Raluca Budiu (Hacker News):

One of the oldest findings in usability is that anything placed on top of something else becomes harder to see. Yet here we are, in 2025, with Apple proudly obscuring text, icons, and controls by making them transparent and placing them on top of busy backgrounds.

[…]

And then comes Apple’s boldest (or dumbest) experiment: text on top of text.

[…]

In iOS 26, controls insist on animating themselves, whether or not the user benefits. Carousel dots quietly morph into the word Search after a few seconds. Camera buttons jerk slightly when tapped. Tab bars bubble and wiggle when switching views, and buttons briefly pulsate before being replaced with something else entirely. It’s like the interface is shouting “look at me” when it should quietly step aside and let the real star — the content — take the spotlight.

[…]

Apple has also decided it’s time to crowd and shrink touch targets. The long‑standing guideline of at least 0.4cm between targets (and 1cm × 1cm tap areas) seems to have been tossed out the window. Either Apple believes our fingers are getting smaller, or it assumes years of practice with smartphones have magically trained us to hit tiny targets with perfect precision.

[…]

This signals another transition (this time for the worse) to Android-style design, where page titles are left-aligned (instead of center-aligned), thus displacing the breadcrumb next to the back button.

Nick Heer:

However, I found the argument against the more prominent Search button in many apps unconvincing[…]

Me, too. I don’t like that it floats on top of content, but I think people did have trouble discovering it when you had to swipe down. Maybe the placement at the bottom also makes it easier to tap.

What is disappointing is that the hidden search field still exists in a handful of places. Most notably, Music on iOS 26 still has two different kinds of Search: the one you can get to by tapping on the button in the bottom-right, and the locally-scoped one you will find at the top of views like Playlists.

Previously:

• On Liquid Glass
• How to Turn Liquid Glass Into a Solid Interface
• Shipping Liquid Glass
• Assorted Notes on Liquid Glass

Whether you love it or hate it, there is no shortage of opinion on Liquid Glass. I have thoughts about what it is, but today I want to focus on why it exists.

Apple’s public rationale for the new design language is that it offers a universal solution across platforms that takes advantage of recent hardware advances. Its touted benefits are a more lively experience that puts a greater focus on content.

The transition from iOS 6 to 7 was used as an example of how Apple has been successful with visual refreshes. But I don’t think that applies in this case.

In late 2012 and early 2013, there was a movement outside of Apple to simplify user interfaces: the highly textured designs introduced with the first iPhone had run their course. You can see this in our own work with Twitterrific 5 and other apps like Vesper. The launch of iOS 7 in 2013 was startling to some designers and developers, but not everyone. There was clearly a need, and the app ecosystem has benefitted from this change for over a decade.

I’m unaware of anyone outside of Apple who’s thinking “we really need to have more fluid glass in our designs”. Of particular note during the introduction is how much time they spend showing off glass blocks and talking about the physical effect itself. While not addressing the most important question: “why do we need this?”

And I’m pretty sure the answer is “we don’t”. The answer is “Apple does.”

I’ve spent the last few months updating Tot for iOS 26 while watching Sean do the same thing with Tapestry. One thing that’s clear from this work is that you never want a control or container that touches the edge of the screen.

It’s like when safe area insets appeared in iOS 11: it wasn’t clear why you needed them until the iPhone X came along with a notch and a home indicator. And then it changed everything.

There has also been an emphasis on “concentricity”. It’s an impossible thing to achieve and an easy target for ridicule. But it’s another case where Apple wants to take control of the UI elements that intersect with the physical hardware.

All of this makes me think that Apple is close to introducing devices where the screen disappears seamlessly into the physical edge. Something where flexible OLED blurs the distinction between pixels and bezel. A new “wraparound” screen with safe area insets on the vertical edges of the device, just like we saw with the horizontal edges on iPhone X.

The user interface work of the past few months will all make a lot more sense, and developers who haven’t been paying attention will have their “holy shit” moment.

I can see this new physical design being very successful with touch-oriented devices: it will feel natural with a phone, tablet, or watch. Hardware and software becoming one in classic Apple fashion.

I’m having a much harder time seeing how Liquid Glass will benefit other platforms like the Mac or Apple TV (where Apple doesn’t even make the screen). Forcing tactility where it’s not needed or wanted feels like a misstep.

Other challenges, like infusing your own branding into an app with clear buttons will be easier to reason about once the reality of the hardware drops. Until then, stay away from the edges and wait for Apple to reveal the real reason for Liquid Glass.

Popular cartoon series South Park has been satirizing U.S. President Donald Trump, and the latest episode, titled "Sickofancy," includes Apple CEO Tim Cook.


A cartoon version of Cook is depicted visiting Trump in the White House to provide him with a gift, which is poking fun at the glass and gold Apple plaque that Cook presented to Trump earlier in August.

"Mr. President, your ideas for the tech industry are so innovative and you definitely do not have a small penis," said the fake Cook. "Please accept this gift on behalf of Apple."

Cartoon Trump proceeds to take Cook's gift into bed with him. "Another great day getting presents," said cartoon Trump while climbing into bed with Satan. "Look at what some dipshit tech CEO gave me," he adds, before suggesting the duo do something X-rated with Cook's gift. Cook was just one of several notable figures shown presenting Trump with high-value gifts in the South Park episode.


In real life, Cook gave Trump a glass plaque with an Apple logo engraved on it, which was manufactured by Apple supplier Corning in Kentucky. Beneath the glass plaque, there is a 24-karat pure gold base that Cook said was sourced from Utah.

Cook was at the White House to announce Apple's plans to invest an additional $100 billion in U.S. manufacturing over the next four years, bringing Apple's total investment to $600 billion.

Cook was derided on social media and in news articles for his bootlicking, but it has been successful for Apple. Apple continues to be largely exempt from the high tariffs that have been imposed on countries like China and India, and at the Cook and Trump White House event, Trump said that companies like Apple that are "investing" in the U.S. will not have to pay forthcoming semiconductor tariffs.
This article, "Apple CEO Tim Cook Featured in Latest South Park Episode" first appeared on MacRumors.com

Discuss this article in our forums

Dennis Schubert (2021, via Hacker News):

I have one of those laptops lacking a lot of accessory ports. In fact, I’m writing this on an Apple MacBook Pro, and all I got was four lousy USB-C ports. If I want to connect pretty much anything, I need some sort of adapter or some sort of hub. USB-C hubs are a great idea: not only do they usually offer a power supply pass-through, but they also allow you to plug in some USB devices, an ethernet cable, and maybe even a monitor. Some even have fancy stuff like an SD card reader or a secondary audio output! And all of that over a single USB-C connection, which makes everything super comfortable if you frequently carry your laptop around your home, but you also have a desk with fixed devices set up.

Unfortunately, since 2018, I’ve worked through three USB-C hubs, and they’re all kinda bad.

[…]

It honestly feels like no matter what you buy, you get more or less the same hardware, and you’re most likely getting a heavily overpriced product just because some company printed their logo on it.

[…]

The fact that most USB-C hubs tend to use the same RTL8153 networking stack is also very annoying, especially since this is known to break on macOS, and it looks like Realtek just doesn’t care. That’s not really great if you’re promoting your hub primarily to MacBook owners.

dazzaji:

One of the things that I found most frustrating about USB-C hubs is how hard it is to find one that actually gives you multiple USB-C ports. I have several USB-C devices but most hubs just give you one USB-C port and a bunch of USB-A ports. At most it’s 2 USB-C ports but only with the hub that plugs into both USB-C ports on my MacBook Pro (so I’m never able to get more ports than I started with). The result is I end up having to keep swapping devices. For a connector that was supposed to be the “one universal port,” it’s weird that most hubs assume you only need one USB-C connection. Has anyone found a decent hub with multiple USB-C data outputs?

I’m using an Anker hub with a bunch of USB-A ports, and it’s one of the more reliable ones I’ve owned—certainly better than the Studio Display—but I do have the sense that it’s slowing things down compared with when I connect drives directly to my MacBook Pro. I’m also using an Anker Thunderbolt dock, which is pretty good but doesn’t have enough ports. I still wish for more built into the Mac itself. (Recent MacBook Pros are down from 4 ports to 3.)

Previously:

• macOS Tahoe Drops FireWire Support
• MacBook Pro 2024
• Belkin Connect USB-C Hub
• QGeeM and Hyper Thunderbolt 4 Hubs
• USB-C Hubs Breaking Ethernet Networks
• OWC miniStack STX
• Thunderbolt 4 Docks
• USB-C Is Still a Mess
• The Impossible Dream of USB-C
• Arc Hub USB-C Adapter

Research firm LightShed partners says Apple should consider replacing Tim Cook as CEO, but the change is unlikely to occur any time soon.


In a note to clients seen by Bloomberg, analysts Walter Piecyk and Joe Galone say that "Apple now needs a product-focused CEO, not one centered on logistics."

Bloomberg notes that Apple shares have "badly lagged" behind rivals like Microsoft and Meta this year after losing ground in the race to deliver compelling artificial intelligence features. Apple shares have fallen 16% in 2025, compared with gains of 25% for Meta and 19% for Microsoft. The note added:

Missing on AI could fundamentally alter the company's long-term trajectory and ability to grow at all. AI will reshape industries across the global economy, and Apple risks becoming one of its casualties.

It is worth noting that this year's slump in Apple shares is a comparative blip in the company's long-term performance with Cook at the helm. Apple shares have gained over 1,400% since Cook started as CEO, compared to 430% for the S&P 500.

The comments come after Apple announced that Chief Operating Officer Jeff Williams will step down from his position this month. He will be replaced by Sabih Khan.

Williams was once thought to be Cook's most likely successor. Now, senior vice president of hardware engineering John Ternus is believed to be the frontrunner. LightShed says "‌Tim Cook‌ was the right CEO at the time of his appointment and unquestionably has done a great job," but in the wake of Williams' departure, "it's time for more disruptive change, not less."

However, Cook is unlikely to step down anytime soon. In his latest "Power On" newsletter, Bloomberg's Mark Gurman said that "there's no immediate successor ready to take the helm. There also haven't been signs internally that Cook is getting ready to leave or begin the process of grooming a replacement."

More significantly, "the board doesn't feel the need to make a change. Apple's directors are Cook loyalists like Arthur Levinson, Susan Wagner and Ronald Sugar." Gurman says:

There's no question Cook bears responsibility for Apple's current struggles. That includes the company's AI missteps, an aging product lineup, the erosion of its design-focused culture, a decade-long drought of breakthrough mainstream hardware, and its growing tensions with developers and regulators. But there's also no question that the board still sees him as the only person capable of turning things around.

Put simply: No crisis is big enough to shake the board's faith in Cook.

In fact, Cook's influence at Apple may grow. Gurman believes he could become Apple's chairman, in addition to his role as CEO:

Levinson, Apple's longtime chairman, has already surpassed the company's recommended board retirement age. So it wouldn't be surprising to see Cook eventually step into that role himself, as Iger, Dimon, Microsoft Corp.'s Satya Nadella and Cisco Systems Inc.'s Chuck Robbins have done at their companies. That would give Cook an even tighter grip on the iPhone maker.

Nevertheless, Apple apparently recognizes the need for change at the company. Senior executives such as services chief Eddy Cue have warned that Apple risks becoming the next BlackBerry or Nokia if it doesn't adapt quickly.


This article, "Apple CEO Tim Cook Should Be Replaced, Research Firm Says" first appeared on MacRumors.com

Discuss this article in our forums

Apple (MacRumors, 2, Hacker News):

Jeff Williams will transition his role as chief operating officer later this month to Sabih Khan, Apple’s senior vice president of Operations, as part of a long-planned succession. Williams will continue reporting to Apple CEO Tim Cook and overseeing Apple’s world-class design team and Apple Watch alongside the company’s Health initiatives. Apple’s design team will then transition to reporting directly to Cook after Williams retires late in the year.

Benjamin Mayo:

I like how the press release says this succession is long planned, and yet they aren’t ready to say who is taking over Apple Watch and Health initiatives.

Also, Cook (himself set to retire in the foreseeable future) has so many direct reports now lol.

John Gruber:

What’s intriguing about the announcement is the design part — a functional area where, especially on the software side, Apple’s current stature is subject to much debate. While Williams is staying on until “late in the year” to continue his other responsibilities — Watch, Health, and serving as the senior executive Apple’s design teams report to — Khan isn’t taking over those roles when Williams leaves. And so by the end of the year, Apple’s design teams will go from reporting to Williams to reporting directly to Tim Cook.

I’ve long found it curious, if not downright dubious, that Apple’s design leaders have reported to Williams ever since it was announced in 2019 (the very same day that Khan was promoted to SVP of operations) that Jony Ive would be stepping down as chief design officer and leaving Apple to found the (as-yet-unnamed) design firm LoveFrom. Williams had no background in design at all.

[…]

I’m of the mind that, in hindsight, it was a mistake for Jony Ive to bring HI (software human interface design) under the same roof as ID (hardware industrial design). That arrangement made sense for Ive’s unique role in the company, and the unique period in the wake of Steve Jobs’s too-young demise. But it might have ultimately made Ive more difficult to replace than Steve Jobs.

I don’t think it ever made sense because it doesn’t seem like Ive really understood software design. And Alan Dye’s background is in advertising and web/print design.

Jeff Johnson:

We’ve come to accept the myth that there’s such a thing as “design” in the abstract, as if some one person were qualified to design anything and everything. That’s ridiculous and nothing but a product of Jony Ive’s hubris.

Mark Gurman:

Apple didn’t announce what will happen to the Watch and Health teams but here’s the likely outcome: Apple never said this but Watch HW was already given to Ternus years ago. You can bet watchOS and health software will go to Federighi. Fitness+ will obviously go to Services.

M.G. Siegler:

Williams joined Apple in 1998 (from IBM), the year after Steve Jobs returned. The same year Cook joined (from Compaq, though he had also been at IBM for a dozen years before that).

Khan joined Apple in 1995, which was obviously before Jobs returned.

The only members of the leadership team that have been at Apple longer are: [Cue, O’Brien, and Joswiak]

[…]

It’s certainly possible that Apple is going to try to spend these next five months finding that design executive. It’s also possible that they promote Dye to such a role – he did have one of the most prominent slots at the WWDC keynote this year thanks to “Liquid Glass” – though as Gruber notes, in hindsight, it may have been a mistake to have one person overseeing hardware and software design – something that only happened because Ive stepped in on the software side after Scott Forstall was forced out in 2012.

Previously:

• Assorted Notes on Liquid Glass
• John Geleynse Retires From Apple
• Jony Ive Is Leaving Apple
• Apple Design in the Cook Era