You are focusing too much on the visual aspects of design, you can't say that Google is consistently far better than Apple in overall design, you might prefer Google's aesthetics but design as a whole I can't really agree with you.
No, I’m not; aesthetic preferences are not limited to the visual, and preferences and relative importance of all the elements you identify are within the scope of subjective aesthetic preference. Though grandparent who I was responding to was focussed entirely on the visual—their whole criticism of Google design was: “...end up looking juvenile and Fisher-Price-like. On mobile, the font is too big and too ragged. The colors and shapes look like a Kleenex box aesthetic. The spacing isn’t all that great.”—so if I was focussed, even exclusively, on the visual aspects of design in my response it would have been appropriate in context.
It's sort-of usable if you set up some custom wallpaper, but that takes a while to load, and while it's loading the page glitches with the original colour scheme on grey.
The experience was fine as it was. Now it's somewhere between irritating and infuriating.
While people selling design languages like to pretend that they are objective, design is largely aesthetics which is largely subjective. IMO, Google is consistently far better than Apple, which consistently, at least since the iPhone era, has come off visibly trying to hard (though recently less so than in the over-the-top skeumorphism period.)