Saw this blog and thought it was worth sharing here. The icon situation on Tahoe is an absolute mess
https://tonsky.me/blog/tahoe-icons/
https://tonsky.me/blog/tahoe-icons/
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.
Tahoe’s icon mess
- Thread starter alanvitek
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Hot take: I like it as it is.
Edit: cause I don’t work with looking on small icons but quick reading over the text.
At some point I just click without even reading because workflows are set in mind.
I even didn’t notice that icons where added and not existent before. That they differ here and there is way beyond my perception.
Edit: cause I don’t work with looking on small icons but quick reading over the text.
At some point I just click without even reading because workflows are set in mind.
I even didn’t notice that icons where added and not existent before. That they differ here and there is way beyond my perception.
Last edited:
I quickly skimmed the article
Two points I want to mentioned.
First, the blogger's thesis isn't wrong per say. I can see his point and he did a great job providing evidense.
Secondly, I never noticed. I've been using Tahoe for a little while, and I never noticed, in fact I had to pull up a context menu just to confirm that those icons to the left of the selections were there - and yes they are.
So if they're not really noticeable and they detracting from the user experience? I can't speak for everyone but I was actually surprised to see those icons on the context menu.
The brain is a funny thing, it easily adjusts and masks out superfluous stuff, I suspect that is what is occurring - at least with me. Everyone is different and no doubt we will get folks chiming in here say how distracting it is. No argument for them.
Should apple have used a cleaner design, absolutely, I like the idea of less is more, but with that said I don't think its a problem.
Two points I want to mentioned.
First, the blogger's thesis isn't wrong per say. I can see his point and he did a great job providing evidense.
Secondly, I never noticed. I've been using Tahoe for a little while, and I never noticed, in fact I had to pull up a context menu just to confirm that those icons to the left of the selections were there - and yes they are.
So if they're not really noticeable and they detracting from the user experience? I can't speak for everyone but I was actually surprised to see those icons on the context menu.
The brain is a funny thing, it easily adjusts and masks out superfluous stuff, I suspect that is what is occurring - at least with me. Everyone is different and no doubt we will get folks chiming in here say how distracting it is. No argument for them.
Should apple have used a cleaner design, absolutely, I like the idea of less is more, but with that said I don't think its a problem.
Slightly earlier, complementary article of the same: https://blog.jim-nielsen.com/2025/icons-in-menus/
Not 100% sure that making Tim Cook oversee the Design Team directly was a good idea. Tim Cook has many strengths, but I'm not sure "an eye for design" is necessarily one of them...at least at the smallest of details level.
Not 100% sure that making Tim Cook oversee the Design Team directly was a good idea. Tim Cook has many strengths, but I'm not sure "an eye for design" is necessarily one of them...at least at the smallest of details level.
For me, the app icons don’t work on a purely conceptual level.
All Apple has done is taken the multi-plane approach from visionOS on put it on a 2D surface, where there is no requirement for parallax. Therefore, the ‘effect’ of distancing different layers of material looks like icons have a soft focus which is neither useful nor better than what we’ve had previously.
Even if they just flattened the layers, they would still retain their identity and art style.
Again, Apple’s excuse is that Liquid Glass was used for ‘consistency’ between platforms, yet the effect on the user is anything but consistent because they appear worse without parallax on a Mac.
The menu icons? Should be an option you can toggle in Accessibility for those who prefer a graphic for guidance.
All Apple has done is taken the multi-plane approach from visionOS on put it on a 2D surface, where there is no requirement for parallax. Therefore, the ‘effect’ of distancing different layers of material looks like icons have a soft focus which is neither useful nor better than what we’ve had previously.
Even if they just flattened the layers, they would still retain their identity and art style.
Again, Apple’s excuse is that Liquid Glass was used for ‘consistency’ between platforms, yet the effect on the user is anything but consistent because they appear worse without parallax on a Mac.
The menu icons? Should be an option you can toggle in Accessibility for those who prefer a graphic for guidance.
I wonder if Apple has some long gameplan for the menu icons. Aside from that, they don't bother me at all. The linked article references Apple's User Interface Guidelines from 1984, when screen resolutions were very low. What was good practice on those screens might not apply on today's high resolution displays.
Both articles reference the HiG from 1992, and also the versions from 2005 and 2020 (at least in the Jim Nielsen article), which - basically - states the same as in 1992.
Now design is ever-changing, and heavily influenced by trend and fashion. Design Principles, on the other hand, rarely changes (much, if at all).
How are you able to read text quickly if you cannot find the start of the text quickly? There is something in the way, the icons, and it forces you to repeatedly "skip" over part. Never mind when the icon is some text. If you were trying to skim a book, wouldn't you find it way harder if the start of every word was preceded by a text-sized scribble?
Literally the first image in the linked article shows exactly what's going on, the subsequent explanation tells you all you need to know: it's clutter and overloads the user.
They are certainly noticeable, and very distracting.
Indeed. So I wonder why people try to defend Apple at all costs, making other uses, who have different brains, have worse experiences?
If the "best" case scenario for these menu icons is, as you described, unnoticed by some users, then what's the point? As the article already points out, they're not useful, because the icons are not consistent nor do they explain anything, nor are they clear enough to make out in many cases. So what's the point? They're a hindrance to many users, don't affect some, and don't really help anyone.
how do you know they don't help anyone?
i don't have any issue with the icons (anymore, than, say, the favicons in safari, or the icons in the sidebar in a finder window).
it's not about 'defending Apple at all costs' (why would anyone do that?) it is, for some of us anyway, an alternative to the (sometimes hysterical) ranting about OS changes, changes we will all eventually adapt to (until apple changes things up again 🤣).
Fantastic article. This is an excellent analysis that makes a ton of great points. Thank you for sharing it. They deserve a job at Apple ASAP.
I immediately noticed the stupid icons in the menu, and they really draw your attention. A completely unnecessary addition. Something simple has been made complicated.
Steve Jobs rolling in his grave 😭
I don't have any problem reading the text. The icons are in one column and the text is aligned in another column. I think a spreadsheet would be a better analogy than a book. Just look in the column for the information you're looking for. If you like to go by icons, look in the first column; if you like to go by text, look in the second column. I do the latter, so don't really care if the icons are there or not.
My biggest takeaway from that article is that the icons are inconsistent, which I would agree with.
I would think Cook would be delegating design oversight to design leadership. I viewed this a more of a “they have to report to someone” type of thing, not that Tim all a sudden thinks he’s a designer.
sounds like you reached a consensus, Tahoe is a poor gui - simplify, or deeper menus, new icons or old icons , it appears that more intuitive controls are your goals but that depends on training (or if you wish your life experiences) so I'm not convinced that one size fits all even in this case
Very Windows 11 compared to Sequoia's minimalism. It's bad taste especially those switching from Windows to macOS will feel at home.
Yeah, I have to admit those icons are obtrusive and unnecessary
Last edited:
of course its important, like whether to serve Sauvignon Blanc or Riesling with pork is a valid question worthy of serious debate
As I've said (and the article says much of this too):
- They are very small, and hard to identify certain shapes
- Specific icons are used inconsistently; one cannot infer the meaning of the icon from the icon alone
- The same menu action often has different icons, for no discernible reason
- They are on every menu, so you cannot easily pick out certain "popular" menu items by icon alone, you must scan every one. (See the article's example of Win95 Word, where some common menu actions have not just icons, but large colored icons which are easily discernible from both other icons and menu items without icons).
Just because you adopt some change does not mean it is better. It is worse, in many respects.
I see you posting in almost every Tahoe thread, constantly, defending Apple's decisions. I don't really understand why, because you always seem to ignore any of the discussion points of anyone you disagree with.
It's fine if you like Tahoe or Liquid Glass or any of that, it's your own personal opinion, and it's okay even if those opinions contract industry knowledge, you're just a random user.
It's like how when a random customer goes into a TV store and buys a TV because the display unit had its brightness and contrast jacked up to appeal to those consumers.
What's not okay is when those types of consumers go on to claim that those who care about the TV reproducing accurate colors are wrong, that they are "hysterical", and that the tv mfr is in the right for having ridiculously blown out colors.
At least in my example the user of the TV can set up the contrast however they please, with Apple's OS choices we are forced to adopt these changes if we want to use newer hardware or be on a more supported OS version.
What's wrong with icons in the menus? I skimmed through the article posted, but still don't get why the icons are a problem. The post is fairly accurate about the inconsistencies and detailed icons at small sizes. It’s weak, however, when the author turns those design failures into a blanket claim that the entire concept (icons in menus, or icons for most items) is inherently misguided. That's because the author asserts that claim rather than demonstrates it through any sort of data. In other words, he treats a debatable premise as a law of UX and then goes through a process of selecting examples (some might say cherry picked) to support that premise. The problem is, again, that the starting premise might not be correct, especially because Apple is trying to have a more unified design across all its devices -- computers, smartphones, VR/AR device, Apple TV, Watch, etc. That wasn't as much of a problem back in the 1990s when the guidelines he references were developed.
Also, are the icons actually slowing down people's use of menus? It's likely the opposite is true, they help people find things more quickly. Without data, the author is just making claims to fit his biases, rather than have a data-driven set of evidence.
Also, icons can serve multiple purposes in menus besides scanning speed:
Also, are the icons actually slowing down people's use of menus? It's likely the opposite is true, they help people find things more quickly. Without data, the author is just making claims to fit his biases, rather than have a data-driven set of evidence.
Also, icons can serve multiple purposes in menus besides scanning speed:
- redundancy (text + icon reduces misreading words for some users)
- cross-language support (less reliance on any particular label)
- learnability for new users
- recognition in peripheral vision if the icon set is consistent. This is because we can more easily process an image in our peripheral vision than text.
Last edited:
hmm, is it not ok for me to have a different opinion, and express it? we're all just 'random users', and each entitled to our observations. what about newer mac users? it's (often) change itself that people find threatening (not to say there aren't sometimes real issues). perhaps newer users will adapt quickly to the menu icons, and use those as a guideline when using menus.
either way, am not going to do a point-by-point rebuttal, it's not worth it. i am entitled to my opinions, stand by them, and will continue to express my point of view; i expect you'll do the same.