Tahoe could be the "jump the shark" moment for macOS. :-(
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
macOS Tahoe Review: Spotlight Shines, Liquid Glass Disappoints
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I do not understand the strategy behind pushing liquid glass onto every OS.
As Apple have alluded to themselves it’s an attempt to unify the design with visionOS, where it seems that liquid glass works very well in presenting interfaces and controls as tangible floating objects overlaying video passthrough of the surrounding environment.
One immediate glaring issue in translating this to the other OSs is that liquid glass elements which will appear truly 3 dimensional in VR cannot do so on standard screens. So they’re attempting to make some interfaces and controls appear 3D using tried and tested embossing combined with a more modern dynamic transparency effect.
Standard screen design language went through a long phase of having buttons and controls embossed to make them appear physical, to help users clearly identify what they could interact with as they gradually migrated from physical controls into digital controls.
As time has gone on users have grown far more accustomed to screen based interfaces and the need to make controls feel ‘real’ has fallen away as physical controls become less common. As a result screen design language has been simplified, flattening everything out and removing embossed edges to reduce visual clutter, preferring instead to use well laid out concise clearly contrasted controls. It is widely accepted that this has made screen based interfaces better to use, and UX has been improved.
But now Apple are trying to incorporate visionOS elements, which will always need to appear tangible, into screen based interfaces, which no longer need to appear tangible. They are adding visual noise back in, with no practical benefit to the end user.
If everyone was rushing out to buy a Vision Pro it might make slightly more sense to compromise the interface design of other devices a little to provide uniformity of experience across the platforms. And maybe in the future they’ll release a Vision device that achieves that level of mass adoption. But we’re not at that point yet, at best it’s 4 or 5 years away (if it ever comes at all).
So right now Apple are reducing the quality of the UX on screen based devices for the sake of a very small number of VR users. And even those users might not appreciate it, given that VR and screen devices are inherently different form factors with unique considerations.
I can’t see what Apple’s reasoning is for doing this. Chasing a single unified design across all devices can only lead to a collection of compromised experiences.
Sorry I wrote an essay lol. It’s been bothering me, now I’ve vented I’ll go about my day 😂
As Apple have alluded to themselves it’s an attempt to unify the design with visionOS, where it seems that liquid glass works very well in presenting interfaces and controls as tangible floating objects overlaying video passthrough of the surrounding environment.
One immediate glaring issue in translating this to the other OSs is that liquid glass elements which will appear truly 3 dimensional in VR cannot do so on standard screens. So they’re attempting to make some interfaces and controls appear 3D using tried and tested embossing combined with a more modern dynamic transparency effect.
Standard screen design language went through a long phase of having buttons and controls embossed to make them appear physical, to help users clearly identify what they could interact with as they gradually migrated from physical controls into digital controls.
As time has gone on users have grown far more accustomed to screen based interfaces and the need to make controls feel ‘real’ has fallen away as physical controls become less common. As a result screen design language has been simplified, flattening everything out and removing embossed edges to reduce visual clutter, preferring instead to use well laid out concise clearly contrasted controls. It is widely accepted that this has made screen based interfaces better to use, and UX has been improved.
But now Apple are trying to incorporate visionOS elements, which will always need to appear tangible, into screen based interfaces, which no longer need to appear tangible. They are adding visual noise back in, with no practical benefit to the end user.
If everyone was rushing out to buy a Vision Pro it might make slightly more sense to compromise the interface design of other devices a little to provide uniformity of experience across the platforms. And maybe in the future they’ll release a Vision device that achieves that level of mass adoption. But we’re not at that point yet, at best it’s 4 or 5 years away (if it ever comes at all).
So right now Apple are reducing the quality of the UX on screen based devices for the sake of a very small number of VR users. And even those users might not appreciate it, given that VR and screen devices are inherently different form factors with unique considerations.
I can’t see what Apple’s reasoning is for doing this. Chasing a single unified design across all devices can only lead to a collection of compromised experiences.
Sorry I wrote an essay lol. It’s been bothering me, now I’ve vented I’ll go about my day 😂
I'm on the public beta and was thinking the same thing. Outside of the some updates to the toolbar button designs, the sidebar, and the rounded corners, Liquid Glass feels very sparse across the OS. Even the clear widgets and icons aren't enabled by default. Big Sur was a bigger UI overhaul vs. Catalina compared to this vs. Sequoia.
Apple for the last decade and more has been 1 step forward, 3 steps back, step over a dollar to make a Nickel.
Don't innovate when we can just copy.
Oh Look at the right hand, not the left, we have new emoji's and new colors. whoopdie ***** Dooo....,
Don't innovate when we can just copy.
Oh Look at the right hand, not the left, we have new emoji's and new colors. whoopdie ***** Dooo....,
I wish people would quit complaining about liquid glass. It's the only good design any software company has had since the departure of Aqua and Aero, which shouldn't have ever left.
Of course, I still use Leopard quite frequently unless I need a modern OS.
Have you used Windows recently? Because my god. macOS is still pretty damn simple to use. The system settings app is really the most annoying thing I can think of. And even it is miles ahead of Windows. I just spent the better part of a day helping a friend with their PC, bouncing around between what passes as the settings app in Windows 11, the control panel, and device manager.
This, on the other hand, is 100% correct. I'd much prefer to use Tiger, Leopard, or Snow Leopard. But I don't want to bash my head against the wall when I use modern macOS either. It's not as easy as it should be some of the time, but it's a lot easier to deal with than Windows.
Of course, I still use Leopard quite frequently unless I need a modern OS.
I think it's worth pointing out that the change between skeuomorphism and flat design for user interfaces didn't occur entirely in a vacuum, design in general followed suit. Skeuomorphism, 3D effects, and photorealism in design began to accelerate with advances in design software and printing/displays around the turn of the millennium and really accelerated through the early 2000s. Look at corporate logos that were redesigned in the 2000s and you'll see most added texture, shading, or 3D pop effects. By the early 2010s that look was starting to feel dated, and minimalistic and flatter designs started to feel cleaner and more modern. (A great example of this evolution is to look at the evolution of the Olive Garden or Volkswagen logo). The move to flat design in UIs thus occurred alongside the move to flat design elsewhere in visual design.
Now we're in the mid 2020s and flat design itself is starting to look dated and sterile, though I wouldn't say it's over. But there is a bigger push now for a middle ground between flat and ornate skeuomorphism or photorealism. Within that context of where design is headed explains why Apple is trying to add more "real" feeling materials to their UI design. Whether Liquid Glass is successful at that is a completely separate debate, but this is a case of Apple following design trends, just like Aqua was them following design trends of 2001.
I don't even run the beta versions and I haven't yet but i'm tempted to upgrade to Tahoe early as I really want to use Apple Intelligence in Shortcuts - i've wanted to make shortcuts that can rename files, organise files based on what it knows they are for ages and it'll be easier (and free!) to do with Apple Intelligence.
This whole Tahoe experiment is hugely underwhelming. It's like when M$ reskinned Win 98 and called it XP. It has that toyness about it that makes Sequoia look thoroughly professional and timeless. I'll probably stick with Sequoia for this iteration which is rather alarming for me. Tim Apple should be worried about the future of macOS now.
I've been running Tahoe since the first dev betas and I have to say the new look is just not landing with me either. It's passable on iOS and iPadOS (though it still has plenty of things that need to, and I think will be, worked out before public release), but a desktop OS is just a different beast altogether.
The talk of "consistency" is just Apple marketing spin. You make UIs consistent across devices through things like following the same style for toggles, the same UX patterns for how you display data or navigate through views or do simple tasks like adjust columns in a list view. And having said that, as much as there's an argument that "for consistency, macOS buttons should look like liquid glass because that's what iOS buttons look like," let me point out an intentional decision in macOS Tahoe to introduce different window radii based on the type of window.
So consistency... with what, exactly? Here's a real world example of several windows overlapping. (This second source is from a Reddit user. Apologies for lack of a proper source citation!)
And that example brings up another pain point about Liquid Glass on a desktop OS. As some have mentioned, the glass effect works best when it has something behind it to refract, otherwise it's just sorta visual noise or at best, a frosted look that reminds folks of Windows Vista. Apple has tried this before, with the sidebar in Finder being semi-translucent, allowing some of the desktop wallpaper to peek through and give the sidebar more visual interest. That's seemingly worked well and is passable. But now, where possible, Apple is encouraging actual window content behind the sidebar. Obviously obscuring your own content would be bad, so they're literally going out of their way with programmatic hacks, like this iPadOS example where the system will dynamically mirror and blur the content to extend behind the sidebar. (This example is on an iPad, but the effect "backgroundExtensionEffect()" is available for all platforms, interestingly.
Don't get me wrong. The option on the left looks terrible. The option on the right is better, but still, pretty terrible and hackey.
Finally, going back to more of the Liquid Glass on UI elements itself, Apple, and UX folks more broadly, have talked for YEARS about how good UI should recede into the background when not in use, and for years, Apple has generally done a good job of continuing to push this principle. Yet, now all of the icons in the Safari and Finder toolbars have giant circles around them. They're doing that in order to make the liquid glass look work, especially when content moves under them, but that's also visually pulling my attention and focus towards the elements, not away from them. The effect is even worse when I have multiple windows open on my Mac, and background windows still are commanding dominance because they're highlighting liquid glass controls (this time in darker, filled in circles, but still, more visually noisy than it is today).
This example is from beta 3 and it has gotten better in the more recent betas, but it's still very frustrating.
And my last point in general is unlike iOS or even iPadOS, I have a larger screen for my Mac. I have more room for content. The UX and "chrome" of buttons and stuff around my content isn't "in the way" at all. Yes, I do want it to recede when not in use, but I also have no need to "hide it" so that "more of my content" can show. Seeing another 30-40 pixels of my Finder folders underneath glassy toolbar buttons as I scroll a window adds NOTHING valuable to my experience. As someone who's been in the UX industry for over 20 years, a decision like that is a nonstarter for me.
Apologies for the long rant, but like others, I'm not a fan of liquid glass on macOS. There's some potential for it, and some elements that can be brought froward, but by and large they're introducing a LOT of new problems and a lot of new things that will need to be fixed, and it's going to take a lot more work than what they can deliver between now and later this year.
The talk of "consistency" is just Apple marketing spin. You make UIs consistent across devices through things like following the same style for toggles, the same UX patterns for how you display data or navigate through views or do simple tasks like adjust columns in a list view. And having said that, as much as there's an argument that "for consistency, macOS buttons should look like liquid glass because that's what iOS buttons look like," let me point out an intentional decision in macOS Tahoe to introduce different window radii based on the type of window.
So consistency... with what, exactly? Here's a real world example of several windows overlapping. (This second source is from a Reddit user. Apologies for lack of a proper source citation!)
And that example brings up another pain point about Liquid Glass on a desktop OS. As some have mentioned, the glass effect works best when it has something behind it to refract, otherwise it's just sorta visual noise or at best, a frosted look that reminds folks of Windows Vista. Apple has tried this before, with the sidebar in Finder being semi-translucent, allowing some of the desktop wallpaper to peek through and give the sidebar more visual interest. That's seemingly worked well and is passable. But now, where possible, Apple is encouraging actual window content behind the sidebar. Obviously obscuring your own content would be bad, so they're literally going out of their way with programmatic hacks, like this iPadOS example where the system will dynamically mirror and blur the content to extend behind the sidebar. (This example is on an iPad, but the effect "backgroundExtensionEffect()" is available for all platforms, interestingly.
Don't get me wrong. The option on the left looks terrible. The option on the right is better, but still, pretty terrible and hackey.
Finally, going back to more of the Liquid Glass on UI elements itself, Apple, and UX folks more broadly, have talked for YEARS about how good UI should recede into the background when not in use, and for years, Apple has generally done a good job of continuing to push this principle. Yet, now all of the icons in the Safari and Finder toolbars have giant circles around them. They're doing that in order to make the liquid glass look work, especially when content moves under them, but that's also visually pulling my attention and focus towards the elements, not away from them. The effect is even worse when I have multiple windows open on my Mac, and background windows still are commanding dominance because they're highlighting liquid glass controls (this time in darker, filled in circles, but still, more visually noisy than it is today).
This example is from beta 3 and it has gotten better in the more recent betas, but it's still very frustrating.
And my last point in general is unlike iOS or even iPadOS, I have a larger screen for my Mac. I have more room for content. The UX and "chrome" of buttons and stuff around my content isn't "in the way" at all. Yes, I do want it to recede when not in use, but I also have no need to "hide it" so that "more of my content" can show. Seeing another 30-40 pixels of my Finder folders underneath glassy toolbar buttons as I scroll a window adds NOTHING valuable to my experience. As someone who's been in the UX industry for over 20 years, a decision like that is a nonstarter for me.
Apologies for the long rant, but like others, I'm not a fan of liquid glass on macOS. There's some potential for it, and some elements that can be brought froward, but by and large they're introducing a LOT of new problems and a lot of new things that will need to be fixed, and it's going to take a lot more work than what they can deliver between now and later this year.
I hear you. I would argue though that wider design trends need not correspond with or apply to user interfaces, which are inherently utilitarian and should be considered very differently from corporate branding.
It could also be argued also that the wider trend which brought about the flattening of design was triggered by the explosion of smartphone use and the digitisation that accompanied it, that’s to say the wider trend was following the natural progression of screen based interface design towards flatness - screen based interface design didn’t necessarily follow the trend.
If there is to be a big push back towards incorporating textures and three-dimensionality into interface design then to be successful it will need to be applied in such a way which adds to the overall usability, or at least certainly doesn’t detract from it.
I think that will be very difficult to achieve as unless done very subtly it will undoubtedly be adding visual complexity, thus increasing cognitive load a little. Users will always gravitate towards visual simplicity for control - they want to think as little as possible so the interfaces they’ll enjoy using will be the most clear and visually concise.
Branding and content design are a different story altogether.
can confirm. Us folks with astigmatism need contrast. This doesn't deliver. I guess I can just go into accessibility and dial things down for my disability, you know astigmatism that affects 30-60% of humans.
Agreed. I don't get why of all the 'materials' that they could have chosen, glass was believed to be have been the best for an operating system. This seems counter-productive and I've yet to hear/read one good reason for why it's an improvement over what we currently have.
I understand certain aspects of Liquid Glass - I particularly like the animations and the edge-effects on some controls - but I'm not sure why the transparency properties of glass lend themselves well to controls that must be navigated and interacted with, with precise movement.
Why, for instance, does the Control Centre - which features a range of critical controls - need to show the colours and textures of the image behind it? What is the purpose and benefit of this to the user? Why is this better than simply opaque or a grey?
And why does the Finder need separate pill-shaped containers for each control? This takes up more screen estate and is distracting, so how is it an improvement?
Apple's explanation has routinely been that you "focus more on your content". I think this a poor justification for what is essentially self-lauding and back-slapping nonsense for execs to justify their wages. Tech demos are a novelty, good design is timeless, which is why people continue to talk about Aqua to this day.
Yeah, cool, I have astigmatism too and I have no idea what you're talking about. I don't need any particular contrast. Maybe there's different types of astigmatism, the regular and the anti-Apple one.
So if a contingent of users dislike something and have objective reasons for such, this is a 'hatefest'?
Eh?
That was the single biggest architectural transition Microsoft ever made to Windows.
It's unfortunate that most of the 'hype' of this new release is related to the UI and less about new functionality. Personally, this liquid glass change should be considered nothing more than a new theme where users should have a CHOICE to use. Why force this UI theme on everyone? If Apple isn't going to implement usable AI features in their OS's, maybe they could at least use AI internally to take all their user feedback data and implement the top requests from its users.
It’s a nightmare for anyone with any eyesight