technology

But that's exactly the thing. If it's just flare, I don't care. Often design of websites and apps is excessive animations and visual noise. Unless your design decision has clear defined purpose, I don't care about it.

Animations must be faster than my reaction speed. Hover effects must signify interactivity. Design must convey information. Otherwise it's just noise.

"Well code should follow this long set of standards because it's more readable, more maintainable, more accessible, more scalable etc."

The article talks a lot about visual identity and consistent design and whatnot. I couldn't care less about that. What I care about, though, is if I can distinguish the icon from other stuff. Does it convey information? Does it serve a purpose? I see the purpose of coding conventions: readability, maintainability, accessibility, scalability, etc. What purpose does "liquid glass" serve?

This is true function over form where design serves utility first and finds its flare in there.

Now for the ending argument of making "apps" squircles. Yes, it does check my boxes of utility. But, was there a problem in the first place? On a phone everything is an app, so everything is a squircle? Why does mac need to follow this? Was there really confusion between files and executables? To me this smells like flare. Why should I care if the steam icon is in a squircle box or is a plain logo?