Liquid Glass’s Tiresome Sameness: Designing for a World That Doesn’t Exist
Design is more than aesthetics—it shapes how we live, work, communicate, and even perceive ourselves. With its recent launch of the Liquid Glass interface, Apple has once again attempted to reimagine user experience across its platforms. Promoted as a sleek, modern, cross-platform design language, Liquid Glass aims to blur the lines between devices with soft, translucent layers and fluid interactions. However, beneath this alluring appearance lies a deeper problem: uniformity at the cost of human experience.
Why does this matter? Because technology is not a blank canvas. It’s used by students in noisy classrooms, professionals in brightly lit offices, parents managing schedules, and elderly users navigating devices for the first time. A uniform design may look elegant on stage but falter in real life where diversity of need, context, and ability define how we engage with technology.
Apple’s vision for Liquid Glass seems to exist in a world where everyone has perfect eyesight, consistent environments, and the same preferences. In contrast, the real world is messy, complex, and deeply personal. By prioritizing aesthetic cohesion over adaptability, Apple risks alienating those who need their devices most—and missing the opportunity to design for inclusion rather than conformity.
This article explores the impact of Liquid Glass’s sameness, its implications for usability and accessibility, and how design choices that seem subtle on the surface can profoundly affect real users. More importantly, it proposes pathways toward a human-centered design that embraces diversity rather than flattening it.
The Origins of Liquid Glass: Uniformity as Innovation
Liquid Glass is Apple’s attempt to create a seamless, fluid experience across its entire ecosystem—from iPhones and iPads to desktops, watches, and beyond. By layering translucent surfaces, soft gradients, and subtle animations, the design intends to evoke depth without clutter, motion without distraction, and simplicity without overwhelming detail.
At its core, the system is rooted in consistency. Every button, window, or menu looks and behaves similarly across devices. Transitions feel smooth, and visual feedback is gentle. In an era where interfaces are saturated with bold colors, sharp contrasts, and fragmented designs, Apple’s approach stands out for its restraint.
The company’s ambition is clear: reduce the cognitive load on users by offering a predictable, refined interface. New users shouldn’t have to relearn interactions when switching from one device to another, and developers can maintain design consistency across apps without reinventing interface elements.
On paper, it’s a noble goal. But consistency can quickly tip into uniformity, and uniformity can erase meaningful distinctions that make technology accessible, personalized, and adaptable.
Why Uniformity Feels Alien in the Real World
Accessibility vs. Aesthetic Appeal
Designers often walk a fine line between beauty and usability. Liquid Glass leans heavily toward beauty—transparency, smooth shadows, and elegant gradients dominate interactions—but this approach can introduce barriers.
Consider users with impaired vision. Low contrast between text and background, while visually appealing, can make interfaces unreadable. Similarly, subtle animations designed to be calming can instead distract or disorient users with attention difficulties.
Uniform designs also assume that users interact with technology in ideal conditions: soft lighting, steady hands, and minimal distractions. In reality, devices are used outdoors under harsh sunlight, on uneven surfaces, and in environments filled with noise, interruptions, and multitasking.
By prioritizing aesthetic continuity, Apple inadvertently sidelines these realities.
Cognitive Load and Customization
For users managing multiple devices across different environments, the ability to tailor settings is crucial. Someone may need high contrast in one setting, larger fonts in another, or simplified layouts during multitasking.
A uniform interface assumes that one size fits all. Without customization options, users are forced to adapt to the design rather than adjust the design to fit their needs. This inversion of control can lead to frustration and disengagement.
Cultural and Social Diversity
Uniformity overlooks the fact that users come from different cultural, linguistic, and cognitive backgrounds. Interface designs must respect reading habits, motion preferences, color perception, and interaction styles that differ widely around the world.
A globally consistent interface may streamline branding, but it risks alienating users who rely on localized adaptations to make devices feel familiar and approachable.
Real-World Struggles with Uniform Design
Emma, the Retiree Learning Technology
Emma, 68, recently purchased an iPad to keep in touch with family and access health resources. The sleek interface of Liquid Glass impressed her at first, but she quickly struggled with navigation. The soft colors and minimal contrast made icons difficult to distinguish, especially under afternoon sunlight.
Without accessible settings to enhance contrast or enlarge text, Emma found herself guessing where to tap, often triggering unintended actions. Her experience demonstrates how aesthetic refinement can inadvertently create barriers for older users.
Raj, the Urban Student
Raj, a university student, uses multiple devices throughout his day—phone, tablet, and laptop. The consistent interface design seemed convenient initially, but his experience deteriorated when trying to multitask in noisy, fast-paced environments.
The uniform interface made it harder to differentiate apps at a glance, forcing Raj to slow down and reorient himself repeatedly. He craved customization options that would allow him to assign unique colors or adjust layouts based on context—but the system’s uniformity left him confined.
Lina, the Accessibility Advocate
Lina, a technology accessibility consultant, has worked with clients who rely on screen readers and high-contrast themes. The Liquid Glass aesthetic, while beautiful, posed significant challenges when adapting assistive tools.
The minimalistic design required workarounds, as critical interface elements lacked visual distinction. In discussions with developers, Lina emphasized that inclusive design must begin at the conceptual phase—not as an afterthought patched in later.
The Psychological Impact of Design Choices
Design is not merely about appearance—it shapes emotional responses. Interfaces that are too uniform can feel sterile and impersonal, leading users to disengage or view technology as less approachable.
A lack of personalization also reduces users’ sense of ownership over their devices. Customization empowers users, allowing them to craft interfaces that feel like extensions of their identity, rather than rigid structures imposed upon them.
This has profound implications for mental health and wellbeing. Devices that are difficult to use or visually taxing can lead to increased stress, anxiety, and avoidance behaviors. By contrast, interfaces that support individual preferences foster confidence, autonomy, and a sense of control.
The Road Ahead: Toward Inclusive, Adaptive Design
To address the shortcomings of Liquid Glass, designers and developers must embrace principles that extend beyond surface aesthetics.
Build for Diversity
Understanding that users come from varied environments, abilities, and cultural contexts is essential. Inclusive design should not be an afterthought but a guiding principle embedded in every stage of development.
Prioritize Accessibility Settings
Providing adjustable contrast, text sizes, animation controls, and layout options empowers users to tailor their experience. These features not only enhance usability but also signal respect for users’ diverse needs.
Design with Empathy
Incorporating real-world feedback through interviews, usability studies, and accessibility audits ensures that interfaces reflect the lived experiences of users. Empathy-driven design encourages thoughtful compromises that balance aesthetics with functionality.
Encourage Personalization
Allowing users to select themes, customize colors, and organize content based on personal preferences creates interfaces that feel intuitive and supportive. Personalization transforms technology from a tool into a partner.
Create Feedback Loops
Design systems should evolve with their users. Implementing channels for feedback and iterative improvements ensures that design decisions remain aligned with user needs rather than marketing ambitions.
Liquid Glass is a striking example of how technology companies can mistake visual elegance for universal usability. While Apple’s ambition to create a seamless, aesthetically pleasing interface is commendable, its uniformity overlooks the complexities of human interaction.
Technology is not a monolith—it’s shaped by individual needs, cultural diversity, cognitive differences, and environmental factors. Design choices that fail to account for this reality risk alienating users, reducing accessibility, and diminishing the human experience.
The future of interface design lies in embracing diversity rather than flattening it. By prioritizing personalization, accessibility, and empathy, companies like Apple can create interfaces that empower users, support inclusion, and enhance wellbeing.
As technology continues to evolve, let’s advocate for designs that are as varied and vibrant as the people who use them. Because in the end, the best interfaces are those that adapt to us—not the other way around.
FAQs
-
What is Liquid Glass?
Liquid Glass is Apple’s new design language, using translucency and fluid animations to create a uniform interface across devices. -
Why is uniformity problematic?
Uniform designs can overlook individual preferences, environmental factors, and accessibility needs, leading to usability challenges. -
Who is affected by these design choices?
Older adults, users with visual or cognitive impairments, and those navigating devices in diverse environments may face barriers with uniform designs. -
Can interfaces be both elegant and accessible?
Yes. By incorporating adjustable settings, personalization, and accessibility options, designers can balance aesthetics with functionality. -
How can companies create better designs?
Inclusive design practices, user feedback loops, empathy-driven research, and flexible customization features are essential for building adaptive interfaces.
Join the conversation about technology, design, and inclusion. Subscribe to our newsletter for expert insights, real-world case studies, and actionable tips on creating user-centered interfaces.
