Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Sorry, but “modern” in today’s world doesn’t necessarily mean good, polished, or well thought out. More often than not, modern design nowadays means rushed, half-baked, buggy, and changed purely for the sake of change.

Example time.

Take modal windows in macOS. Look at how beautiful and coherent the modal dialogs were in OS X. The modal window opened directly from the parent window and stayed visually attached to it. It communicated intent and hierarchy clearly. The animation was fluid and naturally showed where the dialog came from.

It felt logical, elegant, and purposeful.


View attachment 2629667View attachment 2629668

Now, look at today abomination:

View attachment 2629669

A simple fade effect. A new window just appears on top of the old one. That’s it. Very “JavaScript-style.”
Sloppy. Ugly. It throws away everything that made the previous design feel coherent and refined. Sad, honestly.

You know what this is? Cheap. Cheap design. Kitsch masquerading as modernity.
You're kidding, right? You're calling that beautiful and elegant‽ Even at the time I thought that was one of the weaker elements of the interface! It was always such a clunky intrusion. I'm glad that's been improved, though there is still room for more improvement
 
Sorry, but “modern” in today’s world doesn’t necessarily mean good, polished, or well thought out. More often than not, modern design nowadays means rushed, half-baked, buggy, and changed purely for the sake of change.

Example time.

Take modal windows in macOS. Look at how beautiful and coherent the modal dialogs were in OS X. The modal window opened directly from the parent window and stayed visually attached to it. It communicated intent and hierarchy clearly. The animation was fluid and naturally showed where the dialog came from.

It felt logical, elegant, and purposeful.


View attachment 2629667View attachment 2629668

Now, look at today abomination:

View attachment 2629669

A simple fade effect. A new window just appears on top of the old one. That’s it. Very “JavaScript-style.”
Sloppy. Ugly. It throws away everything that made the previous design feel coherent and refined. Sad, honestly.

You know what this is? Cheap. Cheap design. Kitsch masquerading as modernity.

Great example 👍
 
  • Like
Reactions: hieubui
You're kidding, right? You're calling that beautiful and elegant‽ Even at the time I thought that was one of the weaker elements of the interface! It was always such a clunky intrusion. I'm glad that's been improved, though there is still room for more improvement
It was functional, intuitive and made sense. That goes in the direction of "It Just Works".

Today the saying would be "We say it works, so you better believe it - even if it's hard to see and make sense of what we did".
 
And personally, I don’t see any issue. It’s a transition effect. It’s not meant to be paused mid-way through… It’s meant to be swiped down until it’s fullscreen so it’s actually useful. In fact, if you pull it down past about half-way, it springs down the rest of the way itself. It’s a swipe gesture animation. A user has to intentionally hold it in place awkwardly to get it to look that way. I had a hard time getting that screenshot in the first place, because it was hard to hold that in place that low and take a screenshot simultaneously rather than it just springing open fullscreen. When it’s in motion, it’s blurry anyways. If that was the end position, that would be one thing, but as a part of a transition animation? I don’t think it’s a big problem that’s going to impact utility… And when it’s in motion, it looks pleasant the colors of the background content rippling as you scroll it, at least in my opinion… 🤷🏼‍♂️

I doubt many people ever even see it that way. Who is intentionally hanging onto it and dragging it that low to prevent it from opening fullscreen? I doubt there are many doing this…

I think you summarize the current state of software design, and honestly, software in general, very well.

“I don’t see any issue.”

There you go.
No attention to detail. No craftsmanship. No rigor in the making. No intent behind decisions. Just “good enough” shipped as fast as possible.

It reminds me of the Steve Jobs story (I think I've read it in his auto-biography by Walter Isaacson), about painting the back of a fence. His father taught him that even the side nobody sees still matters, because craftsmanship is about your standards, not visibility.

Today, a lot of software feels like the opposite philosophy: if the user doesn’t immediately notice the flaw, inconsistency, friction, or ugly workaround, then it’s considered acceptable.

But people do feel it.

They feel it in cluttered interfaces, broken flows, soulless interactions, inconsistent spacing, awkward animations, confusing navigation, endless feature bloat, and products that look polished at first glance but collapse under actual use.

Details shape trust.

They communicate whether the people building the product cared, whether decisions were intentional, whether the experience was designed or merely assembled.

That’s why craftsmanship matters.

“Yeeahh, that thing looks like crap if you do it that way… but who’s gonna notice, right?”

1778689494643.jpg
 
I think you summarize the current state of software design, and honestly, software in general, very well.

“I don’t see any issue.”

There you go.
No attention to detail. No craftsmanship. No rigor in the making. No intent behind decisions. Just “good enough” shipped as fast as possible.

It reminds me of the Steve Jobs story (I think I've read it in his auto-biography by Walter Isaacson), about painting the back of a fence. His father taught him that even the side nobody sees still matters, because craftsmanship is about your standards, not visibility.

Today, a lot of software feels like the opposite philosophy: if the user doesn’t immediately notice the flaw, inconsistency, friction, or ugly workaround, then it’s considered acceptable.

But people do feel it.

They feel it in cluttered interfaces, broken flows, soulless interactions, inconsistent spacing, awkward animations, confusing navigation, endless feature bloat, and products that look polished at first glance but collapse under actual use.

Details shape trust.

They communicate whether the people building the product cared, whether decisions were intentional, whether the experience was designed or merely assembled.

That’s why craftsmanship matters.

“Yeeahh, that thing looks like crap if you do it that way… but who’s gonna notice, right?”

View attachment 2629825
It’s a transition animation. It’s not supposed to be stopped mid-transition. Many transition animations used for years also look bad if similarly stopped mid-transition.

You’re intentionally using it wrong in order to get a “bad looking” result, and then claiming it’s a “craftsmanship issue”, rather than you’re using it wrong.

If someone goes and starts kicking a fence, it may end up not looking so great, even if the craftsmanship was good and it was painted evenly. Because the fence wasn’t intended for kicking… It might splinter, paint may chip off. It’s because somebody isn’t using it the way it’s intended, not that it’s “poor craftsmanship”…

Again, transition effects aren’t meant to be paused. Transition effects rely on speed to make the transition look smooth. They have to transition between two different looking pages, the Home Screen, and the Notification Center. That’s what the transition effect is there to do. But you’re “pausing” it mid-transition in a way that nobody else is likely to, and then complaining there’s some of both scenes there at once. You know how many great movies you can do that to as well? There are lots of very well crafted movies that will show a bit of both scenes if you pause it mid transition effect… That doesn’t mean they’re “poorly crafted”… 🤦🏼‍♂️. That just means you’re not supposed to intentionally try to pause them at a scene transition mid effect…

Again, I respect your opinion, but I strongly disagree. The craftsmanship of yesteryear wasn’t really any better than it is now. You just seem to remember the good and forget all the bad in older versions… I, for one, am glad we’re past the hideous design of Catalina and prior… I took many issues with the “craftsmanship” of those versions…

And I think this is fundamentally the problem. Different people will have different opinions. You think the new designs aren’t as “well crafted” as the old ones, and I believe the opposite…
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: fisherking
First thing that comes to mind about poor usabiliy is not macOS, but this forum because every login and log out throws you back to main page (of all forums) and you have to get back using history or bookmarks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kal Madda
And there's the rub.
At the end of the day, our like/hatred of a given UI is largely based off of our opinions and preferences. I rue the day that Apple drop skeuomorphism from their design language.
Yep, exactly. 👍🏻. We all have different preferences and tastes. And they’re subjective, so there’s no one correct preference or taste when it comes to stuff like this. 👍🏻
 
  • Like
Reactions: fisherking
“Everything is subjective” is a convenient way to avoid evaluating design quality. You like being politically correct. At some point you have to stand for principles of good design instead of treating every outcome as equally valid just to avoid offending anyone’s preferences.

Taste is subjective. Usability is not. People can prefer different aesthetics, workflows, or visual styles, sure. But design is also evaluated by objective factors like usability, clarity, consistency, discoverability, efficiency, and cognitive load. I can go on and on and oooon. A UI that increases friction, hides information, reduces readability, introduce slop or makes workflows less efficient is objectively worse in those areas, regardless of whether someone likes the visual style.

By that logic, no design could ever be criticized because everything would be reduced to personal preference. But in reality, some designs communicate better and function better than others. That’s why UX design exists as a discipline instead of being pure opinion.

Otherwise, we'll end up from a place of near perfection in presentation:
anyway-to-make-these-events-disappear-from-the-notification-v0-7wqM4B6TbB7Qqem35bEbR0fTPxSl1l...webp

And end up with this crap:
506280117_18107957440508154_3405258911404371352_n.jpg

PS: Sorry I keep posting iOS stuff, but I don't have Tahoe and its much easier for me to show iOS slop, since I made the mistake of upgrading and I cannot downgrade anymore.
 
“Everything is subjective” is a convenient way to avoid evaluating design quality. You like being politically correct. At some point you have to stand for principles of good design instead of treating every outcome as equally valid just to avoid offending anyone’s preferences.
False, I never said “everything is subjective”. I said people’s preferences on matters like this are subjective…. And it has nothing to do with being “politically correct”, it’s just incredibly obvious that such opinions are subjective and not universal truths…
Taste is subjective. Usability is not. People can prefer different aesthetics, workflows, or visual styles, sure.
Both are actually subjective.
But design is also evaluated by objective factors like usability, clarity, consistency, discoverability, efficiency, and cognitive load.
The things you list here aren’t objective factors… Usability for example. This will depend on what the user is using it for. A spoon is very useful for ladling food, but not stabbing meat…. Usability largely depends on the end user’s needs and preferences. Say someone wants/needs an app that’s Android only, then iOS won’t have good “usability” for them, because it’s missing something they want/need.

Same with efficiency, it depends on what you as an individual find efficient. Hence a wide variety of differently designed keyboard accessories that cater to different people who find different styles more efficient for them… This is not completely “objective”…

And same with discoverability. Some would argue swipe gestures that iOS has used for decades now aren’t “discoverable” enough… People have different ideas about discoverability. Case in point, if I recall correctly, you think Finder with the smiley face icon is perfectly discoverable as a file manager. I don’t.

As to clarity and consistency, I don’t take any issue with the Liquid Glass design. I find it to be plenty clear and consistent, with the exception of a handful of bugs that have mostly already been addressed… And what is “clear” or not can greatly depend on individual factors like vision impairments for example. I have glasses, and even was just prescribed with a new prescription I haven’t picked up yet, meaning my current glasses aren’t even fully correcting properly for my vision impairments, and I have no problems clearly seeing Liquid Glass elements…
I can go on and on and oooon. A UI that increases friction, hides information, reduces readability, introduce slop or makes workflows less efficient is objectively worse in those areas, regardless of whether someone likes the visual style.
Again, it’s your opinion that Liquid Glass “increases friction”, etc. It is not an opinion that is universally shared… It is merely your opinion, not a universal truth…
By that logic, no design could ever be criticized because everything would be reduced to personal preference. But in reality, some designs communicate better and function better than others. That’s why UX design exists as a discipline instead of being pure opinion.
False. Nobody’s stopping anyone from criticizing designs. The problem lies when people try to claim their subjective opinions about said designs are “universal truths”, or “objective facts”. You can criticize designs all you like, it doesn’t mean your opinion/perspective is the only valid/correct one… One person might love Van Gough’s art, while another might hate it and criticize it. Both are valid preferences.
Otherwise, we'll end up from a place of near perfection in presentation:
View attachment 2630098

And end up with this crap:
View attachment 2630099

PS: Sorry I keep posting iOS stuff, but I don't have Tahoe and its much easier for me to show iOS slop, since I made the mistake of upgrading and I cannot downgrade anymore.
Again, it’s only your opinion that the new design is “crap”… I think the old screenshot (which I don’t think is Notification Center, looks like the weather app) looks like crap and is ugly, and the new design looks beautiful and visually appealing. And the picture you include of Liquid Glass is not accurate of what it actually looks like, notification cards have more background contrast. That’s probably from the early betas. But it is not accurate of the actual look of the Liquid Glass Notification Center.

You calling it “slop” doesn’t make it so…

I respect your opinion, but it is merely that, and I hold an equally valid and different opinion… 👍🏻
 
Last edited:
Again, it’s only your opinion that the new design is “crap”… I think the old screenshot (which I don’t think is Notification Center, looks like the weather app) looks like crap and is ugly, and the new design looks beautiful and visually appealing. And the picture you include of Liquid Glass is not accurate of what it actually looks like, notification cards have more background contrast. That’s probably from the early betas. But it is not accurate of the actual look of the Liquid Glass Notification Center.

You calling it “slop” doesn’t make it so…

I respect your opinion, but it is merely that, and I hold an equally valid and different opinion… 👍🏻
there's just a group of people here who become enraged (or just indignant) when someone disagrees with their observations or opinions. i find it entertaining (at best) and exhausting (mostly) 🤣
 
You know what, some people just defend whatever Apple does. If they see the old design as new, they would still defend it as more refined. Honestly, Apple's general move toward ipados ios like ui on Mac OS is things I most loathe about.
And the inverse would also work: you know what, some people just attack whatever Apple does.

I’m sure there are some in both extreme camps: some who will defend whatever Apple does, and those who will attack whatever Apple does… I’ve encountered many who seem to only ever attack and criticize Apple and whatever they do. But there are also people who have some criticisms, just not the same ones you have. Just because people don’t share your particular criticism of choice doesn’t mean they have none of their own… I think it’s overly reductionist to try to toss everyone into broad boxes. There’s nuance… 🙂👍🏻
 
  • Like
Reactions: I7guy and Luftkopf
Again, it’s only your opinion that the new design is “crap”… I think the old screenshot (which I don’t think is Notification Center, looks like the weather app) looks like crap and is ugly, and the new design looks beautiful and visually appealing. And the picture you include of Liquid Glass is not accurate of what it actually looks like, notification cards have more background contrast. That’s probably from the early betas.

I'm getting used to LG, and, some of the annoying iPhone effects are due to my small screen size (SE3). I guess Apple doesn't plan to make new phones with smaller screens in the future. But, I did want to point out that the plain former appearance, which you see as ugly, is easier to read than the new appearance, which you think is beautiful. A bit like an architect telling a client to move the chair if the roof is leaking above it. Is the purpose of a PDA to look beautiful, or, to quickly convey information? Some would say that an appearance that can be read quickly and easily is beautiful.
 
I'm getting used to LG, and, some of the annoying iPhone effects are due to my small screen size (SE3). I guess Apple doesn't plan to make new phones with smaller screens in the future. But, I did want to point out that the plain former appearance, which you see as ugly, is easier to read than the new appearance, which you think is beautiful. A bit like an architect telling a client to move the chair if the roof is leaking above it. Is the purpose of a PDA to look beautiful, or, to quickly convey information? Some would say that an appearance that can be read quickly and easily is beautiful.
I get that, I don’t have an iPhone SE, so perhaps the experience is a bit different on those phones. A family member of mine has an SE3, and they haven’t complained about legibility or anything. But I think that’s just going to largely depend on the person. There’s a reason Apple includes customization features for things like text size, increased contrast, etc. Different people have different preferences and needs. 🙂👍🏻

Perhaps the flat design was easier for you to read, but, to me and many others, both are easily readable. I have not experienced any negative impact on legibility, and I even have an astigmatism and need glasses. Even without my glasses I can easily read Liquid Glass UI elements clearly…

Personally, I don’t think everything needs to be designed for maximum contrast, as it would look incredibly ugly, and would remove layers of communication from the system that rely on certain colors. And it never really has been designed that way. Part of design is balancing aesthetic and contrast. I see no evidence that Liquid Glass doesn’t do this well, except in a handful of situations cause by software bugs that have mostly been fixed. Or people intentionally going to great lengths to try to create situations to make it look bad…
 
Last edited:
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.