I don’t think so. I have ran Android 16 on the Pixel 9 Pro XL, including the QPR beta’s. Zero signs of Liquid Glass. It also is not logical, with the introduction of Material Express 3. Samsung, on the other hand, might do it, now that they are introducting glass icons.
I'm sure the effect can be turned off in Settings so it still looks like iOS 18.x. But I still want to ability to adjust the level of the transparency for people with poor vision.
You KNOW Samsung will try to duplicate Liquid Glass with the next One UI version in 2026. And probably not implement it well, either.
I don't know what Apple's pre-occupation with translucency is when it comes to the Safari address bar, Favorites, and tabs. I have seen their 'explanation' of wanting to provide more space for content - but in this case, it's just the appearance of more space for content - at the real expense of usability.
I already had to give up my usual Dark Mode setting when I started using Tahoe - because in dark mode, the problem is even worse. It's a bit disconcerting how little usability testing seems to be going on at Apple these days.
One of the reasons why I want a Pixel. I had a Pixel 9 Pro XL and it just had some issues with it being a bit too slow, but other than that it was good. I am eagerly waiting for the Pixel 10 Pro XL.You KNOW Samsung will try to duplicate Liquid Glass with One UI 8.0. And probably not implement it well, either.
I have a very hard time getting on board with a multi-trillion dollar organization requiring the efforts of unpaid beta testers to discover faults in basic human interface guidelines.
Please, can you show what this looks like in practice? Everyone keeps saying "just reduce transparency" but I have yet to see anyone show what this does.
This has to be how it ends up or it’ll be complaints on all sides.
There are controls in accessibility that are meant to adjust for those who have difficulty seeing elements without high contrast. There simply no one setting that will appeal to every one, if you have already applied settings to address your individual requirements, Liquid Glass respects them.
Who is it that you think we're talking about?
It's a fun idea worth exploring but someone should have put the breaks on this a couple week after development. I do not understand how anyone with two eyeballs and a brain could approve this. If you showed me this image alone, I'd fire you for having such poor instincts and tell you you have no future in user interface development.
The paint is part of the redesign but it's not everything. Personally I'm really enjoying how information and menus are organized in 26 and the much better reachability for UI elements on big screens.
As somebody that suffers from needing slightly higher contrast in text, I agree with you. Apple show how much accessibility really matters when their backs are against the wall to 'innovate'. This is a hail mary at trying to stay relevant and it missed the mark massively.
The transparency is inherently bad people aLeo exaggerate how “bad” Reduce Transparency is in iOS 26 (It’s the same effect as it is in iOS 18 and below; Translucent elements become opaque). If anything, they should be praising it. It still blocks out less of the content layer than iOS 18 and below. It will likely receive polish through the betas since some of it currently lacks padding. It’s a work in progress.
No offense, but I think that looks bad. The "Customize" button no longer looks like a button, with only its top edge possessing a normal button outline. The simple solution would be to just give the rest of the button a slightly thicker, brighter outline than it has, but not as thick and bright as the button's upper outline, rather than "reflecting" the darkness to the left, right, and bottom of the button. This would still impart a glass-like appearance, since if the button is supposed to emulate glass, some of the light "entering" through its top edge should be able to go through it to its other edges and produce reflections there too.
I see your point, but I don't know. While Liquid Glass's initial beta release as well as the subsequent betas contain puzzlingly obviously bad reductions in visibility of many foreground objects, mainly because the background bleeds through too much, and problems like text on many panes, buttons, etc. being too light or too dark for the background they're on, the variety of reactions to Liquid Glass, positive and negative ("I see everything perfectly!" vs. "I can't see a thing!"), shows that no working group at Apple could have figured out what tweaks to LG the public would find results in a nearly universally acceptable version. Releasing LG as a beta gives them the feedback on readability that Apple could never have achieved on its own.
Yeah, that has to be one of the dumber things about the current version of Liquid Glass. Third-party app developers can at least control how far towards the top (and bottom) of the screen the content in their app will scroll, so at least they don't have to do it "the new Apple way" in their apps. It looks like this is another attempt by Apple to maximize active screen real estate, but at the sake of readability.
Let's see what Developer Beta 5 does. Apple won't "freeze" the feature set until probably late August 2025, so you never know.
If they can figure out how to patch discontinuity of panoramic camera, I’m sure they can do this minor optics simulation.