Yea, the programmers aren’t to blame here. In fact some of the visual effects they have achieved are pretty cool. The designers are at fault because they prioritized visuals over usability. Literally nobody I know thinks “Liquid Glass” has been an improvement. The feedback is universally negative.
And it's the UX designer's job to specify the click target area based on best practices and usability testing with real users.
If this is the click target area specified by the designer (or it was simply unspecified) then it's absolutely the designer's fault. I'm a UX designer and I've made mistakes like this before, though this one is pretty egregious because the issue is core to the interaction.
It's sometimes easy as a UX designer to forget to specify some of the smaller details (though this example isn't what I'd call a "small detail"), particularly because they're the kinds of things you don't notice when they work, and I don't have to implement it. The developer has to sit down and write code for what will or will not happen.
I've made mistakes in the past where in an mobile interface I neglected to specify the click target area for some controls. Typically the minimum clickable area we'd use was something like 44x44 but the visual was smaller than that, and I didn't specify it, so the developer made the visible element the one that would respond to the click events. It was too small and it caused issues. I owned up to that one, I didn't want to let the developer take the blame for that.
I've also been fortunate enough to work with developers who would notice these things and then ask me if it was intended and whether they should increase the clickable area. I was always so grateful to have colleagues like that, and I'd always offer to set some time aside to come take a look at things on their local environment before they moved things forward just to catch any issues where they could immediately fix it instead of having to push fixes later on.
I don't know where the failure happened at Apple, but based on what I've seen from "Liquid Glass" it's clear there's some real institutional failures involving either the design leadership, the development leadership, or somewhere in between both. It's really quite embarrassing the quality of GUI and UX that has come out of Apple recently.
This is the first time ever where the hurdle of rolling back my iPhone to an earlier version of iOS feels worth the effort. I disabled as much of the liquid glass effects as I could because I found it difficult to read and now it all looks like shit, whereas before I could read it and it looked nice.
In this specific case, yea, the programmers might be at fault, but most of my gripes with Liquid Glass are not like this. They are design issues. This seems like maybe more of a bug stemming from an underlying design issue (corner radius being ridiculously large).
Exactly. I don't know how about "big design houses" like Apple, but in my small shop designers _only_ care about static screen stories. They don't care how user will click those icons, how focus will work, how any dynamic aspects of complex UI works.
In past it was "given" by desktop env, now it's all rebuilt in material or other design but without any advanced behavior, it only "looks good on static screen".
At a place like Apple, I can bet that it's not like some contract engineering shop where a blob of programmers just sit there blindly implementing whatever is written by someone else in Jira tickets. The final product that ships in the OS is going to be the result of massive, often heated negotiation between HI and the engineering DRI. A huge change to the look and feel is unlikely to be implemented if there's strenuous objection from engineering leadership.
Yeah I don’t like the glass effect and I realised it’s because it creates movement and drags your attention to things that should be background items. On the phone, video controls and app folders are particularly egregious.
I'm fond of saying that most problems in the software world are due to one thing trying to do two things, or two things trying to do the same thing. In this case, it feels like the former: getting the same implementation to cater to both desktop and mobile is obviously the most efficient solution from a development perspective, but not an end user (and ultimately business) perspective.
Allegedly the next gen MBPs will have a touch screen. I think Apple have pushed a touch-enabled macOS UI out a year ahead of the hardware: maybe to iron out issues; maybe 'cos they could... I worry that we're stuck with this shit for a few more years, 'til the touch screen goes the way of the touch bar.
These rumors about touchscreen MacBooks have been going around for at least 10 years. At this point I don't believe any of it. Especially with how they sell keyboards for iPads.
I’d tweak it to say that a foolish consistency is the absolute worst design principle. All things being equal, consistency is a good thing, but it sometimes gets prioritized to the point of absurdity and becomes counterproductive.
I think the core issue here is that consistency bounds are arbitrary and some people tend to push to much on these. Finding the middle is hard and is political. Arguing with UX or QA whether previously unrelated features on different screens should behave the same is exhausting. That's why I prefer small projects where I am the only customer or all users are extremely aligned (internal developer tooling).
It definitely isn’t. It’s good in many contexts, but zealous adherence to some pithy design principle without consideration is bad engineering and bad design.
yeah, but somehow consistency was not a concern when picking icons for menu items. as pointed out by some previous discussions on this matter.
i also hate this "consistency" idea. was working on mobile app for android/ios. and a requirement was for apps to look identical on both platforms. whyyyyy. sure for designer it looks nice, but as a user who uses either ios OR android im used to conventions of particular platform. why throw that all away just to look identical an both platforms.
I’ll add a third perspective that’s probably often gone unsaid: I love it on Apple TV, and kinda like it on iPhone and Mac. It definitely needs to be improved though. There are definitely a whole bunch of usability issues, but they shouldn’t be too hard to fix. And Apple has shown willingness to iterate until they get it right. Unlike Microsoft which just moves onto the next thing (the system settings UI design in Windows 11 is fine.. but can they pleeeease just integrate all settings into that UI now.. how many generations of settings / control panes are there in Windows now?)
The huge corner radius is one thing I do wish they reverted in Mac OS.
I love it both on an iPhone and a Mac. It runs great and it looks great. It’s a mistake to look at what people say on the internet. They are usually hopelessly contrarian.
