Windows 12.2 Concept: Liquid Glass Look vs Real-World Engineering

When a talented concept designer reimagines Windows as a glossy, translucency-first OS, the result is visually striking — but the work of turning a mood board into a production-ready operating system is a far bigger engineering challenge than a nine‑minute video suggests. The AR 4789 “Windows 12.2: The Next Evolution” concept has reignited debate about what a future Windows could look like, borrowing heavily from Apple’s recent Liquid Glass aesthetic while also nodding to Windows’ own design history; the result is appealing in snapshots, but only modestly convincing as a blueprint for a real OS. (windowscentral.com)

Background: what sparked this conversation​

Apple’s 2025 WWDC introduced a cross‑platform material Apple calls Liquid Glass, a translucent, refractive design language that reshapes UI accents, wallpapers, and system chrome across iOS, macOS, and watchOS. The announcement emphasized real‑time translucency and dynamic tints that react to content and environment — a clear aesthetic shift that pushed design conversations beyond Apple’s ecosystem. (macrumors.com)
Independently, fan designer Abdi — known on YouTube as AR 4789 — published a concept titled Windows 12.2: The Next Evolution that imagines how Windows might embrace a similar visual vocabulary: layered translucency, softened motion, containerized desktop layouts, and a more cohesive Start and Settings experience. Tech outlets from Windows Central to Neowin and Digital Trends picked up the video, praising the coherence and polish of the mockup while noting it’s purely speculative. (windowscentral.com, neowin.net, digitaltrends.com)
At the same time, Microsoft has been moving pieces of Windows toward a more consistent visual framework through WinUI work and staged UI rollouts in Insider previews — most notably the Release Preview build 26100.5061 (KB5064081) in August 2025, which included gradual, server‑side enablement of updated visual elements and dark‑mode dialog theming. That engineering reality is important context: Microsoft is iterating visually, but the company’s constraints — compatibility, enterprise management, and accessibility — color every decision. (blogs.windows.com)

---

First impressions: what the Windows 12.2 concept gets right​

The concept nails several emotional goals that matter for desktop UX:

• Visual cohesion. The whole UI looks like it was designed in one sitting rather than accreted over decades. Consistent corner radii, uniform shadows, and matched translucency create the feeling of a single visual system.
• Polished motion. Smooth transitions and subtle attention cues make simple interactions feel premium. The video’s install flow and theme switches emphasize motion that communicates state clearly.
• Choice and personalization. The mockup foregrounds theme packs and taskbar styles, letting users switch quickly between compact, mini, and Classic (Windows 7‑like) looks. That level of one‑click personalization is emotionally satisfying.
• Containerized desktop. Grouping icons, widgets, and apps in labeled containers reduces perceived clutter and can improve discoverability on busy desktops.

These wins matter because modern users evaluate an OS not just on raw features but on feel. A platform that communicates its affordances through design choices reduces cognitive friction and can make everyday tasks feel smoother.

Interface highlights in the concept​

• A Start menu design that channels Windows 10’s familiar All Programs list while modernizing tile treatment.
• File Explorer tweaks that prioritize speed and clarity without radically changing navigation metaphors.
• Desktop widgets and drag‑and‑drop widgets onto the desktop (a user‑desired capability that isn’t native in Windows 11).
• Theme snapshots and per‑virtual‑desktop theming to better distinguish workspaces.

Those are thoughtful, user‑facing ideas that align with what many Windows power users have asked for over the years. Coverage across multiple outlets underscores the appetite for this kind of evolution. (windowscentral.com, concept-phones.com)

---

The technical reality: why the mockup is not the same as shipping software​

Concept videos are free to ignore real world constraints. Shipable operating systems are not.

• Legacy UI debt. Windows carries a vast catalogue of legacy components — Control Panel applets, UAC secure desktop, older third‑party Shell extensions, and vendor‑supplied OEM dialogs. Many of those components aren’t trivially themeable; bringing them into a single visual system requires either refactoring or replacing decades‑old code paths. Microsoft’s staged updates reveal this: visual changes are being rolled out selectively because a wholesale flip would create unacceptable regressions.
• Accessibility and compliance. Color, contrast, and focus indicators must meet WCAG and assistive‑tech expectations. Translucency and blurred backgrounds reduce contrast and can obscure hit targets or readable text if not tuned carefully. Real accessibility validation requires automated testing, screen‑reader verification, and enterprise pilot programs — none of which concept videos address.
• Performance and power tradeoffs. Real‑time refraction and layered blur are GPU‑accelerated operations. On high‑end machines they look fluid; on older or integrated GPUs they can introduce lag and battery drain. A production design must include fallback materials or adjustable fidelity for low‑power devices.
• Automation and enterprise management. Enterprises rely on stable UI element placement for automation, RPA, and monitoring tools. Large visual shifts can break scripts and require updates to management templates, GPOs, and ADMX files. Microsoft’s conservative, telemetry‑driven rollout is meant to mitigate these operational risks. (blogs.windows.com)
• Security dialog clarity. Security prompts must communicate risk unambiguously. Styling that softens contrast or uses nuanced translucency could inadvertently reduce the perceived severity of privilege elevation or malware warnings unless explicit design constraints are enforced.

In short, what looks like a pure aesthetic choice in a video can have cascading technical, usability, and enterprise implications that demand cross‑discipline engineering work.

---

Where the concept risks misfires or false positives​

• Aesthetic nostalgia traps. The design references Windows Vista/Aero and Apple Liquid Glass simultaneously. “Nostalgia” can be polarizing; visual callbacks that remind users of older, controversial OS releases can backfire. The goal should be modern clarity, not a nostalgia mashup that revives the worst memories of past UI missteps.
• Inconsistent affordances. The concept uses a circular maximize control and other icon changes that aren’t semantically obvious. Small details like icon state changes (maximized vs restored) are fundamental UI affordances; getting those wrong creates real usability friction.
• Typography and localization. Several early mockups (and even some user attention pieces) show typos and grammar issues — harmless in a concept, but unacceptable in production. Localized UI requires far more rigorous attention to language and string length than a mockup assumes.
• Over‑reliance on motion. Transitions should enhance comprehension, not replace it. Users with vestibular sensitivity or those on low‑power devices must have accessible, low motion alternatives.

Flagging these concerns is essential: the visual polish of a concept can mask small functional details that matter to broad user populations.

---

Cross‑platform influence vs. platform identity​

The concept draws heavily from Apple’s Liquid Glass look. That’s not accidental — major platform redesigns have a way of influencing the industry. Apple’s material was intentionally presented as systemic across iPhone, iPad, Mac, and Watch, and outlets covered it extensively after WWDC. (macrumors.com)
But copying surface aesthetics without aligning platform metaphors is a shallow shortcut. Windows’ heritage — with flexible window management, diverse hardware targets, and enterprise priorities — requires decisions that balance:

• Platform identity (what makes Windows unique)
• Design modernization (how to remain current)
• Compatibility (enterprise/lifecycle constraints)

A pragmatic path for Microsoft is to take ideas — containerized organization, simplified personalization, modern translucency — and adapt them to Windows’ existing affordances, rather than attempting to transplant an Apple visual system wholesale.

---

What Microsoft would need to do to make a “Liquid‑Glass‑style” Windows real​

Turning a concept into production requires concrete engineering steps. A realistic roadmap includes:

• Continue WinUI migration. Prioritize moving legacy controls into WinUI or a single theming layer so theme tokens and contrast rules can propagate uniformly.
• Tiered rendering fidelity. Implement adaptive translucency that degrades gracefully based on device GPU capability and battery state.
• Comprehensive accessibility audit. Validate contrast, focus outlines, keyboard navigation, and screen‑reader behavior across all new visuals.
• Enterprise deployment controls. Ship ADMX templates and management tooling to let admins control or block visual changes during pilot rollouts.
• Performance telemetry. Use staged rollouts with telemetry to measure frame rates, UI latencies, and power impact before wider enablement.
• Developer guidance and tokens. Publish clear tokens and UI patterns that third‑party app developers can adopt to look native without breaking behavior.

These aren’t sexy items in a concept reel, but they are the exact pieces engineering teams must deliver to make any major visual overhaul safe in production.

---

How enthusiasts can approximate the look — and why they should be cautious​

If the aesthetic appeals, users can experiment today, but with caveats:

• Use supported personalization tools: built‑in theme packs, Dynamic Lock Screen options, and Safe Mode personalization. These keep the system within supported paths.
• Try third‑party themers sparingly: tools like StartAllBack, various icon packs, or custom explorer shells can mimic the look but often break across updates and can interfere with accessibility or security features.
• Test on non‑production hardware: If using registry hacks or unsupported mods, do so in VMs or spare machines only.

Microsoft’s own Insider program remains the safest way to preview platform work. The Release Preview build 26100.5061 (KB5064081) and follow‑ups are examples of how Microsoft is enabling visual changes gradually — join the Insider channels with backups and pilot appropriately. (blogs.windows.com)

---

A practical critique of the concept’s specific UI choices​

What to keep​

• Themed containers for desktop organization. This reduces cognitive load and could be implemented as an optional shell enhancement.
• One‑click theme packs. Shipping curated, reversible themes with full token swaps (icons, notifications, sounds) is user‑centric and relatively low risk.
• Improved Settings navigation. Small changes like an address bar in Settings and clearer hierarchy are quick wins.

What to reconsider​

• Systemwide heavy translucency as default. Make it an opt‑in or adaptive feature for high‑end hardware.
• Opaque security visuals. Never soften the visual treatment of elevation or security prompts; clarity must trump aesthetics.
• Non‑standard control metaphors. Preserve familiar affordances (e.g., maximize/restore icons) unless there is a demonstrable usability improvement and a migration period.

---

Longer‑term: design, AI, and the future of Windows UX​

Beyond cosmetics, Microsoft is moving toward an AI‑centric user experience with Copilot and workspace awareness. A successful visual refresh should enable, not distract from, these new usage models. For example:

• Visual layers can surface contextual AI results without stealing focus from primary tasks.
• Containerized desktops could become AI context sets — group windows, settings, and tools relevant to a single task and let AI recall them later.
• Motion and translucency must be functional: reinforce hierarchy, not merely decorate.

The strategic question is not whether Windows should look like Liquid Glass; it’s whether a future Windows can deliver clearer, faster, and safer workflows while modernizing its visuals. That balance is precisely what enterprises, developers, and users will judge.

---

Conclusion: a measured “yes” to the ideas, a firm “no” to the checklist‑only approach​

AR 4789’s Windows 12.2 concept is a compelling thought experiment. It shows how far desktop design can go when color, translucency, and motion are treated coherently. The concept’s biggest value is in its ideas — theme packs that change everything elegantly, cleaner Start menu affordances, containerized desktops, and widget placement flexibility.
However, turning that mood into a shipping Windows product demands a hairline fusion of art and engineering: massive WinUI migration, accessibility verification, enterprise controls, performance fallbacks, and clear security boundaries. Microsoft’s current approach of controlled, telemetry‑driven rollouts (as seen in the Release Preview channel updates) is the responsible way to evolve the shell; that same discipline must govern any Liquid‑Glass‑style ambitions. (blogs.windows.com)
For Windows enthusiasts and designers, the takeaway is simple: borrow the good ideas, examine the tradeoffs diligently, and demand that any visual refresh comes with enterprise readiness, accessibility guarantees, and adjustable fidelity. A beautiful OS must also be reliable, secure, and inclusive — otherwise the shine fades quickly.

---

Source: MakeUseOf Someone made a Liquid Glass Windows 12 and it's... just OK