71–80 of 88 posts
The color change doesn't bother me nearly as much as the change in proportions. Insetting the face on the right and removing its curvature makes the smile look super weird and less "human" to me. I'm sure I'll get used to it, but it feels a little off.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe it's a subtle way to punish non-native apps that recreate UI elements, but do not use SwiftUI. The user gets used to the native way of UI elements and everything else will look odd after a while, forcing developers to ditch everything that isn't truly native.
I think this point was subtly mentioned on the WWDC State of the Union, around the 40:54 mark. https://developer.apple.com/videos/play/wwdc2025/102
> When you use Apple's native frameworks, you can write better apps with less code. Some other frameworks promise the ability to write code once for Android and iOS. And that may sound good, but by the time you've written custom code to adapt each platform's conventions, connected to hardware with platform-specific APIs, implemented accessibility, and then filled in functionality gaps by adding additional logic and relying on a host of plugins, you've likely written a lot more code than you'd planned on. And you are still left with an app that could be slower, look out of place, and can't directly take advantage of features like Live Activities and widgets. Apple's native frameworks are uncompromisingly focused on helping you build the best apps.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sorry to burst your bubble but users literally do not care "how native it looks" other than the vocal minority online. Never ever heard any non-technical user complain that Spotify does not fit in.
… but people _do_ care about consistency. They're willing to accept a certain amount of "specialization" for things they care about deeply / use all the time / demand unique approaches, but people like things to look and behave the same when they're pure utility. Which most things are. People don't complain about Spotify, because (1) the design feels and performs like something Apple would design, and (2) music is so…
But Apple doesnt? Why else would they throw away their current design language, and invent something new ("Liquid Glass").
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Alfred will show you the full path of the search results https://www.alfredapp.com/
how would one compare alfred and raycast? I've never owned a mac before, just got one a month ago.
Since it was release I've seen people frequently complaining about Raycast's memory consumption.
There's a lot of overlap in terms of features.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sorry to burst your bubble but users literally do not care "how native it looks" other than the vocal minority online. Never ever heard any non-technical user complain that Spotify does not fit in.
… but people _do_ care about consistency. They're willing to accept a certain amount of "specialization" for things they care about deeply / use all the time / demand unique approaches, but people like things to look and behave the same when they're pure utility. Which most things are. People don't complain about Spotify, because (1) the design feels and performs like something Apple would design, and (2) music is so…
Take Slack for example with its fancy menus, not even close to what Apple uses. No feelings expected there. Let's not talk about Google apps, which live in its own UI world.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
… but people _do_ care about consistency. They're willing to accept a certain amount of "specialization" for things they care about deeply / use all the time / demand unique approaches, but people like things to look and behave the same when they're pure utility. Which most things are. People don't complain about Spotify, because (1) the design feels and performs like something Apple would design, and (2) music is so…
Hard disagree. If people cared, then all iOS apps would use standard styling, but the matter of fact is that every app has its own style, which does not stop at colors. They all share the same affordances (top left arrow to go back, bottom tab bar) but the UI is more often than not heavily customized. Take Slack for example with its fancy menus, not even close to what Apple uses. No feelings expected there. Let's not…
This assumes they have a choice between equivalent apps that OS-integrated and one that are not. Many times, they don't.
Anecdotally: while some people don't care about consistency in the art they put on their walls, most do.
Slack is included in the "apps that you use all the time" rule. Also in the "apps you don't have a choice about" rule.
(Edit for spelling and wording)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
… but people _do_ care about consistency. They're willing to accept a certain amount of "specialization" for things they care about deeply / use all the time / demand unique approaches, but people like things to look and behave the same when they're pure utility. Which most things are. People don't complain about Spotify, because (1) the design feels and performs like something Apple would design, and (2) music is so…
> but people _do_ care about consistency. But Apple doesnt? Why else would they throw away their current design language, and invent something new ("Liquid Glass").
They're rolling it out across their entire product catalog, so more consistency if anything.
I wish it would break history and let Spotlight and show me the path for the file it has found. Is it 2023/accounts.xlsx or 2024/accounts.xlsx or 2025/accounts.xlsx? Who knows!
I wish it would break history and let Spotlight and show me the path for the file it has found. Is it 2023/accounts.xlsx or 2024/accounts.xlsx or 2025/accounts.xlsx? Who knows!
I'm on the Tahoe beta and holding command with an item selected in spotlight shows the path.