> Giving equal visual weight to each icon is an improvement.

Equal visual weight is another way of saying less differentiated.

> "Shape" hasn't disappeared as a distinct visual cue, as the area within the squircle is made of, well... different shapes.

Shape refers to a boundary outline, not interior patterning. A square with polkadots is still shaped like a square.

> A smaller icon is harder to click, because clicking on a transparent area... doesn't click at all.

That problem is only tangential to what shape they allow your icon to be within an enclosing NxN hitbox. Assume an implied framework where clicking on them isn't broken.

Some differentiation between elements must be sacrificed in order to build shared UX patterns between them. I think we can definitely go too far in either direction.

An example of a nice compromise would be the macOS menu bar. Most status icons are monotone, which allows the ones with meaningful color differentiation to shine through without being drowned in the noise or increasing user fatigue.

> user fatigue

Citation needed. What is user fatigue? Can it be empirically measured? Fatigued by what? Too much color? Lack of shape? Too much contrast? Lack of contrast?

When is the last time you were "fatigued" by icons?

Without hard facts the expression is just a wishy-washy way to promote a personal taste.

User fatigue is UX concept and can be measured.

I'd be surprised if squircles reduced user fatigue though - I think a good adjacent example is Googles new icons with the colours that all look similar. Users were complaining immediately that they had to look harder to find the correct app.

Another thing we use everyday - fonts - have differentiated visual spacing and shapes make them easier/quicker to read. So it would make sense for this to apply to icons that serve a similar purpose on a smaller scale.

I'm speaking in the capacity of a professional designer and developer, using industry terminology that any other professional will recognize. Please let the adults talk.

> Without hard facts the expression is just a wishy-washy way to promote a personal taste.

For a moment there, you almost had us thinking that you were interested in learning something.