[magnuspaaske]

There was also an article in Wired about this and I'll just say this: the fact the most discussed thing about the new iOS version is how to make their terrible new UI (that no one asked for) off is telling something about the state of innovation at Apple. It's annoying to see apps adapt to the new design, making a lot of the navigation in the top and the bottom worse (and great to see a couple of holdouts like Bluesky). A design philosophy where the full width of the screen is used is pretty good, not sure we needed Apple to prove it with a counter example.

Can't wait for them to release iOS 27 and announce they've made a useable UI again. "Hey friends, those accessibility settings you've used for a year? You don't need them anymore. Apple is where innovation happens!!"

[rdtsc]

> I'll just say this: the fact the most discussed thing about the new iOS version is how to make their terrible new UI (that no one asked for) off is telling something about the state of innovation at Apple.

I observed that too. Polled a few people I know who upgraded and they all have the same impression that they'd rather turn it off. I shared the accessibility settings with some to help them out. I haven't upgraded my main phone might have to wait a while longer.

This has to be resume driven. I presume designers at Apple have to end the year with a review to justify their salaries. "So Bob, what would you say you do here?". The answer "Well not much, we designed things nicely already, and now we're just chilling, listening to podcasts and having 2 hour lunches" is not going to fly. They want to say something like "That flashy glass thing, we did that!". Except, in this case I wish they'd all just be chilling and having 2 hour long lunches, instead of messing with the interface since they apparently managed to make things worse.

[lesuorac]

I assume it's technology driven. The effect is probably expensive to produce so phones with weaker performance can't do it.

[fodkodrasz]

So basically it is to have shorter battery life despite advances in battery technology, and have planned obsolescence? This makes this even more compelling to leave their ecosystem.

This is just jumping the shark, as they need to push out something that can be talked about their products, and Apple Intelligence is a flop so far. As the saying goes: “There’s no such thing as bad publicity.”

[vladvasiliu]

I have an iphone 11 (non pro) I use as a GPS. The update works fine on it, I haven't noticed any unusual slowdown. If I'm not mistaken, that's a 6 year-old model, and I think it's the oldest one supported.

I can't comment on the battery life, since it's plugged in almost all the time. I haven't noticed any change on my regular phone (14 pro).

[cmckn]

My humble opinion is they took the opportunity to play “look over here!” after the Apple Intelligence (or lack thereof) fiasco.

[IAmGraydon]

It’s shareholder driven. They have to act like they’re still innovative even though they have no idea where to actually innovate at this point. So they chose to change something very visible that they could point to as a big innovative change to keep share prices moving in the right direction. Ever heard of end-stage capitalism? Well, this is it - when every principle is sacrificed in the name of revenue.

[rdtsc]

> It’s shareholder driven.

Yeah I think both are in the same vein. At the corporate level it's shareholder driven and on the individual and team level it's resume driven. It boils down to "What cool thing have you done in the last 12 months?" kind of question.

[postexitus]

When Windows XP was first released, one of the most requested things were to turn the new skin/theme off and make it look like Windows 98. Similar with all later versions of Windows. I don't like Liquid that much, but I wonder how much of this is actually just getting used to the old stuff.

[Onewildgamer]

This feels more like Windows Vista when everybody wanted to switch it off but ultimately switched back to Windows XP until Windows 7 was launched. The liquid glass confuses a lot of folks and it's good when done minimally and not all over the OS.

[magnuspaaske]

I think the difference with earlier UI redesigns is that the supposed benefit of liquid glass is the whole opacity thing, where several things are laid on top of each other while trying to show what's underneath. That just creates a much more messy interface, making it harder to see what's going on since they've dropped UI-classics like using contrast to make text readable. That's also why the setting to tune down liquid glass is found in accessibility and not, say, display preferences.

I'm a bit too old to have been privvy to any Win XP design backlash, but I think the more apt comparison is with Windows Vista, where transparency was also a major part of the design philosophy (usability be damned). We have pretty good ideas about what makes a good UI/UX and none of those ideas involve using transparency to make readability worse while also not really making what's under the half-transparent element visible or readable.

[array_key_first]

IMO:

1. There's actual value in getting used to things. Part of the reason older people can't use computers well and get scammed is because trendy software companies constantly reshuffle the same stuff and they can't keep up.

2. A lot of UI progression is objectively worse, and I do mean objectively. Less legibility, more clicks to do the same actions, etc. We just get used to back software.

iOS 26 is bad software. We might get used to it being bad one day. It's still bad.

Similarly, Windows 8 was bad software. We actually undid that one.

[postexitus]

We always get used to what you categorize as "bad" - it's just different. UX / UI people are not clueless, yes, they do some things because they are shiny and cool, but they constantly collect metrics and improve. People moaned all the same when iOS moved on from initial Skeuomorphic roots - now we can't even look at these screenshots without cringing.

[array_key_first]

Metrics are worse than useless because they don't tell you WHY something is the way it is.

For example, many websites optimize for engagment and in the processes make their website WORSE. Because people have high engagement with shitty things. Thats why humans can't look away from a car wreck.

UX designers are basically creating car wrecks so they can say "look at how many people are looking at us!"

Yeah, I wouldn't brag about that.

[hollandheese]

>Similarly, Windows 8 was bad software. We actually undid that one.

Windows 8 was bad software for desktop and laptop computers. I will say though that it was great for hybrid tablet computers and they should have kept that interface for them. Using a Surface running Windows 8 is much nicer as a tablet than what Microsoft has done since. I have no idea why they thought a tablet interface was a good idea for desktops though.

[Telaneo]

> I have no idea why they thought a tablet interface was a good idea for desktops though.

Some Microsoft VP saw an iPad and said 'That! Do that!', and the dominoes just fell from there.

[sys_64738]

> 1. There's actual value in getting used to things. Part of the reason older people can't use computers well and get scammed is because trendy software companies constantly reshuffle the same stuff and they can't keep up.

The first rule of UI design is don't change things. The second rule is to make it easy to revert exactly to the prior layout. For webpages and apps, it's not hard. Don't change things. Do not change things. Do. Not. Change. Things. But UI designers are too stupid to grasp the simple rules.

[steve1977]

With the difference that up to and including Windows 7, you could actually easily and officially make it look more or less like Windows 2000.

[IshKebab]

Every little change to Facebook was met with huge protests back in the day too (before they learned to do them gradually and also before they trashed it).

[SchemaLoad]

Isn't this the case for all UI redesigns? When youtube changed to their current design there were posts about browser extensions to restore the old interface. I remember hating it myself at the time yet now I don't have an issue with it and probably prefer it to the old design.

Some people are always upset with change.

[GuB-42]

Yes, people are upset with every UI redesign that is not an incremental change.

So stop redesigning your damn UIs!

I know why they do it. That's because if you don't change the UI, it is like you didn't change anything, and people don't feel the need to upgrade. It is important for marketing and therefore I don't expect it to change.

But if you really care about usability, don't change your UIs without a good reason. Also, keep in mind that not every user is a young tech addict, it is hard enough to explain to my grandparents how to use a computer/smartphone without them being thrown off by UI changes. Ok, it may not be where your money is, but that's part of accessibility.

[pflenker]

I don’t see how your argument applies to Apple‘s transition to Liquid Glass. Apple only did incremental design changes for years, IIRC this is only the third major UI/UX iteration since the early 00s.

UX is not timeless, features emerge or go out of fashion, user behavior and expectations change, the hardware on which the UI/UX is operated changes. You only can incrementally evolve your ui/UX so far, as you can’t know what the future will look like.

[array_key_first]

Liquid glass is objectively worse than what came before it. It's literally harder to see what the fuck is going on, and everything takes more time to do.

There are zero legitimate benefits to it. It's just neat and cool, which is a very poor reason to do something.

They should've just... Not done it.

[Arrath]

> Yes, people are upset with every UI redesign that is not an incremental change.

Speaking for myself, it's also annoying when the redesign is half assed. I think it's awfully embarrassing that you can still dig deeply enough into settings panels in Windows and get XP themed panels. Hell, dig deep enough and there's probably even older ones lurking still.

[1718627440]

To me that is more a sign that I finally arrived at a dialog I can trust to do what it says and which actually achieves what I have been looking for the whole time. To me trying to change something in Windows seems to be a hunt for that old window first, before I can do anything useful.

[Arrath]

You're not wrong, and I share the sentiment. "Modern" panels are near worthless, I have to dig down to something crusty to actually expose useful settings I can tweak.

[1718627440]

That's true about the stuff you reach from Settings. But I also learned that Windows has a nice way to adjust the settings, every setting is described by a few paragraphs, it is structured in a tree and actually understandable. And you even can enumerate them and know you have considered all of them, there is nothing playing hide and seek with you. Really crazy that this is built in into MS Windows. It's called Group Policy Editor. Not sure why not everyone is using that instead of the crappy slow Settings app.

[GuB-42]

Windows 8+ UI is just plain incompetence.

You may like or may not like the new settings panels, but making them incomplete and redirecting you to the old ones for the missing features is just wrong. Even worse, they have been gradually adding the missing features for more than 10 years, breaking all familiarity, and they still didn't manage to finish the job.

I don't know what happened internally but Microsoft went from being arguably the best in the world to something that is objectively terrible. You may not like liquid glass, but at least, there is intent behind it. With Microsoft today, it looks like a collection of internship projects.

[OldOneEye]

Hah! I've seen the same TCP/IP Advanced Networking config ugly panel since Windows 95, up to Windows 10. It makes me feel at home, but it confirms your assessment.

[close04]

> Some people are always upset with change

You defended "change" in general, not in this particular case. "Change could be good so this change must be good" is a weak argument that can be used to defend any change. This is a shallow dismissal of the complaints instead of a solid defense of the change.

The poor contrast of the UI strains the eyesight, all the transparency and glass effects are distracting and tiring, so are many of the animations which just introduce a delay for no reason, and so on. I unlock my phone and the top row of icons is "thrown" on the screen with a big delay and a very ample motion to the point it was disturbing.

These aren't useful changes, they cause a loss of practical value to many users even if they bring esthetic value to others. The changes most brought up in complaints are objectively worse that what we had before. It's form over function and tells the world the designers had no ideas how to practically improve the UI so they added visual bells and whistles, flashes and sparkles.

[irjustin]

> Isn't this the case for all UI redesigns? When youtube changed to their current design there were posts about browser extensions to restore the old interface.

Yes but UI redesigns usually involve UX redesign as well. It's not just visual so you actually gain something from it (even if at first it feels like a regression).

But liquid glass helps me do what... see my background?....!?

[fodkodrasz]

It helps Apple sell bigger phones: even wider margins and less readable text (it was already borderline unreadable because we had to showcase Retina hyper-resolution, now we can even do that without contrast!) When you buy a 10" phone maybe you'll be able to read an iMessage...

Seriously unsure who thought it might be a good idea and why. Possibly just a diversion from the AI development falling behind schedule and competitors. I really cannot imagine a user cohort falling for this gimmich in large enough percentage to push this, I'd rather think no serious UX A/B testing was done.

Modern design is already pretty bad and usability and readability being almost ignored aspects, but this is the most arrogant step I met recently, despite the ambitious attempt by Posthog website redesign to be the champion in user-hostile UX category.

[stephen_g]

True, and it's the same with any big redesign that it should tend to be the worst it will ever be at the start and then be gradually refined. I expect it will end up quite good by the time they want to start over again in 10 or so years, and people will complain about losing it and how bad the new interface is! At least there are a few good years in the middle to end of each cycle!

[marginalia_nu]

I'm not an apple user, have used neither the old or new design, and if I had to choose, I'd pick the old one any day of the week. Liquid Glass very much feels like Apple's Boeing 737 MAX moment.

The Liquid Glass design has awful contrast, and seems really amateurish with how stuff on the screen overlaps. Looks like the stuff you'd see in KDE 10-15 years ago[1], back when compositing window managers were kinda hot and new.

[1] This is from 2012, and arguably deals with the transparency-induced readability issues better than Liquid Glass seems to: https://imgur.com/a/x1LmBAQ

[IAmGraydon]

No. This isn’t about preference for certain aesthetics. The new glass UI elements are objectively worse for readability.

[the_other]

> Isn't this the case for all UI redesigns?

This one is particularly bad because it's shit. It makes the device harder to use for most users. It introduces a load of utterly pointless, and/or confusing, patterns/motifs... like:

- why do some navigation buttons hover about 3 meters above the panel they control (the enormous drop shadow around back/next/close buttons)

- why is the settings sidebar floating above the settings panel content, such that only the image carousels but not the text slide under it?

- why are the rounded corners of panels and windows so round that about 40px of every window's height and width becomes unusable?

- why do I have to see my wallpaper, blurry, under every fucking control, icon, component, list and panel? It started with Lion where the wallpaper would bleed through the sidebars of windows, even when they had other windows beneath them

Someone at Apple decided the "desktop" paradigm that made their computers usable has become redundant, but they're taking it apart in tiny steps, drawn out over years and multiple releases. The desktop paradigm was really good: you could have multiple apps open side by side and drag & drop content between them, just like you could if you were assembling physical things on a physical desktop. With Liquid Glass, you wouldn't imagine that was possible, because parts of the apps hover 3m off the surface, making it visually unsettling to navigate your windows. And your windows are made of various grades of glass which is brittle, and smooth, and you can't stick anything to it. Glass isn't a work surface unless you're doing stained glass windows. To do work, you need the confidence the surface will hold up beneath your actions, and a little bit of friction so your materials and targets don't slide all over the place. Why on earth are Apple creating the illusion of an unworkable work surface?

I'm convinced they're trying to deprecate the menu bar entirely by making it less and less usable (thinner text, transparency), but they're not willing to move it to the tops of windows like on Windows. Are they hoping we'll all give up using (because they've made it shit) it so they can just let it go? (like iOS?).

[Telaneo]

Change for the sake of change is not a good thing.

I'm still mad at Youtube for their redesigns, to the point that I moved over to Freetube, since I found normal Youtube that hostile of an experience.

[marginalia_nu]

Yeah I stopped using Spotify because of their constant UI churn. This was around back when they subtly changed the hue of the Spotify logo for no clear reason.

Went to Youtube Music instead, which doesn't seem to ever get updates and likely has been relegated to Google's project limbo.

It's fantastic. It's arguably a worse service, but I'll take that over the frustration of having to figure out yet another new and improved music listening experience every other time I open the Spotify app.

Ultimately, good design stays out of the way. Design changes is design getting in your face, ... which is the diametric opposite of staying out of the way.

[coffeefirst]

Sort of. The difference is this one has real, objective UX issues with hit areas, inconsistent icon use, making every website with position fixed elements broken, and constantly drawing attention to itself.

All of these are fixable without backing away from the big idea. But it’s pretty rough so far.

[floundy]

I thought the hit area issues was just a Safari thing after moving over from Android to the iPhone 17 Pro. Idk how it’s selecting things so far from my finger and the actual links I’m clicking on. Interesting you’re saying it wasn’t an issue until iOS 26?

[globular-toast]

Yes, but that doesn't contradict the comment about innovation at Apple. They are now at a similar stage to Osprey backpacks. They release a new look every year but with all the same features and functionality that we had a decade ago.

[vosper]

Who are today’s innovators in the backpack space?

[perryprog]

For what it’s worth, I’m definitely leaning “Apple fanboy” and have been amenable to their past UI redesigns. This is the first that I truly think is a regression, and I immediately turned on Reduce Transparency after updating.

[Daedren]

Developers have 1 year to apply the new design change, they're forcing it afterwards. It's not really by choice.

[3D30497420]

Can you share more about this?

I've only just started developing in SwiftUI, but I do know that some of these changes are automatic based on the components you use not necessarily a specific choice by the app developer. I started developing my app with the prior iOS version, but using standard components. After updating to iOS 26, the glass-effects were automatically added.

[Daedren]

There is a property you can add to your Info.plist called UIDesignRequiresCompatibility.

If you set it to yes, you'll retain the pre-26 design. Apple said they'll only keep this working for a year.

[itopaloglu83]

There are a lot of Apple employees here that are going to downvote this but I cannot turn a blind eye to this abomination.

I’ve been an early adapter since my first iPhone in 2009. But the new UI is plain ugly, lacking general accessibility, and full of bugs to the point that it’s just user hostile at this point.

They broke almost all of their design guidelines and make everything useless bubbles, I just cannot believe that Apple released this ugly thing to billions of devices.

[busymom0]

A lot of these UI bugs are also of the kind where once I notice them, I can no longer un-notice them. The border around the Home Screen icons being one. When you swipe up from bottom to go back to Home Screen, the app icon doesn't initially have border while the animation is ongoing. Once the animation finishes, the border suddenly shows up. Once I noticed this, it's been annoying me everytime I swipe to go back.

I thought the latest dev beta of iOS would fix this but it's still here.

[itopaloglu83]

Exactly. It’s especially bothering because the previous version had a lot of thought put into it, macOS specifically would allow you to drag a file onto terminal to get its path etc. such small but incredibly powerful things all around. It’s the thought behind the design and its consistency that matters.

Instead now we have a phone operating system UI posing as macOS. There’s no proper text alignment, padding, or good margins. It’s just not elegant at all, it feels like a knockoff.

The other day, the keyboard stopped showing up in Safari, I was getting an empty keyboard tray when I click into a text input. How in the frozen hell are they able to achieve this level of incompetence. What’s the goal of this, just extract money from people and enshitify everything. I’m just so tied of macOS at this point that I started enjoying my work computer which is Windows 11.

[sys_64738]

It's trash and is what happens on a yearly release cadence when you need to have a driver for the release. Sometimes you need to do something. Anything. That's why they have this monstrosity of a UI. Total garbage.

[Lio]

> Can't wait for them to release iOS 27 and announce they've made a useable UI again. "Hey friends, those accessibility settings you've used for a year? You don't need them anymore. Apple is where innovation happens!!"

I'd actually be impressed if they were that responsive. Fixing a problem is the second best thing after not creating it in the first place.

Doubling down and not acknowledging a poor choice would be so much worse.

[xattt]

“We’ve heard a lot of feedback about the incredible design changes we made in iOS 27. In order to meet the challenges set out by our users, we invented a new type of glass that is both transparent and opaque… at the same time! Physically impossible, you say? Not at Apple.”

[al_borland]

There is switchable glass that can change between transparent and opaque. It’s used for some car sunroofs and various other applications. While it’s not “at the same time”, as a theme idea for the OS that has analogs in the physical world, it could be done.

[brewdad]

I've seen this used for the restroom doors at trendy bars. The glass is clear until you lock the door. It then turns opaque while you do your business.

Apparently, solid doors made of steel or wood are too last century.

[msephton]

Hotel showers too. When they are transparent they make the room feel bigger.

[xattt]

The next UI direction for iOS should be coloured or textured glass (with bubbles or glass block refraction) with dark mode options that mimic uranium- or cerium-doped glass.

[what]

I would pay for windows that can do so that so I don’t need curtains.

[al_borland]

It looks like there are adhesive films to add the feature to existing windows, if you don’t want to go all-in on entire windows (which is also an option).