3 ms·

I don't think anyone is alleging they went to the UX designers and told them they needed some form of distraction. What is plausible is that the UX designers w

I don't think anyone is alleging they went to the UX designers and told them they needed some form of distraction. What is plausible is that the UX designers were working on one or more possibilities for a major redesign and apple executives decided to push one out even though it might not have been good enough/ready because they needed something splashy in the absence of their promised AI features.

leakycap 1y ago
> they needed something splashy in the absence of their promised AI features Yes - they showed their hand when Apple execs declined to appear at the annualThe Talk Show Live shortly after the host of the show publicly questioned the Apple about the failure to deliver on Apple Intelligence. They clearly did not want anyone talking to them about that, and the myriad of friendly interviews they did post with other tech folks danced beautifully around the lack of anything in Apple's AI offering.
nradov 1y ago
Most UI designers will churn for the sake of churn, no ulterior motive needed.
brookst 1y ago
It would still be a year or more before launch. They had to have the toolkit ready for internal apps way back when. And any time you make a massive change in design system, you’re faced with a choice of maintaining two systems (which sucks) or ripping the bandaid off and shipping when the new one is not completely ready (which sucks) The distraction thing is just a totally unnecessary conspiracy theory. It’s sufficient to observe that LG just doesn’t seem ready.
- arecsu 1y ago
  The whole system and apps are half-baked overall, filled with bugs, and obvious UI/UX mistakes. I do believe [speculation warning] there's plausibility in the idea it has been pushed by C suite, even against the advice from designers and engineers at Apple. It is inconceivable to me as a designer myself that they let so many amateurish readability and usability flaws, all over the place across the entire system. I experimented with SwiftUI recently to get my hands in the Liquid Glass system itself, just by curiosity. Customization of the amount of blurriness is non existent at all, it is very hard to control aspects of it, super opinionated, bugs that had to be overcome with workarounds which didn't happen with previous versions of the toolkit. To add fuel to the fire... nobody is talking about "the lack of AI" in latest macOS & iOS, and everybody seems to focus on the, overall, bad experience of Liquid Glass. So... if the strategy of serving as a distraction was true, it... worked? Not that I wanted "AI" personally (rather, I would love if they let people install any apps they want in their own phones they purchased with their own money...) but I can understand they having some pressure from certain segments of society and/or investors to have something, given the current state of affairs.

leakycap 1y ago

> they needed something splashy in the absence of their promised AI features Yes - they showed their hand when Apple execs declined to appear at the annualThe Talk Show Live shortly after the host of the show publicly questioned the Apple about the failure to deliver on Apple Intelligence. They clearly did not want anyone talking to them about that, and the myriad of friendly interviews they did post with other tech folks danced beautifully around the lack of anything in Apple's AI offering.

nradov 1y ago

Most UI designers will churn for the sake of churn, no ulterior motive needed.

brookst 1y ago

It would still be a year or more before launch. They had to have the toolkit ready for internal apps way back when. And any time you make a massive change in design system, you’re faced with a choice of maintaining two systems (which sucks) or ripping the bandaid off and shipping when the new one is not completely ready (which sucks) The distraction thing is just a totally unnecessary conspiracy theory. It’s sufficient to observe that LG just doesn’t seem ready.

arecsu 1y ago
The whole system and apps are half-baked overall, filled with bugs, and obvious UI/UX mistakes. I do believe [speculation warning] there's plausibility in the idea it has been pushed by C suite, even against the advice from designers and engineers at Apple. It is inconceivable to me as a designer myself that they let so many amateurish readability and usability flaws, all over the place across the entire system. I experimented with SwiftUI recently to get my hands in the Liquid Glass system itself, just by curiosity. Customization of the amount of blurriness is non existent at all, it is very hard to control aspects of it, super opinionated, bugs that had to be overcome with workarounds which didn't happen with previous versions of the toolkit. To add fuel to the fire... nobody is talking about "the lack of AI" in latest macOS & iOS, and everybody seems to focus on the, overall, bad experience of Liquid Glass. So... if the strategy of serving as a distraction was true, it... worked? Not that I wanted "AI" personally (rather, I would love if they let people install any apps they want in their own phones they purchased with their own money...) but I can understand they having some pressure from certain segments of society and/or investors to have something, given the current state of affairs.