I think this is a clever moat Apple created with Liquid Glass: they picked an effect that is easy to make a worse version of, but very hard to do the real/right way (and humans have an intuition for real/right because they see real glass every day). So any copycats will look worse in a way that's pretty obvious and Apple gets to keep the "premium-looking" product.

I recently saw a large gold (plated) surface - larger than a hand. The effect the light played off of that metal was amazing, I've never seen the effect in small gold jewelry. Photographs and video just don't capture it. If Apple ever turns their attention to gold and manages to nail that effect, I would consider one of their devices just for that aspect.

Gold is really good at reflecting infrared which is why it was chosen as the coating for JWST's mirrors. I wonder if the colors just past visible on its way to IR would be just perceptible enough to give the look you are noticing???

Might the gold have tinted some of the IR into a visible wavelength? A wavelength that is otherwise not commonly seen in nature?

The moat is real! I haven't tried recreating Liquid Glass in the browser yet. From what I've seen, it's possible, but not in a practical, cross-browser, "can be applied to an arbitrary component" kind of way.

Of course, as soon as we figure out how to get it done, Apple will move on to the next thing. I'm okay with that though. It was a bold move, and I can't imagine how much time and money Apple spent making Liquid Glass look that good.

I think you overestimate how much most users are able to detect such differences and will care about it.

Somewhat like the blind tasting tests of Coca Cola versus Pepsi versus supermarket brands.

Okay, I was with you about users caring about differences in the look of a glass refraction effect. But I'm flabergasted at the fact that there are people that cannot tell the difference between Coke and Pepsi by taste.

I think the same is true for when they started using blurs everywhere. They knew Android OEMs would copy it in a worse way and shoot themselves in the foot. That's also why material design doesn't rely on blur effects, it needs to run well on much worse hardware.

It's fun seeing the attempts to mimic Liquid Glass though, the most impressive so far is this Flutter package: https://pub.dev/packages/liquid_glass_renderer

That is a very impressive attempt at Liquid Glass! The whole cross-browser and cross-platform bit is still a challenge sadly → "Only works on Impeller, so Web, Windows, and Linux are entirely unsupported for now"

Here is one with SVG filters (can be compute intensive):

[0]: https://codepen.io/rebane2001/details/OPVQXMv

I don't think it's that hard for someone with experience writing shaders to emulate. The moat is that it's almost impossible to replicate with browser technology, which hurts web-based ui systems and is still a big challenge with something like flutter or jetpack compose multiplatform.

Stuff like React Native get it basically for free because their ui is still technically "native".

But apps that rely on web views are screwed and I'm sure Apple will be happy to push devs away from those solutions as they're inferior for users.

Now they just need to figure out a way to push RN apps towards true native.

I fully agree that Liquid Glass is almost impossible to replicate with browser technology without using 3D shaders. But I’m curious to know your opinion about why apps that rely on web views are inferior for users (apart from the above reason). I certainly think Apple thinks they are inferior, but I'm not sure how devs and users feel about it.

> I certainly think Apple thinks they are inferior, but I'm not sure how devs and users feel about it.

Does it matter at that point? Seriously asking.

Webview apps are limited to 60fps so they feel sluggish on iOS. Running them in safari with the 120fps dev option enabled they can feel like native, but then feel laggy when bundled into their own app.

I suppose it's only the bad ones that I notice, but I can definitely get annoyed by UI that's janky, choppy, or close-but-not-quite native. It's jarring.

> Now they just need to figure out a way to push RN apps towards true native.

Isn’t that impossible? If I call native code via binding or their official language, the same thing will happens.

I mean push the devs towards writing native swiftui.

I think the other component of the moat is that their OS/GPU stack is power-optimized for this effect in hardware, which generic solutions for generic hardware will have trouble matching - even a lower fidelity replication’s power drain could be an order of magnitude higher as a result.

True, innovation is much easier when you have full control over the hardware. My project would have taken a fifth of the time if I were only targeting Safari on Apple devices. But I trust that clever engineers and developers will keep finding ways to optimize effects for other platforms and devices.

That is one way things could turn out. On the other hand, when Apple started to introduce the iOS-7-style frosted glass effects, we got backdrop-blur in CSS, which handles the hard parts of achieving a similar effect on the web.

If this whole liquid glass effect catches on big time (which isn't out of the question right now), we might see something in the web platform that gives developers access to the platform primitives required to render it.

Why shouldn't there be an effort to make more OS UI elements available via HTML? There's no technical reason against it. So I'm not saying that is what's going to happen, but I don't think this is a kind of moat they created with the explicit intention to make web apps worse.

> I don't think this is a kind of moat they created with the explicit intention to make web apps worse.

Yes, exactly! Personally, I’m glad that Apple invests in this kind of R&D. They push the whole field forward as others try to catch up. I doubt they’ll ever make their UI freely available to all other platforms, but I do hope CSS continues to add features that make these effects much easier to implement on the web.

They literally said this is the reason in their marketing.

> features an entirely new material called Liquid Glass. It combines the optical qualities of glass with a fluidity only Apple can achieve

https://www.apple.com/ca/newsroom/2025/06/apple-introduces-a...

But yeah, it is a pretty clever way to make most cross-platform toolkits stand out and create a desire to create true native apps which increases their moat and means that some apps will have only an Apple version (or a worse app on other platforms) rather than releasing the same app on all platforms.

I agree that Liquid Glass's edge distortion looks great, and I will try my hand at recreating it eventually. For the current project, I aimed to create a material that looked polished, worked consistently across browsers, and didn't use real 3D. And you're right about the effect being more visible when moving over a fixed background. The demo site I'm working on for the library does this, it's just not ready yet.

Thanks for sharing the resources!

> But missing out on the refractive aspect of glass takes away the strong visual separation of layers that IMO is Liquid Glass's biggest contribution

Good. I was already on the fence about frosted glass, but I absolutely hate the refraction effect, it is super distracting and will always look ugly in certain scenarios. Yes, it is how real glass behaves, but I do not care for that. It is like someone took the worst part of skeumorphism and doubled down on it, and I say that as someone who liked iOS better before version 7.