i've kinda had this thought before but never could express it ("you only need up to a certain level of smartness to express most coding concepts correctly")
but it never occurred to me that, if true, of course the harness becomes increasingly more important. which feels absolutely correct of course.
i hope you're wrong. they certainly have seemed to test the waters on many other fronts. the $99/yr notarization fee is now basically required as running unnotarized apps is made hard and scary enough to turn off probably 97% of average users
they also briefly took away the ability to disable gatekeeper per terminal command (now back)
next they wanna launch a touchscreen macbook, presumably this fall
I hope they don’t ever do a touchscreen MacBook. They already have every angle of that use case covered far better than the competition; either you get an iPad if you absolutely need to be pawing at a screen, or you have the excellent trackpads that are far and away par excellence. I don’t see how a touch screen on top of also the industry standard for screen quality will in any way improve by having greasy finger trails distorting the tiny pixels.
Maybe I’m missing something. How would a touchscreen MacBook improve on something?
That being said, based on what I’ve been seeing at Apple, I would not be surprised if they did go down that mediocrity route.
> How would a touchscreen MacBook improve on something?
It won’t, but there’s now an entire generation of users who get confused and angry if any kind of display doesn’t react when you poke it with your finger.
im not a UX expert by any means but my first impression at WWDC seeing liquid glass was "holy shit, they pulled that off? i know apple would never compromise on legibility, so... how? there are so many situations where this won't work, and they can't exactly control the content that the buttons are overlaid on top of"
cue my confusion when it was exactly that: an obviously problematic idea implemented with all the obvious flaws showing up
they have largely fixed it now, half a year later, but the liquid glass isn't very liquid anymore. it's frosted. which is fine, but obviously not the original idea they were going for
contrasty backgrounds are fundamentally incompatible with legibility
>im not a UX expert by any means but my first impression at WWDC seeing liquid glass was "holy shit, they pulled that off? i know apple would never compromise on legibility, so... how? there are so many situations where this won't work, and they can't exactly control the content that the buttons are overlaid on top of"
That's what I mean, even if worded badly. Someone probably managed the glass distortion effects as an experiment, or demoed a transparent redesign of a small portion of the UI, and it looked awesome. I think it's cool that they can green light weird ideas, otherwise there's stagnation. But it is obvious that there were fundamental unresolved issues, and yet something in the process pushed the idea forward anyway.
It signals something very wrong in company structure. If you can't trust the process to drop what doesn't work, then trying new things is risky. And as you say, it's an experiment that feels so unlike apple, to disregard polish and accessibility that way.
... liquid glass isn't very liquid anymore. it's frosted.
is an important point. Liquid Glass does not come across as "a bold design idea which is slightly flawed" but rather something which failed so bad when they tried it that they dialed the intensity back to the point where it doesn't make a statement anymore. So it looks like they hired an intern to randomly add anti-antialiasing here and there for no good reason.
If they had simply put the clear glass on top of a heavily frosted shelf, maintaining a clear divide between content and control and making sure the clear glass was never directly on content, we would be discussing the ways to improve the design instead of everybody's dismissal of the whole thing.
they are doing exactly that now, but at some point, there's no discernible difference between a gaussian blur and a complex shader like liquid glass.
taken to an extreme, the heaviest possible blur results in just one solid color (at which point there is no visible difference between a gaussian blur and LG at all).
so the more blurry the shelf is, the less important liquid glass gets. therein lies the dilemma: you can't have interesting, complex backgrounds AND legibility. it's either one or the other.
the current design is good. or becoming good, finally. but it's also not worth the, what, 2 hour reduction in battery usage, the lags and visual glitches, the major changes many apps see themselves forced to undergo, ... because it looks almost like a gaussian blur now.
I think a primary concern when Apple evolves their new design language nowadays is competitive differentiation. Because so many people try to clone their UI, they seek to add visual elements like frosting, glass, squircles, etc. that are difficult or impossible to achieve in competing platforms. Gradually others catch up and they need to evolve it again. Liquid Glass seems like an aesthetic choice made purely for the technical difficulty of the simulated physics necessary to accurately recreate it.
Wouldn't that imply that design is solved (at least regarding visual elements discussed here)? Then why not move onto other things? Why self-sabotage their success?
A lot of bad, unwanted features get written purely because "developers need something to do" and the same thing happens on the design side. I spent over a decade as a developer at various companies fighting bored designers who just had to redesign the look and feel of the app over and over because the current one was "stale" and "lacked pizzazz and pop!" But, then we devs would do the same thing to the feature list, refactoring and reimplementing and adding features for the sake of writing software, so... I was a hypocrite to complain.
If AR/VR took off then something along the lines of liquid glass would be the only option for the entire design space. Early on there's going to be a lot of embedding of app context into the AR/VR setting to get a jump-start on content. But if people are going to be walking around with rectangular panes around their head, it's better that part of the app chrome is transparent.
Is this compromising readability? Yes, but now there's another kind of perception problem, and it's whether you can see what's literally in front of your eyes in physical space.
The AR push is also an issue in itself. There are very fundamental issues that remain unresolved, and I would say untackled even.
VR setups make you isolated and vulnerable. Any VR device is really awkward to use in public (read: in your living room or in an office).
In turn, AR setups that let the world through reduce image quality by virtue of being transparent, and it is unclear that they provide advantages. You get a slightly more immediate access to notifications in return for permanently pointing a camera towards anything you look at, which is understandably not well received.
And that's just for content consumption. When you introduce work, input is still significantly worse unless you're sitting in front of a keyboard and mouse, in which case you might as well have a full laptop.
Kinda-not-really? Wayland has wl_region objects and wl_surface_set_input_region but wl_region only has axis-aligned rectangles. you'd end up approximating the circle (or whatever shape) as a union of horizontal rect slices, rather than a pixmap. you can't just hand over a pixmap mask, you have to decompose the shape into rects yourself.
and you can bind everything to very specific shortcuts like "press and hold cmd, then scroll mouse wheel up"
Targeted towards music producers and AI (there's one collection of snippets that starts an MCP server and exposes some basic functionality) in the beginning.
> It has just merely moved from "almost, but not entirely useless" to "sometimes useful"
[citation needed]
:P
This thing has changed the way I work. I barely touch my editor to actually edit anymore, because speaking into the chat field what changes I want it to make is more efficient
The tooling does need to get better, yes, but anecdotally, I do a fundamentally different job (more thinking, less typing, less sifting through docs, less wiring up) than 3 months ago
So much of my career was spent on especially rummaging in docs and googling and wiring things up. I believe that's the same for most of us
what about children being fed unhealthy things? childhood obesity is dangerous and also affects their mental and physical health.
let's install cameras in all supermarkets that ensure parents cannot buy unhealthy things for their children.
of course, adults can continue to purchase anything they want for "themselves". but the facial scanning in supermarkets is imperative for child safety!
This is right on the money and really highlights how short-sighted these proposals are.
We're perfectly willing to destroy our privacy for things that don't matter, but then the stuff that does, we don't touch.
Realistically, seeing some boobies on instagram is NOTHING compared to childhood obesity. Nothing. We're talking lifetime of suffering and early death versus boobies.
They are initiated by the same people - the government - and pursue the same goal - mass surveillance. They should 100% be fought against and grouped together.
reply