Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 28th May 2009 14:23 UTC, submitted by hotice
Permalink for comment 365824
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:30 UTC, submitted by JRepin
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 22:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 15:53 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 22:43 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 21:50 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:15 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:11 UTC, submitted by Drumhellar
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:06 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2007-06-28
i think you may have missed my point. i guess what i was trying to convey was that these logos, which will in all likelihood become the icons for the individual applications, do not obviously belong to the apps that they belong to. they are too abstract. if a user had, for example, an icon for each of those apps in his or her dock/panel, it would not be clear what apps they belonged to. the symbols on them are too vague. it would be very easy to (frustratingly) open the wrong app. since KDE 4 has been striving for user-friendliness, this seems to be a step backward.
aesthetically, they are obviously fine and modern. but that isn't enough. it's bad enough for a new user that some of the apps have overly vague names. kexi? krita? karbon? what's the likelihood that a new user is going to bother with the app when they can't easily see what it does without opening it? unfortunately, most people aren't as adventurous as the kinds of people that hang out on osnews.
Edited 2009-05-28 18:37 UTC