Good to see that liquid glass is not just for the app icon. Happy to see the apps getting updated. However would have been even better if all the Apple apps were updated on day 1.
This, looking more like something for security.Is it a shopping bag or a padlock?
The rendering performance simply isn’t sufficient compared to what is showcased in their demos and examples. It doesn’t align with their vision, and there are too many issues with the layers. Overall, it frequently fails to work and tends to be quite unreliable. Choosing this option feels misguided. Aqua offered a far better approach to implementation. It’s frustrating to see individuals who lack an understanding of design language, user interface, and the development cycle claiming it looks great. From another perspective, people with this viewpoint are going to be increasingly disappointed. If the company continues to ignore feedback from the community, they risk losing many users. It is disheartening to see how Apple is becoming increasingly untrustworthy.The whole Liquid Glass UI is a nod to the old Aqua UI. This looks like a modern take on the original OS X design. I think it looks great.
For those saying things like "Steve Jobs is rolling around in his grave" or "Jobs would not approve" -- he approved the original Aqua theme. Would he approve this? I have no idea and neither do any commenters here.
I hear your frustration, and I agree that Apple’s demos can set expectations that early implementations don’t always initially meet. That said, it’s too early to conclude that Liquid Glass is fundamentally misguided or that those who appreciate its direction “don’t understand design.” People who understand design were involved in Liquid Glass design. Just because you don't like it doesn't mean people who do don't understand design language and user interfaces.The rendering performance simply isn’t sufficient compared to what is showcased in their demos and examples. It doesn’t align with their vision, and there are too many issues with the layers. Overall, it frequently fails to work and tends to be quite unreliable. Choosing this option feels misguided. Aqua offered a far better approach to implementation. It’s frustrating to see individuals who lack an understanding of design language, user interface, and the development cycle claiming it looks great. From another perspective, people with this viewpoint are going to be increasingly disappointed. If the company continues to ignore feedback from the community, they risk losing many users. It is disheartening to see how Apple is becoming increasingly untrustworthy.
When will this relentless, breathtaking, awe-inspiring wave of innovation from Apple come to an end?
If you look closer, it's more like the polished edge of a sheet of glass. Zoom out and that "thick stroke" you're seeing is just a subtle touch of the design that's needed to give the icon some depth.
reflects a deliberate shift toward a more adaptive, depth-based interface model. While it might seem minor, this is a huge shift in how the UI works. There is always push-back to change.
Most of us want the same outcome: a stable, coherent, and thoughtfully designed UI.
Are you involved in UI design?shift to adapt to what exactly? how do see-through icons and menus give interface 'depth', whatever it's for? can you somehow click through them? just parroting marketspeak gibberish doesn't make it make sense.
presumably until this vaseline delight, it was anything but.
Are you involved in UI design?
There was no need to be defensive. I was just asking out of curiosity because if you were in the field of UI design I wanted to ask you some specific questions about Liquid Glass.I don't have to be involved to notice a shift to gimmicky.