Apple apps that are not yet Liquid Glassed

[woolypants]

Apple is worth four trillion dollars, their entire philosophy that they have bet the next decade of their user interface on both wasn’t decided on by one guy, and certainly won’t be abandoned because said one guy jumped ship.
There will definitely be refinements, but anyone expecting them to completely abandon liquid Glass I’m afraid is going to end up having a rude awakening come OS ‘27.
The last time Apple’s head of UI was replaced was 2015. The OS released in 2016 looked almost identical to the ones released in 2015, 2014 and 2013.
If you’re looking for the next UI after liquid Glass, come back in the mid 2030s, maybe even the early 2040s. Aqua in one form or another was around for 13 years and the flat design was around for 12, obviously with variations, improvements, and optimizations along the way.

That's a cool analysis. What you're missing is the incredible backlash against Alan Dye.

Very senior people at Apple read Daring Fireball, for example, and they will have seen the vitriolic posts from Gruber about Dye. I don't think I've ever seen Gruber attack an Apple employee in such a way.

People at Apple will have clicked through to the Twitter storm celebrating Dye's removal from the company.

So, I just don't think Liquid Glass is like "the usual" UX/UI revolutions at Apple, such as the one introduced by Ive a decade ago. Well, that's my two cents, anyway.

That said, I also don't expect it to disappear in a puff of smoke. But I do expect it to be "refined" significantly in the 2027 releases of the OSes. After all, Liquid Glass isn't a fundamentally bad idea. It's quite cool. It's just implemented in the most awful, slapdash way. Apple has already "refined" it a few times in the current OS releases by giving people control over its implementation.

 

[svenmany]

what is it you'd expect to see? those apps all look like they usually look, they don't significantly change to 'match' the current OS (i use logic, final cut, pages, numbers...). just not sure what would change...

Focusing just on Pages... I expect a number of changes will come, if Apple sticks to their liquid death guns:

• The windows will get larger corner radii to match what we see in Safari.
• The left sidebar will extend to the top of the page, overlapping the window controls. This will make the thumbnails of pages obscure the controls. You can see this is Preview.
• The right sidebar will get some layering effect as well, extending into the toolbar area. You can see this in Finder when you show the file preview pane.
• All of the toolbar icons will become larger and harder to accommodate in the available space.

You can see the mess they created in Finder when you show the preview pane.

 

[svenmany]

After all, Liquid Glass isn't a fundamentally bad idea.

Some parts of it seem cool, but the "glass" aspect of it might be a fundamentally bad idea. I am definitely not a serious designer, but I think multiple layers of information overlapping will always be a problem. It will always make what you really need to see somewhat obscured.

 

[Lounge vibes 05]

That's a cool analysis. What you're missing is the incredible backlash against Alan Dye.

I’m not missing it, I don’t find it particularly relevant.
Liquid Glass goes way beyond Alan, it’s an esthetic adapted throughout the entire company.

 

[Apple Knowledge Navigator]

That's a cool analysis. What you're missing is the incredible backlash against Alan Dye.

Very senior people at Apple read Daring Fireball, for example, and they will have seen the vitriolic posts from Gruber about Dye. I don't think I've ever seen Gruber attack an Apple employee in such a way.

People at Apple will have clicked through to the Twitter storm celebrating Dye's removal from the company.

So, I just don't think Liquid Glass is like "the usual" UX/UI revolutions at Apple, such as the one introduced by Ive a decade ago. Well, that's my two cents, anyway.

That said, I also don't expect it to disappear in a puff of smoke. But I do expect it to be "refined" significantly in the 2027 releases of the OSes. After all, Liquid Glass isn't a fundamentally bad idea. It's quite cool. It's just implemented in the most awful, slapdash way. Apple has already "refined" it a few times in the current OS releases by giving people control over its implementation.

I believe a way Apple could move forward with LG is to treat it like any other software or hardware release, and to introduce a ‘LG 2’.

But, as usual, rather than admitting to mistakes they’ll simply frame the fixes as “enhancements”.

 

[Wolf1701]

But, as usual, rather than admitting to mistakes they’ll simply frame the fixes as “enhancements”.

I can already hear it coming... “revolutionary,” “magical,” and “incredible,”

 

[svenmany]

I believe a way Apple could move forward with LG is to treat it like any other software or hardware release, and to introduce a ‘LG 2’.

But, as usual, rather than admitting to mistakes they’ll simply frame the fixes as “enhancements”.

I think Apple will just tweak it over time. There is not enough outrage on the web and there are plenty of positive reviews. Influencers are not designers and they're usually quite ignorant of subtle issues. They would love apple hardware if it leached heroin into the fingertips (until they realized what was going on and the damage it has caused).

It's a very challenging position Apple has put themselves in. They've implemented something that is very hard to control and very variable. For many users special customized tweaks are going to be required to work around the pain points that might be unique to their work flow, hardware, or visual challenges. Apple software has never offered users control to such an extent.

This change might be something macOS never recovers from.

 

[maflynn]

This change might be something macOS never recovers from.

What do you mean by that?

Like you said, there's not a lot outrage on the interwebs and reviews have largely positive. I'm not sure what you mean by never recoving

 

[Populus]

OK, conspiracy time, but what if Alan Dye leaving Apple has also made the C-suite realise how utterly trash Liquid Glass is? And the work to update Apple's apps to Liquid Glass has been dropped, so that they'll simply pick-up on whatever UI/UX update arrives with the 2027 releases of the OSes? (Which will presumably be a significant "refining" of Liquid Glass, or certainly rowing back certain "design elements".)

It’s great to have wild guesses. However, I see a main flaw in your reasoning. In my opinion, Apple isn’t going to ditch Liquid Glass for at least 3 years, otherwise it could be seen as a failure.

Now the “refinement” you mention is actually possible for iOS 27 but being just after one year, it would be so subtle that it wouldn’t really matter to implement Liquid Glass now or in one year time.

Sure, Apple could use iWork apps as a test ground for the “refined” Liquid Glass a few months before the debut on iOS 27, but again, I very much doubt that the main concept of Liquid Glass will be tossed away until iOS 29 or 30…

This is just Apple being lazy, or not prioritizing consistency. Other Apple apps are still using the old interface, such as the Apple Developer app, to the point that it seems straight out of iOS 13… and its quite funny to watch the Liquid Glass videos on an app that still has the old UI design.

 

[svenmany]

What do you mean by that?

Like you said, there's not a lot outrage on the interwebs and reviews have largely positive. I'm not sure what you mean by never recoving

It sounded more ominous than I intended. I meant that macOS might forevermore have translucency where textual content is present. My comment was from a vague feeling, but here's some loose thinking that I'm only coming up with now.

I guess "Glass" is their branding of translucency. And maybe "Liquid" is their branding of the variability of translucency and other animations. There are other parts of the rewrite that seem to have nothing to do with liquids or glass. But, most importantly, translucency is so important that they gave it a name.

They certainly wouldn't spend time with such extraordinary visual effects in areas of the screen that didn't have the user's attention. The user's attention is drawn to areas where information is being acquired. So, they have branded the idea of presenting information with variable translucency.

They've given a brand name to a mistake. It would take a lot to walk that back. I don't see enough push back from the press. Some people really like it. If my vision were better, I might even like it. From a business point of view, there is no compelling reason for them to reverse course. And, I have a feeling there is a compelling business reason to having all devices present a consistent interface.

They will never be able to tweak it to provide everyone a satisfying experience. For me, they would have to spend the time making a nice UI that had almost no translucency near text or click targets. I don't think they have the talent to pull that off since it would have to coexist with a translucent version that would be getting most of their development attention. And they would be fighting against their tendency to not offer the user enough levers to control things.

They will tweak it and it will get somewhat better. I'll certainly survive it and forget about being annoyed by it. People get used to the bar being lowered. That particular bar is offset by the prettiness bar being raised.

 

[maflynn]

It sounded more ominous than I intended. I meant that macOS might forevermore have translucency where textual content is present. My comment was from a vague feeling, but here's some loose thinking that I'm only coming up with now.

Thanks for the clarification, that makes more sense.

 

[TumbleDryer]

There are still a fair number of Mac apps that have yet to be updated with Liquid Glass, despite Tahoe being announced almost 6 months ago. Would be interested to hear thoughts on why this may be, and what we can expect from any updates. Apps that I don't believe have been updated include:

Pages
Numbers
Keynote
Logic Pro
GarageBand
Final Cut
iMovie
Mainstage

Is it because what's left of the design team don't like Liquid Glass and now Dye has gone they're refusing to update them? 😆

 

[ifxf]

I tend to believe these apps are either being EOL or will be replaced by new apps.

 

[iBookmaster]

I don't expect the apps to be glassed. It's all about the finder and desktop experience. Not the apps. This is part of the reason Liquid Glass is not that big of a deal to me. Once you use the apps, you don't even notice it.

 

[svenmany]

I don't expect the apps to be glassed. It's all about the finder and desktop experience. Not the apps. This is part of the reason Liquid Glass is not that big of a deal to me. Once you use the apps, you don't even notice it.

I get your point and it seems valid for now. However, Apple does not position Liquid Glass as only a Finder and desktop experience. They are actively encouraging developers to embrace it and us it in their applications.

Preview is an app and has been completely glassed. But, maybe the intuition is that Preview is almost a utility, like Finder. But the handful of apps I checked in /System/Applications are glassed. Freeform and Journal are real apps (not utilities) and they are glassed.

I use mostly third-party apps. Unfortunately, they are tending to glass up too. I use QSpace, not Finder, and it has suffered glass-related damage: increased window radius, less efficient toolbar, and the strange sidebar layering that we see in Finder. Luckily, QSpace allows one to get the sidebar away from the window controls.

As developers (Apple and non-Apple) release new versions, those version will suffer glass breakage. For example, the Beta of Ice for Tahoe has "Adopted liquid glass design" (https://github.com/jordanbaird/Ice/releases).

Apps you use might get glassed and then it might be a big deal to you. It will all depend on the particular developer and how much of glass they adopt. If they fully adopt glassy translucency and liquid animation, then you would really notice it.

 

[iBookmaster]

I get your point and it seems valid for now. However, Apple does not position Liquid Glass as only a Finder and desktop experience. They are actively encouraging developers to embrace it and us it in their applications.

Preview is an app and has been completely glassed. But, maybe the intuition is that Preview is almost a utility, like Finder. But the handful of apps I checked in /System/Applications are glassed. Freeform and Journal are real apps (not utilities) and they are glassed.

I use mostly third-party apps. Unfortunately, they are tending to glass up too. I use QSpace, not Finder, and it has suffered glass-related damage: increased window radius, less efficient toolbar, and the strange sidebar layering that we see in Finder. Luckily, QSpace allows one to get the sidebar away from the window controls.

As developers (Apple and non-Apple) release new versions, those version will suffer glass breakage. For example, the Beta of Ice for Tahoe has "Adopted liquid glass design" (https://github.com/jordanbaird/Ice/releases).

Apps you use might get glassed and then it might be a big deal to you. It will all depend on the particular developer and how much of glass they adopt. If they fully adopt glassy translucency and liquid animation, then you would really notice it.

I just opened Preview and Freeform and didn't notice any glass look at all. I kind of hope it stays that way. If they do glass things up more in apps, I hope they do a good job of it.

 

[nebojsak]

I get your point and it seems valid for now. However, Apple does not position Liquid Glass as only a Finder and desktop experience. They are actively encouraging developers to embrace it and us it in their applications.

Preview is an app and has been completely glassed. But, maybe the intuition is that Preview is almost a utility, like Finder. But the handful of apps I checked in /System/Applications are glassed. Freeform and Journal are real apps (not utilities) and they are glassed.

I use mostly third-party apps. Unfortunately, they are tending to glass up too. I use QSpace, not Finder, and it has suffered glass-related damage: increased window radius, less efficient toolbar, and the strange sidebar layering that we see in Finder. Luckily, QSpace allows one to get the sidebar away from the window controls.

As developers (Apple and non-Apple) release new versions, those version will suffer glass breakage. For example, the Beta of Ice for Tahoe has "Adopted liquid glass design" (https://github.com/jordanbaird/Ice/releases).

Apps you use might get glassed and then it might be a big deal to you. It will all depend on the particular developer and how much of glass they adopt. If they fully adopt glassy translucency and liquid animation, then you would really notice it.

My workflow is Adobe apps, Blender, Path Finder for Finder alternative, and some other stuff like Logic Pro etc etc. None of these suffer from current LG implementation. I don't like those overly rounded corners definitely, but it doesn't get in my way, I can easily ignore it. Then again, I didn't like Aqua as well. YMMV.

 

[svenmany]

I just opened Preview and Freeform and didn't notice any glass look at all. I kind of hope it stays that way. If they do glass things up more in apps, I hope they do a good job of it.

Yeah, they don't have much glass look to them. But, Liquid Glass has still been rolled out in them.

Both Preview and Freeform have the Liquid Glass exaggerated window radii. If you show thumbnails on a large PDF document in Preview, you will find the images of thumbnails in the sidebar obstructing the view of the window controls. You will also notice in Freeform that the sidebar extends over the window controls as well (but doesn't do as much harm). Both of these applications have been converted to some extent to use the Liquid Glass API.