as I find glassy UIs visually appealing.
My 82 year old mother has enough trouble figuring out what is a button vs. what's not. She just taps everything on screen to find out. This is going to make it worse.
Exactly. It's like they are trying to make it harder to use.
The 4th image on the page showing "All Of Me, Nao" is really hard for my eyes to read. I can't read "Nao" at all if I view that page on my iPhone. I can only read it on my Macbook Pro on a large external monitor.
I suppose there will be an accessibility setting to turn it off
1. It makes depth and layering extremely clear.
2. It prioritizes focusing on the content.
These are good principles and I think they’ll last the distance. There are plenty of refinements needed, especially for accessibility. I suspect over the next few years we’ll see the direction toned back a little while still retaining the best parts.
I am not sure we have a long run, as both dooms & destiny loom (eg Future Shock .. Singularity], but if we do then here is my background for my short take ...
1. Unlike you, I have not used the beta but I thoughtfully watched both Monday developer sessions on Liquid Glass & their new design system
2. My early computing experiences were, eg, ASR-33 teletype with paper tape to timeshare, then Altair 8800 and then punched card batches, so I have lots of personal evolution in ui/ux over many decades. Sadly my parents--born in 1922/1923--never used computers nor understood why I loved them and programming
3..665 omitted for brevity
666. in recent years I have devolved into Stone Knives & Bearskins dev mode within iPad Safari, because no one cares what I do and so I get to enjoy tinkering with tiny things in odd ways; ie I might be slightly crazy, so caveat emptor ...
Apple is threading a needle here. If they push too hard and fail they're doomed. If they don't take the lead (atop shock wave of tech) they're doomed.
Their leadership is rich and could easily retire, and Apple~ponderers need to always factor in that they dogfood their products because they believe in them.
Like Capital B Believe in Apple/products in that very real way in which one doesn't just say they dig a band but actually struggle and sacrifice to get to a concert thousands of miles away.
Allow me to observe that we already live in a trending post~Literate society and the ongoing collapse of the USA educational system, Covid~lost-years, the current Administration chaos, and the unstoppable engulfing of everything by ~AI++ makes a completely non-traditional ui/ux near term inevitable just by the principle: Flux !== inertia.
I am observing that the traditional ~marketplace deciders coupled with generational fashion du jour flocking are dwarfed by our Interesting Times just as diaspora can elevate tulips to mania and wheelbarrows full of money can fail to buy lunch.
Within that point of view (and if you're reading this far, no, to answer your question, I do not do drugs or write manifestos for public consumption) I will offer this condensed thought about Apple's current ui/ux steps ...
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.
Applying that to our extraordinary circumstances with a McLuhan Tetrad lens (Retrieval) suggests that all of classic myths to 20th Century SF&F invocation of magic words, gestures and holodecks are nearly upon us for reals.
Our devices are about to watch us, listen/hear us, immerse us in interactive faux reality to an unprecedented extent, ie apart from thousands of years of fanciful storytelling. Genies and demons. Dragons and Wizards.
Gods taking human form.
So.
If Apple is on a 1.5 year track to force developers to unify their runs-on-any~device ui/ux to a ~simplified magic, then I say we are witnessing Apple trying to mount their surfboard, quite calmly, incoming tsunami considered.
Lots of us may not be looking forward to getting wet.
But that is hardly Apple's fault.
Surfboards for the Mind(TM)?
lurker mode back on
This is a flop like the flat keyboard design. Making worse by trying to make it better. Verschlimmbessert.
And this from a company with unlimited financial resources.
And for the few that aren’t okay with feeling out of place, the devs of those apps will now have to contend with shipping more macOS specific styles and workarounds.
I’m not looking to discuss Electron performance/etc so please ditch that discussion before it starts. I just find it interesting how comparatively tricky this particular UI styling might end up being for cross-platform developers.
And they're rational to do it this way. These companies shipping apps to millions of people all came to the conclusion that investing in native Mac software is not worthwhile to their business. Users don't avoid Electron-based products, and building native Mac apps slows you down. It's easier both technologically and organizationally to ship your web site as an Electron app. It costs less and you don't lose any users.
So I would be surprised to see _any_ popular Electron app get design updates to accommodate these changes.
As a user it makes me sad, but I find myself blaming Apple for losing this fight, not the hundreds of successful companies that all somehow make the same choice. If building native were an advantage, people would take it.
It's rational for businesses to do things that make them money, and to not do things that don't make them money or make them lose money. SaaS business believe that spending R&D budgets on growth hackers and web product engineers is a better return than spending those same budgets on macOS engineers. I suspect they are right.
It doesn't matter to these businesses that you personally avoid Electron apps. They don't care, and Apple has made it easy and rewarding for them not to care.
Electron apps are not all B2B or associated with a service. This restriction is odd.
> Or, what purchasing decisions have you made on behalf of your company that took Electron-ness into account?
Password manager. PDF software. REST client. Other developer tools.
You're taking the boring argument track here. Yes, they use their own design system language, but they still roughly fit in with an OS that's not random transparency/glass effects everywhere.
They clearly will not fit in with the new UI styling without significant thought and work.
It's not going to matter, most Electron apps look out of place on the Mac already. The developers are not going to care and probably most users are not going to care either (I used to be staunchly against Electron for this reason, but gave up, and now I choose just enjoy apps looking the same between platforms).
Apple neglected the desktop from ~2016-2020 and made two frameworks that are unpopular among developers (Catalyst and SwiftUI) after that. Outside some indie devs, the native Mac app ship has sailed. Even developers that had their roots in macOS (e.g. AgileBits) have given up and switched to Electron.
AFAIK, most people do most things on the Web. So, no, Electron Apps will feel like what most people use most of the time. It's native apps that will feel out of place.
The design language of native controls is usually much quieter and more subdued than the garishness that is allowed in the name of branding.
Consistency with native app/style had never been an issue, ever. It's stylistic choice. while I get that someone would like to have the same theme everywhere it does not prevent anything.
Every single webpage is different that the other and yet everybody browse the web.
There's plenty of pragmatic reasons not to build a native app. The concerning thing IMO is the hegemony of opinion here. After all, nothing says "hacker" quite like following all the rules properly and always doing the sensible thing. :)
IMO the jury is out on how much they are.
> why are none of these gains being used to get back towards native app development?
because the different platforms are still radically different in a way an LLM can't easily and simply paper over. How do I specify a UI in a way that an LLM can competently implement it in HTML, SwiftUI and whatever Windows is using these days?
One argument might be that, like with any LLM output, you still do need to know it well enough to know if it's good or not implementation-wise. You still need that knowledge to understand if your performance for rendering in some scenarios is going to fall off a cliff.
Web (via browsers or Electron/etc) are mostly one train of thought. When you're doing native application development using host OS frameworks, you have to actually know the framework. LLMs don't really save you from that; i.e, I could have an LLM spit out whatever flavor of Windows-specific UI I need. I have zero way of knowing whether it's correct or not.
But I’ll probably get used to it.
This. The animations on iOS are already a bit too much—now they've taken it to the next level.
It's not like it's even that useful, I never heard of any phones letting you adjust the beam width/strength like that before but it was quite fun to play with that the first time I discovered it.
God forbid software be a little bit fun.
This reminds me a lot on the visual we were saying for Windows Longhorn before Vista was released, peak Apple being their usual trailblazing self.
I’m just amused we have somehow circled back.
IMO it should "opaque up" the glass stuff when the blur detects significant similarity between the text / icon content on top, vs the blurred background on bottom.
"COOL" is not "success".
It will be even harder to see in anything but a dark room than these perfect press videos show.
I am surprised they forgot the important detail of good contract to be able to read the name of apps.
But yes, terrible visual usability. Otherwise it looks nice, better than flat.
https://www.deviantart.com/zainadeel/art/Shine-2-0-for-Windo...
This is the kind of design that does great in a 15 minute user test, but is annoying 2 months on.
Then we went totally flat in 10.10, and it was pretty awful then too. I'll stay on Sequoia until Apple irons this out in 2-3 future macOS versions, or maybe it's finally the year of the linux desktop... at least in my world.
And while it was very pretty, the movement away from translucency was due in large part because of accessibility (for all users).
It's actually quite difficult to see controls (and read text) when not on a flat/solid background.
And go back to Mac OS the most easily usable GUI?
I don't want to watch Avatar XXXVI when I pick up my phone to check my messages.
Cook stays.
That some company is making money?
"Reaping the rewards of their earlier innovation" is literally his job.
I still don't get your point.
Apple is a public company. It's mission is not to impress @mjburgess but to make money for its shareholders, which they do really well.
Cook didnt add 2 tr, he collected it. If I plant a field of crops, water, grow etc. them and you turn up after my death to sell them -- who made the money?
Cook presides over a dying field he continues to reap without sowing.
Apple UI designer #1: Well, the flat design has been largely a success so far, but those darn users -- they can still easily pick out widgets from the background, and with a few tries still reasonably guess what they're for and how they'll respond!
Apple UI designer #2: I know! Let's make the widgets semitransparent. That way they'll be harder to pick out from the background, and Macs and iPhones will become delightfully fun puzzle boxes users will love trying to figure out, much like my dog loves his snuffle mat!
When nobody used computers, it was necessary to attract people. How? With the bestter interfaces, usability. A graphical operating system running on a CPU of 20 MHz or less was something. It's not fast, but it's the best possible for the time!
And after 2000, everyone is using computers. The market is not expanding as companies expected. It's no longer important to attract people, everything can be done without worrying about the user, he's no longer important. Now, the Android keyboard is bigger than the Windows 95 installation, and my computer crashes from time to time with CPUs operating at GHz.
No, the interfaces of the past were not perfect, but they were made to try to fool people.
Remember Netflix? It used to recommend sharing passwords, now it tries to charge for each different IP. Is the same thing, the stream market is stable now...
The good UI is lost, it's a thing of the past.
I hope Apple gives the option to turn this whole thing off.
I notice the borders now also have shadows / gradients due to reflection, that's also something I'd like to remove personally.
Same here. I do not understand the fascination with making things harder to read and see.
I hear folks on contrast concerns. I have hope though. I really like the de-emphasis on compute. On tools being less the thing, on the content first, on getting computing out of the way, making it ambient. Unboxing the content, unframing it.
The glass refraction seems like a an amazing leap forward. Material has been around forever and there's all these developer docs showing the stack up of layers, implying the depth of the system, but in the 2d user world everything is flat, composited into indistinction. The visual sepration, allowing semi transparent motion, but using refractive style to clearly separate the layers, adds such clarity that it feels obvious in retrospect immediately to me.
I still lack hope that XR is going to be a huge huge thing, that it will be comfortable over time, but it makes such sense to me that XR would inspire & lead this shift, to depriotizing the UI & emphasizing the content.
I'm stressed a bit trying to imagine the transforms required to make this refraction happen. I don't think CSS is going to be enough. The new CSS Painting API ("Houdini") also seems more generative than able to modify & script what is?
It's a decade too late for that. Websites and mobile applications are the de-facto metaphor for using computers, trying to fight that trend ostracizes your most promising markets. Hell, it even ostracizes a lot of Mac users that like the new approach.
Maybe it's time to face the music - people like convenience. MacOS does not have potent enough windowing controls to make most users comfortable throwing around several windows to use one app. iOS and iPadOS both neglect their multitasking abilities to the point that people practically forget you can use more than one app at once.
I don't hate the idea of trying to enforce a more informative windowing model, but I also don't think most people can intuit how to use it. If Stage Manager is any indication, most people just want a fullscreen view of a single-page app.
I agree that right here right now change feels impossible. That the monolith app as everything as the sole decider of all UX feels absolute & total, a fief never to be invaded.
But I'm less confident this fortress really will hold forever. And liquid glass has some of the seeds of undoing this totality, by emphasizing content, by making tools a visually separate layer.
Which is just going to make people try even harder.
It's not at all a concern for Apple, nor should it be.
In raw shader code it's verging on trivial, like old school environment mapping. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reflection_mapping
1. Use CSS Images Module Level 4's element() function to capture an image of the layer below. (currently only implemented in firefox)
2. Feed that image into an offscreen canvas.
3. Use a shader to distort the image as needed. This can be done in a paint worklet so it doesn't slow down or hold up the main thread.
4. Use CSS Painting API Level 1's paint() function to paint the contents of the canvas onto the background of the button. (currently only implemented in blink based browsers)
I might be wrong, but without more context, that sounds like it'd defeat browser protections to avoid leaking your browser history via the color of :visited links.
I got confused between the <image> css type (that `element()` produces) and the image type used by canvases. But they're different on purpose to try and make things one way to handle privacy/security concerns. (canvases can go in the other way, but they can end up "tainted" and you have to mess with CORS which a whole bunch of devs can't handle)
We can:
- declaratively render <image> css types onto elements from css land using `background`
- declaratively get the finished render of an element back into an <image> css type using `element()`
- programmatically make whatever changes to bitmap data inside a canvas
- programmatically copy the contents of a canvas through Houdini's paint worklets into an <image> css type that is declaratively accessible using `paint()`
We just don't have a non-CORS way to directly get an <image> css type into a canvas' bitmap data in the first place.
I haven't checked, but there could be a way to draw an <image> css type into an svg, then draw that svg in the canvas. Assuming that doesn't break the element() link, you could do the CORS headers dance to make the canvas' data accessible again.
So, you could probably make it work on your own website, but you couldn't release it as a library because each server would need to be set up correctly to allow it to work.
It'd probably be much easier to just skip the canvas entirely and do the distortions entirely declaratively in svg using filter effects (e.g. svgDisplacementMap, or maybe feConvolveMatrix) so there's no privacy leaking.
Ironically, that'd probably mean that the effect could be completely implemented right now in firefox without waiting for new features to be released, but with firefox's poor svg filter effects performance, it'd run at seconds per frame instead of frames per second.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Looking_Glass
Liquid Glass looks a lot like coming up with changes for the sake of them.
We completely ignored all the things you actually wanted and did this instead.
Yes I know Apple have always been like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nx7v815bYUw (BOOM)
But at least the Stebe Jovs keynotes gave me the chance to be impressed for a moment in my head before laying in to the superlatives.
I want a good UI to fade into the background. But this one is like a UI designer's promotion fever dream: The UI is at the center, no matter the content. The promotional video says "This material brings a new level of vitality to every experience" and then they show a video player where now the control overlay has more contrast, more movements, and more bright lights than the actual movie. And then the other features are just bull*: "It responds in real-time to your actions". Gosh I hope other UI frameworks would respond to my actions, what a novel idea! And yeah, ever played a video game? Things reacting to user input in real-time isn't exactly groundbreaking. And then they top it off with "a fluidity only Apple can achieve", which is just delusional. Desktop Linux box + RTX 5090 + current video game + 240 Hz screen => a fluidity that exceeds everything that Apple can achieve on a phone.
I mean I like SwiftUI and I like how apps look on the current iOS. But I think it's already borderline intense just to use the OS. It certainly should not have any more additional glitter, blinking, movement, or animations. It might be the direction that GTK could benefit from, but not SwiftUI.
In short, this feels like a step in the wrong direction for Apple to me.
Heck, we hit "peak-UI" with Win 2K, AFAAIC.-
PS. Like, literally.-
But I have to be honest, it was randomly generated.
Apple really isn't what it once was, this is embarrassing.
The stiffness is because the presenter is mainly a techie, developer or manager and not a natural performer. Their bodies are resisting the conformity by conforming to the letter but not the spirit.
- https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2025/06/apple-introduces-a-de...
And Microsoft always shows a lot of pretty images for their software design promo material and it never looks anything like that in reality. Oddly enough a lot of their desktop apps are just webapps at this point so they're basically in a similar situation to Google. And they have to make things run on low-end hardware (or at least they should...) so they aren't in Apple's position of being able to design knowing the hardware can handle calculating light's refraction through glass 60-120 times per second.
I think the new design approach here is a clever nudge towards "Neo Skeuomorphism". Interface design is clearly heading in a much more skeuomorphic direction (see: AirBnB redesign) lately with the rise of AI. Liquid Glass is an apt way to provide more material-realism without devolving back to the objective realism that the old Skeuomorphic style pre-2013 represented.
Time and time again I see people bemoan Apple's UI direction and then sure enough within a year or two it becomes ubiquitous as web designers adopt the patterns for their own work.
The funny part is that the lede is getting buried here. The big story is of course the universal design _across platforms_. We're now ultra-ultra close to a unified OS, something that has been in materializing extremely slowly over the past decade and a half.
This shows most designers follow trends. It does not show Apple's ideas were good.
But to be honest, people do market research, they know what the public like. And if I’m totally being honest, if I made a new design for the general public and the odd internet forum didn’t get enraged about it I’d be worried I either had made too un-impactful a change or worse, I’d made something critics like more than the general public.
It feels like that’s what happened here, to be honest.
It’s okay for a product to stay the same, if the current design is the right one. I just can’t imagine what problems they’re trying to solve with this update.
This is new update is dog ugly and universally reviled. They’ll fix the most egregious stuff in beta, and then in a year or two dial it in.
This is a big, bold move. I’m happy to see them do something that takes some courage and also ship it.
Most of the really bad/unreadable screenshots I see are people customizing things so they look terrible. All the defaults look great.
I think it’s great we have deep customization options coming. That’s good. To people that say you shouldn’t be able to make it look bad… No. My desktop OS is infinitely configurable and I can absolutely break it. I’m happy to see at least the most surface level guard rails coming off of iOS.
This is good.
Sheesh.
Apple has never pretended to be anything other than a luxury goods company, they bang on endlessly about how high end everything they make is, yet people keep acting all surprised pikachu that they’re priced like luxuries and are sometimes aimed at markets that go above the average consumers head.
You can't see or process the information behind the glass - at best it's major cognitive load to do so, at worst it's just very noisy with zero added information.
AirTags are still holding me in Apple ecosystem but now Androids have their own tracking thingies, maybe it's time.
On the Macos side, I'm open to the new aesthetic, but I just hope to god they've been actually investing in performance improvements when it comes to SwiftUI, which has only barely been viable in some cases thus far. If MacOS gets a full UI update, but the Settings screen still lags when navigating between sections, someone's doing something wrong.
It''s not terrible, but I will avoid it for a while. My biggest issue is the system resources this will require. I just don't care for the pretty, as much as I care for fast UI. Thinks Windows 11 delayed right click context menu.
Unifying their operating system design language makes sense, but ugh do we really need yearly operating system revisions like this. It is obvious that the engineers struggle with the marketing led pace judging by how many issues there are every major release of macOS. I don't upgrade to a new major until a .3 usually because of this.
But instead we got this.
Does this how a massively large and rich company's intellectual bankruptcy begin?
This updated design language seems to have similarities to Microsoft's Material/Fluent design system that brought more of that same glass material to Windows 11, with the more 3d-looking edge outlines on ui elements. So the glass metaphor seems to be a trending metaphor in these UIs, for better or for worse.
but it definitely takes me back to endlessly tweaking with linux mint skins in my college dorm.
The overall bulky style reminds me of the least appealing cosmic-techno-chrome Windows themes that were spawning like rabbits ~20 years ago: https://www.thepcmanwebsite.com/themes/images/themes/bounce_...
Is there a reason only Apple can achieve this look, or is it just marketing crap?
Wanted to hate it but looks kind of cool so we’ll see how bad the accessibility is.
They call it a material so this is a new type of glass? Can I actually use a loupe on it or that’s just for fun?
Is it possible to do the same job with same performance on Android? or Windows or any general target OS and software stack?
Seems that shader itself does not costs too much(normal map? lookup table?). What really matters is their UI/Shader job scheduling in realtime constraints on any CPU/GPU load state.
The transparency effect is a nightmare. Its so fascinating to me how this made it through to an official iOS release. We'll see how it plays on GA. I think we're going to see some major changes to the way its designed before GA.
The original reason for dropping transluscency was that "old people can't tell apart things", well we're way past the era of "no phone" generations, are we forever going to have things stay ugly?
Vista was the best looking OS ever with Aero on.
The artist name "Nao" on the music player. The zoom level "1x" on the camera. The tab "Library" on the gallery. And even the URL "floralarrangem..." in the browser.
Seems to be a consequence of low-contrast, busy backgrounds, and overly aggressive use of transparency. Maybe a "tinted glass" approach and more considerate color/contrast choices would help.
That this was the dominant topic during the keynote of their annual developer event doesn't seem to bode well for the state of the ecosystem. Especially combined with how cutting the sarcasm was for the new version numbering and new macOS name announcement(s).
The browser navigation overlaps the viewport. I wonder if this'll break websites/apps that anchor a menu to the bottom.
It's also, somewhat curiously, not neumorphism. All the interface layers appear distinct, which makes me worry if things like Dynamic Island and Control Center will be mistaken for app controls and not distinct phone controls.
p.s. If you like Aqua, you might enjoy playing around this open source glass rendering CSS library: https://www.specularcss.org/#materials/glass
p.s. If you like Aqua, you might like this open source glass rendering CSS library: https://www.specularcss.org/#materials/glass
Open notes or messages, swipe left on an item.
In iOS 18, the options (silent/delete in Messages or share/ delete) were simply icons, cleary delineated as buttons with color matching backgrounds, no text.
Now the options have descriptive text under each button which of course is cut off 99% of the time as it exceeds the tiny width these action buttons have - and the buttons are harder to hit.
How? Why?
I have the most controversial opinion here I think: I think it’ll be just fine. Not incredible! Not necessarily amazing! Not terrible either! Just… fine. They’ll dial it back a bit into public beta and then public release, and no one will care that much and it’ll be fine.
People getting all storm in a tea cup over this.
Floating menu bars over the content at the bottom is a great way to make it impossible to actually use the bottom of web pages.
The "liquid glass" stuff, even in their handpicked promo screenshots, has functionally unreadable text and illegible controls.
The vanishing buttons are going to make app UIs even more obtuse and undiscoverable.
We’ve had books/scrolls for thousands of years, laid out in beautiful proportion, and now it has all melted in the oven!
Absolutely nothing interesting or innovative on the horizon, besides AI snake oil that they apparently just can't get right...
End stage big tech.
It doesn’t seem like they have anyone who can say “we’re not shipping/announcing that” with ultimate authority.
The AVP never should have shipped in its current state. Then there was/is the Siri 2/AI debacle. Now macOS, too.
This is to say nothing of the butterfly keyboard.
I guess this is more of the same? Some pretty picture can shine through at you because... pretty?
I get there are accessibility concerns, but apple has the best track record of any os building company at making sure accessibility options exist and work well, so I hope that will address that. As for people here saying it’s ugly… how do I out this delicately. They do huge amounts of product research and market research as a company, it’s likely this will go down very well with the public even if it doesn’t go down well with the average HN reader… if you catch my drift.
It’ll be fine, IMO at worst it’ll be a bit ugly and they’ll be forced to walk it back a bit. The way people here talk about it it’s like this design kicked their dog or something.
This looks far more complex and something almost like real time ray tracing.
Note: not being a hater and appreciate the complexities of working on huge platforms as Apple ecosystem. Just genuinely wondering, since it feels like maybe 2 years of start/stops/changing priorities.
I think it's exactly this. Apple got caught with their pants down on AI, had to shift quickly and that's what got us last year's announcements that never came.
Well, it still isn't ready, so they needed something to give this year since they are so committed to an annual release cycle (which I think is a mistake IMHO), so we get a design change & some love for the iPad.
OTOH, I like where Apple is going with private, on device AI. So if they need some more time to make it useful and polished, totally fine with me. I'd prefer they don't ship a half baked, hallucinating piece of crap. I personally don't/won't use any of the AI "features" so for me personally, it's refreshing to have a tech conference keynote not be "AI AI AI AI." It's worse than when blockchain was all the rage.
I turn it off now. Turns out the instances where I want to see through a window are basically nil. They make for nice screenshots though.
I guess we will have to wait for State of Union.
That's something that would have been VERY doable for them on the iPhone/iPad, too.
Maybe this is the start of replacing macOS with some form of iPadOS experience in the medium to long term.
I hope the funky animated time can be disabled and I can still open the camera.
1. new wallpaper to differentiate yearly identical hardware increments
2. CPU bloat to hog resources, slow your device and push people to update their HW
these tick both boxes.
Without all that glassy thing. A neutral consistent flat design without too many shades.
You know..., like Material design?
Still rocking a budget Android though ... don't see a reason to change.
Oh and the Magic Keyboard? Great. Now my thin 13” iPad Pro feels literally as heavy as a MacBook Pro.
Someone tell me what is the point?
Grrr...
Hard to tell for sure until you have hands on though.
Makes everything harder to read, far more expensive on your battery. No benefits.
WTF.
That's the final nail in the coffin for me.
Bumping from iOS 18 / macOS 15 etc. towards year-based naming, nice. I wish more projects followed this.
But why would a slider button suddenly become translucent when you move it? Awful.
Apple designers: Please copy wobbly windows too.
What is the purpose of text in a screen?
Does something really help that purpose? Anything that does not is WRONG.
Did Apple learn nothing from Windwos Vista and Compiz?
I really hope apps like Ente can step up and get better and native, offer desktop backup + sync both as well. But then there's always the chance that Apple will just find a way to shut them down. or reject their updates, just like they did in the past.
Anyway, I guess we'll have to wait and see what else they manage to screw up with this "move."
But my aging eyes would like option to turn of the translucency altogether. That would be gold.
*{
opacity: 0.36
}
Many elements are still completely flat or more subtle. So, to me, it feels more like a new tool to convey hierarchy, rather than a complete new design: Secondary < Primary < Glass.
Also, the Safari-Redesign is back for round 2? It'd be funny if it runs into the exact same backlash again.
This'll probably stick around for years until Apple decides to switch design languages again, and they'll never admit the old one was bad - classic Apple.
It's unbelievably broken... like an Android phone with 30 themes installed at once.
iOS 18 actually looks good and is readable, which makes this worse. That's the thing about peaking - it's a long way down. Feels like they had to ship something because their AI isn't just behind - it's absolutely broken like shit. Siri's been stale for 15 years, and they're not even polishing features that others have half-baked into their products. They've got... nothing.
- In general, it always looks worse on dark mode
- The glass transparency effect is too local. It looks only at what's exactly below, so if you have two icons side by side in Control center on iPhone, one may show dark and the next one light, making you think one is active and the other one is inactive. It's pretty clear they wrestled with icons being too transparent so they blurred them a bunch, but it just makes it worse in those cases.
- It does have sensible defaults for (most) 3rd party icons that are flat, by adding some reticule on the flat logo to make it pop and look less out of place.
- The textfield contrasts can be horrendous. If you try to add a sky background to macOS messages (the first choice), the textfield is white text on lightly colored background. In Safari, if you have one of the default desktop background, you can get grey text on blue grayish background. There's absolutely no contrast and it's clear that they will have to address it.
- Safari for macOS takes the contrast issue above and pushes it to 11. It tries to reintroduce the universally hated concept of "the webpage takes over your browser window" but makes it worse. It's horrible enough to have your tabs and icons change color from white to black if you tab from say hacker news to github, but they've added a very slow (and buggy) animation for the UI on top. So while the tab switches immediately, the UI on top slowly morphs from white to black. Absolutely infuriating (and can't be disabled in beta 1). You also can't really see the selected tab in dark mode on a webpage with a black background.
In summary, some things look ok but in general it's really rough. The finder icon sums it best, they had a concept (transparent layers), and tried hard to shove everything through it, never stopping to question if maybe the concept needs adjusting when it clearly didn't work. I expect a bunch of changes, as is it's really rough.
It's not glassy (thank god), but it is just as disorientingly-bouncy.
I am quite happy with Mint/XFCE on the Linux side though. Clear and very fast. Glad to have finally shifted.
That said, I do greatly appreciate how the new guidelines and redesigned UIs make interactive buttons actually look like buttons. Each tappable element is visually distinct and represented in a consistent way. I just wish that Apple didn't insist on moving/hiding buttons in response to unrelated actions (ie WHY do I lose my action buttons when I scroll down, and why do they poof into existence when I scroll up? Why can I search on the root page of Settings but not on any subpage? Why does tapping a button that reveals a submenu hide that button?) Just stop moving things around, please.
I'm excited to see this effect turned into a WebGL library in literally a week by some smart devs out there, and then adapted by Material Design in another month. Really? Only apple? This kind of rhetoric might have worked on me 20 years ago, but today it's just sad how obviously false it is.
Both new UIs look truly awful, and seem like accessibility nightmares. I will continue enthusiastically disabling animations.
Stunningly beautiful.
But maybe on the desktop you can see them if you use a mouse.
There was a reason nobody layered barely readable icons directly onto the glass surface in aero. Even the text in the title bar had a glow to increase the contrast at least!
Fire all the design team. Should have done it back when iOS7 came out but clearly it wasn't a one off.
"Look at our presentation, UI updates"
What happened to actually innovating?
They really are promoting "set your alarm without closing your streaming video"
... I mean. Great. My life is gonna be so much easier.
> Users love widgets
MMmm Apple. Time to stop with the mushrooms
Perhaps human should be less obsessed in twisting nature to serve our comfort, and just adapt ourselves more to what nature provides.
If we have the hardware then not using it is wasteful. My iPhone doesn't get cheaper if I don't use all the power it provides.
Plus your battery will thank you for this.
God this marketing copy is sickening
Literally who wrote this, and who did they write it for??
The glass stuff I am meh on but let’s see it in practice.
I taught people to use computers in the 90s and early 2000s, and having those concepts matching to real world objects helped immensely. Recently I had to teach my kids to use a PC (they no longer teach that in "computers" at school, by the way, iPads only), and everything was arbitrarily designed without even internal rules/consistency let alone building on real-world metaphors.
You've also had this ongoing trend of content density getting consistency worse, and now Apple is accelerating a trend to make UI elements difficult to see/harm discoverability further. Liquid Glass is going to be a painful period, and all the clones that do it even worse are going to be pure hell.
But I'm 100% behind you on "make buttons look like buttons" and "don't hide functionality behind arbitrary gestures that you never tell the user". UI designers may hate menus these days, but they were so good for letting a user browse through looking for the thing they want. Search boxes are a good speed improvement, but should never be the only interface object because many times the user doesn't know exactly what they're looking for.
This is also why most voice assistants don't get used very much, there's no easily accessible list of phrases they know and they aren't smart enough to really understand what the person wants, so people end up using the one or two phrases they know the assistant can handle and forget about it otherwise.
Thank you for saying this, you've just made me realise they share all the problems of text adventures while having none of the excitement.
So long for muscle memory (oh and for consiseness, it's worse in French).
Anyways, that's the prime reason there's no list: either they want to change the commands willy-nilly, or they don't know them because that's whatever the model's learned.
Only saying "15 minutes" initiates a timer for that long.
This goes even deeper in the "undiscoverable commands" issue at hand.
"notify me in 15 minutes" feels natural and casual, and how I'd expect to interact with modern voice assistants. "set a 15 minutes timer" feels overly formal and redundant (it does not help that in French, a timer is "minuteur", so you repeat the "minutes" sound twice), and how I'd expect to interact with old voice assistants. This new one is just some hidden trial-and-error thing deep in Siri that's likely an engineer that likes cooking that added it as a shortcut.
Among the many shortcomings of Siri is that it seems as if it's not good with verbs. I've learned to avoid them as much as possible. Put another way, it's better with nouns, so I focus on them. I guess that's why
"15-minute timer" and
"15 minutes"
work well. But similarly, I wanted to use the stopwatch the other day. Not something I ever really do. Just saying, "Stopwatch" got it open. And testing now on some non-Apple apps also worked (in case Siri has some built-in pro-Apple bias). One was WhatsApp. The other was an app for an insurance and banking company. That one, just saying its name opened the contact card I have for the company. That's fair. Trying again, and saying "company name app" opened the app.
Of course, sometimes the verbs are necessary. But I've had more success when I could avoid them. Do note that I say all this using a Siri-only phone that is too old for any of Apple Intelligence that may get mixed in with Siri.
But the reality is it doesn’t work and users have to specifically learn the few things it can do.
Regarding the "notify" vs "timer", I had a very similar experience with a friend. I went to a bakery, and she asked me to get her some kind of pastry. To me, she meant some kind of bread. Queue confused faces on both sides when she asked where her stuff was. Sure, it's still in the broad "baked goods" category, just like a reminder and a timer. This was in France, both living in major cities 200 km apart. It's not like some extreme variation of English from the other side of the world.
Turns out it's actually already a word: having the proper form or shape —used of minerals whose crystalline growth has not been interfered with
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/idiomorphic
That seems to fit amazingly well here too.
Likely related to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affordance#As_perceived_action..., but it's a jargon word most tech people and others don't know, and it creates debates about what it means among those that do know it.
I usually say something like it should be obvious it's clickable, or obvious what it does, when it comes up.
> Affordances are what an object can do (truth). Perceived affordances are what one thinks an object can do (perception). Signifiers make affordances clearer (closing the gap between truth and perception). Signifiers often reduce number of possible interpretations and/or make intended way of using an object more explicit.
> A grey link on the screen might afford clicking (truth). But you might perceive it just as a non-interactive label (perception). Styling it as a button (background, shadow etc.) is a signifier that makes it clearer that the link can be clicked.
I don't think there's any more widely known terms here, and not any used within general tech audiences. I'd like it if there was a useful shorthand too but devs/users/clients are probably going to stick with e.g. "I couldn't tell that was a button" because the above have failed to catch on.
"Visual cues" feels accurate enough. I immediately understand "Buttons should look like buttons".
"Skeuomorphism" has caught on. It's not guessable but then it saves quite a few words so helps with communication. It probably got picked up by some tech news/blog sites and reached critical mass because skeuomorphism vs flat design resonates with people.
A lot of those real world objects no longer exists, or are less frequently used than their counterparts, so I sort of see why moving away from that design language makes sense.
I'll hold of judgement of "Liquid Glass" until I've seen and used, but I don't feel like it's necessary. It's certainly not "the biggest" design update ever. System 9 to MacOSX was still greater.
This isn't really Apples fault, but I also expect others to start implementing something similar, but badly. Apple do have a point that this is something that only Apple can do well, because you do need to ensure that hardware can keep up. We're going to see other attempt something similar, but it won't been nearly as polished.
Overall I still feel that Apple is trying to force to much functionality into the phone platform. It would be really lovely to have an iOS light, that does less and with a simpler UI/UX.
Yeah, about that.
When iPhone SE2 was first released (April 2020), it featured the A13 Bionic, which was the most powerful SoC Apple has had at the time (to be succeeded by A14 in iPhone 12 couple months later), and ran iOS 13.
Every succeeding iOS release, the phone felt a little more sluggish. Right now, by iOS 18: it sometimes takes half a minute to open the share sheet; misbehaving apps can make the phone almost too hot to touch, and can freeze the app switcher UI for 10+s; Safari takes 4s to "cold start" into about:blank; and so on. None of these are signs of CPU throttling, it's all just software. I almost can't wait for Apple to drop support for major releases - even if the current release is crap, the next one will be worse.
I pretty much expect last year's devices to start struggling with this new design after 2 releases.
To be clear, an irreversible update caused my iPhone 4 to become immediately unusable.
This reasoning never made a ton of sense to me. Gen Z don't use devices with knobs and buttons anymore, therefore we should all design our interface elements to look like nothing in particular?
If you give someone young and tech savvy a digital UI, they will figure out how to use it. It's precisely the oldest and least tech savvy users for whom interface design is most important, as they are more like to get frustrated and quit your app. Why optimize for the young, then?
(I mean, it's a rhetorical question, as I already know the answer - the designers creating the interfaces are themselves young and tech savvy gen-Z'ers.)
We have volume sliders rather than knobs, because that's easier on a touch interface. I get your point, but does the button need to look like the button on the radio in our grandfathers car from 1960? Probably not. I was thinking more in terms of filling cabinets, floppies as save icons or even the phone as the receiver on a rotary phone. Would it be easier to set a timer on your phone if the UI looked like a kitchen egg timer? Having the email icon be a letter doesn't even make sense anymore. My kid has sent one letter ever and all the mailboxes will be removed next year. How does having a letter as an icon going to provide any meaningful frame of reference when we daily receive more email than we do actual letters in a year, or two, or three?
Usually the reasoning just stops at "but nobody sends letters anymore!" without going a step further and justifying why that even matters.
That is a good question. The "share" icon e.g. is something that has no real world equivalent, and I'd argue that it almost doesn't work. Technically it could be anything and we'd over time agree that "This thing means share".
We're still at a point where many still understand the references, but over time something like the letter in email icons, just becomes cargo cult. Perhaps you're right, it doesn't matter, as long as we agree what the icons mean.
The New York Times uses a box wrapped up in a bow.
I can't link to it because it's rendered as an in-line SVG, but this is HN, so picture this in your mind:
<svg aria-hidden="true" width="19" height="19" viewBox="0 0 19 19"><path d="M18.04 5.293h-2.725c.286-.34.493-.74.606-1.17a2.875 2.875 0 0 0-.333-2.322A2.906 2.906 0 0 0 13.64.48a3.31 3.31 0 0 0-2.372.464 3.775 3.775 0 0 0-1.534 2.483l-.141.797-.142-.847A3.745 3.745 0 0 0 7.927.923 3.31 3.31 0 0 0 5.555.459 2.907 2.907 0 0 0 3.607 1.78a2.877 2.877 0 0 0-.333 2.321c.117.429.324.828.606 1.171H1.155a.767.767 0 0 0-.757.757v3.674a.767.767 0 0 0 .757.757h.424v7.53A1.01 1.01 0 0 0 2.588 19h14.13a1.01 1.01 0 0 0 1.01-.959v-7.56h.424a.758.758 0 0 0 .757-.757V6.05a.759.759 0 0 0-.868-.757Zm-7.196-1.625a2.665 2.665 0 0 1 1.01-1.736 2.24 2.24 0 0 1 1.574-.313 1.817 1.817 0 0 1 1.211.818 1.857 1.857 0 0 1 .202 1.453 2.2 2.2 0 0 1-.838 1.191h-3.431l.272-1.413ZM4.576 2.386a1.837 1.837 0 0 1 1.221-.817 2.23 2.23 0 0 1 1.565.313 2.624 2.624 0 0 1 1.01 1.736l.242 1.453H5.182a2.2 2.2 0 0 1-.838-1.19 1.857 1.857 0 0 1 .202-1.495h.03ZM1.548 6.424h7.54V9.39h-7.58l.04-2.967Zm1.181 4.128h6.359v7.287H2.729v-7.287Zm13.777 7.287h-6.348v-7.307h6.348v7.307Zm1.181-8.468h-7.53V6.404h7.53V9.37Z" fill="#121212" fill-rule="nonzero"></path></svg>Computers are full of these things though. The Shift key is a reference back to how typewriters worked. We didn’t change the name of the key, because nothing physically shifts anymore. Most don’t know what it means historically, but they still know what it does on their computer.
I’ll all for bringing skeuomorphism back.
While the Shift key keeps some resemblance of the original object behavior, a shortcut like Cmd + Shift V makes no sense in the metaphor.
Same way holding Shift while selecting objects in the finder, or arrowing around breaks the mental image. In many ways, the Command key's higher abstraction makes it easier for newcomers to grasp that it just does magical things.
Cmd + S saving the document needs no additional lore or image of a past clunky machine would had somehow reacted in a Rube Goldberg way.
Interfaces should be simple to use for simple tasks anyway, getting rid of semantic noise is IMHO a better way.
And we kept the letter "c", even though in English this is always* either pronounced like "k" or like "s", or the "ch" digraph. But sutsh ðings go in sykles, and one day ðe English language will be simplified.
* Saying "always" is a risk on a forum like this, no doubt there's an example I've not thought of.
In a fictitious modern, phonology-based spelling system, you could write the above something like:
“Bat sač þings gou in sajkls, änd wan dej ðí Ingliš längwidž wil bí simplifajd.”
;)
Accents do make spelling reform difficult. For example, some of the people who grew up 5 miles from me (they were Cosham/Portsmouth, I was south Havant) pronounced both these "th"s as… I don't know the linguistic symbol, but something like a "v" or an "f".
What's your accent btw? In "standard" English, 'the' has a voiced consonant, whereas 'thing' is unvoiced.
EDIT: Sorry, I now see you already told about your regional accent.
Other than the specific location and the social category of "upper-middle-class", I don't know how to describe my accent. People at school thought I was posh, but I never saw myself that way.
Now I live in Berlin, so I might have started picking up a bit of a German accent (and perhaps an ESL accent if there is such a thing).
Everyone decided that "save" = "disk"
Maybe a different looking disk, but still a disk.
That universality across apps for basic functionality was the biggest feature: it didn't matter if I knew what a disk was or not, because I knew the disk-shaped thing meant save in every app.
The original modern sin of UX was having the hubris to ditch universality because they believed whatever batshit they dreamed up was better enough to justify doing so.
It wasn't. Arguably, it couldn't ever be.
You could come up with a unique wiz-bang UX for something that's objectively 25% better than skeuomorphism, and it still wouldn't be a net improvement. Because no user cares about one specific app enough to train on it.
But building a hammer that looks like every other hammer doesn't get you on the cover of design/UX magazines...
> Maybe a different looking disk, but still a disk.
I had a discussion about this with my parents, who saw the 5" disks actually flopping back in the days, but never cared enough about computers.
They thought the floppy icon meant it was saved on their drive, when it was actually commited to the cloud service they were using. They spent a while looking around, in their Document folder, Download folder etc. and gave up after a while.
I can't remember which service they were using, but boy were they pissed.
This reminds me of the Figma rant on how you can't do presentations offline even if you save your slides to disk, that's where the whole industry is trending.
Knobs work as a tactile interface that require two fingers minimum to rotate predictably. With digital screens we lost the tactile element, and mandated a new one finger (thumb) minimum. Interfaces had to adapt, which is why knobs were replaced with sliders. Changes like this happened all over the place; not because of "gen-Z", but because they were the most effective solution for the platform.
Yep. What would the modern equivalent of the save icon - a cloud or an generic IC representing the soldered-on SDD? Hard drives, floppies, or any other user-controlled storage devices are now out of fashion.
(It also displays a CRT with a Windows 95 BSOD for Samba network shares, but that's 100% on purpose.)
OTOH Apple's own apps haven't had a "save" button for a really long time now. Everything autosaves (and syncs to iCloud) automatically - use Undo if you need to. More complex apps, like Numbers, also automatically maintain a version history.
Icons make localisation much easier. In fact flat web design has evolved a fairly standard set of icons for basic operations. Most people know what a burger menu and x in the top corner of a window do. Same for copy, share, and so on.
The problem with Liquid Glass is that it's making the background style more important than the foreground content. No one cares if buttons ripple if they can't see what they do, because icons themselves are less clear and harder to read.
So I don't know what the point of this is.
Unifying the look with Apple's least successful, least popular, most niche product seems like a bizarre decision. I'm guessing the plan is to start adding VisionPro features in other products, but without 3D displays the difference between 3D and 2D metaphors is too huge to bridge.
I really liked Aqua. It was attractive and it was very usable.
This is... I don't know. It seems like style over substance for the sake of it, with significant damage to both.
My age shows here as well and I'm not in any way excited about this design change at all. Suddenly Apple decided that this fancy acrylic glass animation for widgets, interface that says "look we aren't stagnant - we did something" will be enough to diverge attention from other problems. I sincerely doubt that it's gonna be.
This release feels like a return to transparency trend which we had somewhere around Vista and initial KDE Plasma releases.
From the preview so far I'm not excited.
I have to say app icons look nice (the borders make them pop just a bit more), the border highlights are clear without being loud, and elements like the dock look nice. The inactive button states actually look great – as shown in the Camera and Facetime screenshots – they actually do look like little glass buttons, which is good.
Where I have issue is when multiple of these glass elemenst are shown at once they fight for attention and it's persnally quite overwhelming for me. The image of the video player controls on iPhone and AppleTV are in my opinion awful and load, and that's especially where you want a quiet UI.
When the shape has a strong refractive index and that's where it becomes really noisy for me with the Safari and music tab bars being absolutely awful in my opinion.
It's a shame because I think if they kept the idea but dialed it down from 11 it could be fantastic.
I wonder if they manage to change anything or tweaks, polishing (sic!) will happen over next or two iOS releases.
> Suddenly Apple decided that this fancy acrylic glass animation for widgets, interface that says "look we aren't stagnant - we did something"
And I honestly felt sorry for woman who tries to sell me amazing emoji combining "technology". Who actually uses this beside the obvious die-hard fans on dedicated sites and forums.
> But this whole keynote video felt like it's on nearly same levels as car salesman, infomercials/teleshopping.
As I child of the nineties I was surprised to eventually learn that a file in a folder was a real thing and not only a computer concept.
I strongly disagree. I don't mind if people like skeuomorphic graphics. Want to make the "play" button look like a 1987 tape deck? Not my thing, but everyone has different preferences. That's fine.
But I loathe, detest, hate, despise, skeuomorphic user interfaces. Remember when Calendar.app would only let you turn one month page at a time because that's how desk calendars work? How Podcasts looked like a reel-to-reel recorder and waste tons of screen space? Contacts app imitating the limitations of a physical black book because that's how real books work?[0]
If you like brushed metal or whatever, right on. Again, not my thing, but you do you! But I cannot abide the fake limitations that skeuomorphic design pushed onto software in the name of making apps work just like their physical equivalents. The UI on the magic boxes we're typing this on are limited only by our creativity. Please, please don't infect them with the real world's restrictions when it's not necessary!
I went to school in the 90s and learned computers in school.
All they taught us was the basics. How to use Windows explorer. What files are and how to rename and delete and undelete them.
And some hypercard clone. Which barely taught us anything about computers except "they can do stuff you tell them to," which I guess was a valuable lesson?
The middle school here has a "computer applications" class that covers all that kind of thing. Definitely not iPads only.
This is my #1 take-away from this. At this point it seems pretty safe to assume that interfaces made by Apple will probably still be decent, in spite of this design philosophy.
The clones, however, are going going to take accessiblity to new lows.
I swear, some decisionmakers deserve a brutal punch in their face. I don't even care anymore about being civil in such matters.
Just as visual design across the majority of digital touchpoints seems to have arrived at a mature level, this will unleash a giant wave of noise including gradients on text.
Brrr.
Looks like shit.
Right now I really want skeuomorphism back.
Much like iOS 7 they will have to spend another 2 - 3 years "tweaking" or basically walking back some of these design decisions.
I believe the problem is when Tim Cook decided to merge "Design" under one umbrella. So the Design team now takes over both Hardware and Software Design when they kicked Scott Forstall out. A lot of Apple's UX went down hill from there.
In a month Apple will have been on autopilot for longer than Jobs was at the company during the 1997-2011 heyday. Jobs became iCEO in September 1997. After 167 months passed, he left in August 2011. It has been 166 months since then.
On the other hand Steve Jobs has accomplished far more within the same time frame compared to Tim Cook with far fewer resources. I really like the analogy of "autopilot".
I do think Steve could push Forstall as his successor, but didn't because Forstall wasn't ready as CEO. Tim Cook was a much better choice at the time as they have to compete with Android and they need market share ( in terms of user not sales ) to not repeat the same mistake with Mac vs PC. Tim should have mediate between Forstall and Ive instead of picking sides. The restructuring created power vacuum for Craig and Eddy Cue to pick up. With Crag we end up with OS that is constantly resume / features release driven and Eddy Cue which we end up with Apple Music, Apple TV+, Apple Fitness, Apple Arcade. None of them in my opinion are good decisions or great products / services.
I think it’s odd this thread is largely complaining about Apple taking too many risks, or making weird designs they don’t like, or being too feature-driven. The fact of the matter is that Apple has by far created the most stable tech ecosystem of any comparable company. With a very consistent design language as well.
Windows has a horrific track record (with only Windows 7 & 10 being well regarded in the past 15+ years). Android typically doesn’t support devices with major software updates past a small handful of years. Apple’s combo of privacy, long term support, and extremely consistent release cadences & design language make it a much more stable platform than practically anything else. They even did an entire hardware architecture change under our feet without downgrading the user experience in any meaningful way.
I mean whether or not you agree or like Apple’s service products like Apple Music, it is absolutely a very smart business decision to continue investing in them. Apple TV has a higher percentage of high quality content than other providers. Apple Music is at worst hardly that different than Spotify. Apple Arcade is just a way to bundle products that already exist.
I dont disagree. In fact I talked about services revenue in 2012 / 2013 before it was even a term on Appleinsider and other places. But the difference is that old Apple make a Great product and then make a business case out of it.
New Apple is we need to grow services so what should we do, and make some product out of it to fill the gap.
One is a Product focus another is a business revenue focus. Very different mind set. Although arguably both would have worked well if a Yard Stick of Quality was in place. Which is lacking in many areas in modern Apple.
>Which Tim Cook has absolutely excelled at.
That is somewhat true. Best operational manager and supply chain before anyone on the internet knew of it. But on taking risk it is going in all the wrong places. Apple had 200 Stores world wide before the 1.2 Billion iPhones and 2 Billions I Devices user. And they had 50 planned so arguably they had 250. Now they have ~500 Stores. The moment you have somehow who thinks Apple Store is a cost centre and not somewhere to quote SJ "Help your customers".
Apple TV+ having little to zero impact outside of US. And even in US home turf they are not doing great. But burning 5 to 10 billion every single year just to hide your services revenue profit margin.
I guess I could sum it up as Apple has more money than they know what to do with it. And Tim Cook is being stringent in places it shouldn't and spending on things that till now provide little value.
Tim Cook is exactly this kind of executive. While he has done an incredible job with leading the business and operational side of Apple, the public doesn't give credit for that sort of thing. Now imagine if Steve appointed someone just like himself and the business fumbled. Steve would hate for his legacy to be tarnished by appointing a brash successor.
All that being said, for what it's worth, I don't think anyone could have lived up to Steve's reputation. It is quite unfair to Tim Cook that he will always be compared to what people think Steve Jobs would have done.
Can we say that yet? A lot of value was made in the short term, but it kinda feels like that would happen to any CEO that has an iPhone moment on their hands. Cook's real challenge was to flip the scenario into something sustainable; can Apple take the excitement and turn it into a product line?
They certainly tried. Cook led the charge on the Apple Watch, which fell short of a tentpole offering but still found an audience. Airpods took off, presumably after Cook learned from the failure (and acquisition) of Beats by Dre. And Vision Pro... the less said the better. Maybe there's something still in the holster, but I expect this to be a dead-end product line moreso than Airpower.
Are disposable headphones enough to build a legacy off of? The Apple Watch certainly isn't, and don't even get me started on Vision Pro. We could point to the big one that everyone likes to credit him as; "the supply chain guy", but even that seems to foster political contention in America. Apple's software faces antitrust scrutiny, privacy concerns[0], and an overall degradation in app quality as their attention splits into different markets. The legacy is the important question, and if Tim Cook were to resign tomorrow I think he would be remembered as the CEO that screwed Apple over for good.
[0] https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2023/12/apple-admits-to-...
That's an interesting way to say "is the best selling watch model of all time, and outsells not only all other smartwatches combined but also a substantial chunk of all normal watches put together."
Apple has about 25% of the global marketshare for smartwatches: https://www.counterpointresearch.com/insights/global-smartwa... They are the _largest_ supplier, but they certainly don't outsell everyone combined.
It also took Apple about 4 years to find the actual use-case for the Apple Watch: health tracking and payments.
Here, I'll start:
- https://randsinrepose.com/archives/innovation-is-a-fight/
But more importantly, I take issue with the main theme of your first link, as it's stuff I've heard a bunch elsewhere. I can agree that "innovation requires some tension", but I think it's a huge mistake to think that because Forstall had some (or at least looked like he had some) of the qualities of Jobs that he was the right man for the <no pun intended> job. I.e the argument usually goes something like "Hey, Jobs was disagreeable and kind of an asshole, so since Forstall is disagreeable and even more of an asshole he should be CEO."
But that clearly misses the fact that Forstall could in no way engender the level of respect that Jobs had, and I don't think people would have respected him more if he became CEO. People really admired Jobs at a deep, deep level, and that was clearly not the case for Forstall based on the many other Apple execs who couldn't stand him.
It all comes down to what results they can produce inside the organization, people will bear the worst assholes if the output can justify it somehow.
skeuomorphism is grounded on real world counterparts.
How many buttons in real life are actually made of glasses clear or frosted?
While I'm not an Apple user I believe these iOS devices are going to sell like hotcakes.
this... I don't understand the reasoning. Nobody is complaining about iOS design? Nobody asked for this? This is just bad?
Look at the most basic UI interaction - text cursor movement - and note how this new liquid glass adds more confusing visual noise by adding text reflection for no good reason, which makes, for example, an empty line appear as a line with some text due to this reflection, thus making it harder to see that your cursor is located at the top line.
> more focus to content
it's the opposite, you dilute focus on content by manufacturing non-existent noise.
And the claim to being "natural" in the video falls flat - compare to the actual physical movements a few frames before - the lens doesn't change in width or height! So the digital animation noise is unnatural!
Similarly with the menu sheet adding new rubberband effect in the corner- what underlying natural interaction does it reflect? What signal does that jiggly noise send?
But yeah, if you live in a "lively delight" fantasy of design, nothing would stop you.
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/winmsg/windo...
"Slowly, I'm coming to the conclusion that designers should never be employed, only consulted on a per-project basis. If they sit around 8 hours a day, they end up changing something or the other to justify their existence. But human beings are not used to change at such a rapid cadence. Humans take time to settle into a design and establish patterns of usage."
While you need new designs for new features, you don't need to redesign old features every few years. It's change for the sake of change.
- on older iphones this design probably wont render so well or fast (I guess require modern iphone with raytracing functionality) -> people need to buy new iphones
- put wrench into those cross-platform apps like flutter, capacitor to make their apps feel off.
I've seen this - it's not limited to designers, I've also business stakeholders with limited scope pushing for meaningless changes and revamps. The incentives to absolutely find something to do are too great. No one in higher management ever wants to hear that everything is fine and that we should do nothing. You'll be instantly booted saying that for lacking ambition and vision even if you're right. There should always be the next thing. As part of the tech industry earning a salary you always need to sell "something" internally.
Really good designers exist and are about as rare as good engineers.
We need more UX that people can "settle into" instead of the constant assault of superficial change that drains energy from everyone's ongoing effort to adapt to exponentially increasing fundamental change!
there's room for creativity in UX, lots, just not at the "how does the texture of a button feel and flow" - need to move HIGHER level, towards eg thinking of experience minimizing cognitive load, increasing synergy and augmentation ppotential etc etc ...the ceiling is waaaay higher than most UX ppl think
If I'm being employed to create bad product (bad UI) then I'm bad at my job.
Everything single decision should have a rational about it. You should fix what is broken, improve what can be improved and certainly not doing feng shui changes.
TL;DR: It's a management issue.
About "only Apple can achive that": It would be pretty simple for MS to do something like this in Windows. DirectComposition (or whatever it is called nowadays) could set the appropriate shader when drawing windows. You cannot do it as a normal user, because you can only pick from a select set of backdrop shaders (but if some hacker wants a challenge, you could inject the code into dwm.exe to do so :-)).
> irrelevant time-wasting demand
It simply doesn't feel like an HN thread until someone gets insecure enough to berate non-sequitur Open Source projects, does it? When I browse the rest of the web, I always end up missing HN's iconic Jungian groupthink. You lot tend to shoot yourself in the foot before anyone even notices you're drawing a gun.
See recent "Breaking down why Apple TVs are privacy advocates’ go-to streaming device":
* https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2025/06/all-the-ways-apple-t...
Case in point, the largest screen in the lead image in the linked article does nothing to showcase this new UI, but it does promote Fountain of Youth, a show on Apple TV.
When you 'hover' over an app on an Apple's tvOS, the app populates that preview section with whatever content it wants. In the linked article's screenshot, the Apple TV app is being hovered over, so the 'preview' section is populated with content from Apple TV.
If the user swiped right, to hover over the Arcade app, that preview would change to show some Arcade game. Hover over Netflix, Max, Hulu, Spotify apps, and you'll get content previews from them.
So yes, they are "ads", in a hyper-literal sense, but not strictly, not facilitated by the operating system, and not in any way that matters.
Apple TV is AFAIK the best device in its category.
I also think your definition is overly broad and doesn't reflect what an "ad" is. For example, if Apple cut the feature from iOS that allowed you to control your music from your lock screen, Spotify would also be willing to pay Apple to be able to control specifically Spotify from your lock screen. Does that mean "being able to control music from your lock screen" is an ad for Spotify? No. Does iOS allowing app-specific widgets on the homescreen count as ads, since if it didn't exist, companies would be willing to pay to be on people's homescreens? No, widgets are not by definition ads (even if some widgets may be ads!). Similarly, the Apple TV OS providing the ability for installed apps to show interactive app-specific UI on hover (i.e. the user has chosen to interact with this app, or has chosen it as their primary app in the OS), does not mean the OS itself has ads.
[0]: https://developer.apple.com/design/human-interface-guideline...
We agree then that the Apple TV has ads in it.
What I dislike about internet discussions is that we've gone back and forth over pedantic definitions of what "ads" are, rather than discussing your more interesting meta-point.
If you do, I suppose what I would amend my statement to is: it doesn't show ads for apps I don't explicitly select in the UI. Either way, that's much better than most competing products... And it's incredibly fast, with the lowest latency of any streaming device.
I don't like Apple's locked ecosystem, and avoid most of their products. But the Apple TV is just head and shoulders above anything else on the market, so I own one and am quite satisfied with it.
They made it so almost everyone uses the Apple TV app for at least some viewing and there you get ads for Apple TV+ shows and their suggestions include shows that require a subscription to a service you may not already have. Or the suggestion will sometimes require a rental or purchase through the iTunes Store. These are ads.
I have no idea what you mean by "they made it so almost everyone uses the Apple TV app." You mean, they made an app that many people like, and that app has ads in it (but not the OS)? That doesn't mean the OS has ads.
Personally, I never use the Apple TV app: I use Netflix, Crunchyroll, HBO Max, and the Criterion Collection apps. And I never see what I would consider to be ads in the OS, and I never see content previews for apps I don't use.
You are free to never open apps that have ads in them on the Apple TV.
(If you mean: installed apps are allowed to show content previews when you hover on them in the UI — I think that's pretty different from an ad, and it's a feature I personally like, since it means I can easily resume a show I was previously watching without even having to open the app-specific UI. That's quite different from my perspective than showing ads for services and apps that I've never used, that I can't remove.)
Infuse just lets you... play a file. How novel!
Figuring out which elements are selected in the UI is often hard.
The trackpad on the remote is not good -- I've tried setting it to disable trackpad and click on, but then I'll inevitably find an app that needs a trackpad.
Overall I'm quite happy with the AppleTV as a device, but the UI could use quite a bit of help.
Apple products are gonna be perceived as the icon of the beauty and usability regardless of the actual qualities. Be sure, Xiaomi and Huawei (and probably even Samsung) will try mimicking the newest Apple design language. Like it was before with crippled keyboards, enormous touchpads, glossy reflective screens, notches, etc..
ofc. but people don't like it when you say the quiet part out loud.