Did you... did you bring DEI into this? I'm going to assume that was a typo. Anyways, I think you're being a bit dramatic here. There are definitely some refinement and fixes that need to be made with Liquid Glass, but it's overall just fine.
No, I brought up DEI because Apple’s sudden systemic decline directly correlates with a managerial and structural overhaul guided by that ideological shift.
You assumed it was a typo not because it was unclear but because you lack the bandwidth to track how bureaucratic “vibes-first” orthodoxy destroyed the design and production culture of competency. Your humble brag as deflection from acknowledging that what you’re defending is the product of a regime shift in recruitment, standards, and accountability.
You’re watching the effects of coercive hiring pipelines optimized for ideological compliance over functional excellence and the result is a monoculture of underqualified appointees shipping half-baked UX pretensions as if they were gospel.
This isn’t “a few refinements needed.” This is:
• Mission-critical features non-functional.
• Core OS mechanics rewritten for no reason.
• Usability replaced with design theater to appease fragility instead of enabling mastery.
It shouldn’t be taboo to discuss how a trillion-dollar company went from shipping best-in-class interfaces to force-feeding broken products to a legacy user base they now treat as an obstacle.
The customers didn’t change.
Apple did.
And until you can acknowledge the ideological capture behind that transformation, you’re not defending progress you’re enabling regression as an evolution that’s destined for failure.