Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 7th Sep 2009 17:43 UTC
Permalink for comment 382751
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 05/18/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 7:37 UTC
Linked by fran on 05/18/13 1:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 23:35 UTC, submitted by kragil
Linked by MOS6510 on 05/17/13 22:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 22:15 UTC, submitted by Tom
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 17:04 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 13:17 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 12:06 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2008-05-26
Forget about the disk space for a moment. Think: Why would anybody need 512 x 512 icons? Why would anyone need their icons that big?
If you have a Full-HD monitor, such an icon takes up nearly half the vertical space of the screen! That's obscene! 128 x 128 should be the absolute biggest, or better yet have bitmap icons for smaller sizes, the biggest being 64x64, and use SVG for bigger sizes.