Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 18th May 2012 21:54 UTC
Permalink for comment 518584
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Features
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:33 UTC
Linked by David Adams on 05/16/13 4:23 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/11/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/08/13 14:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/02/13 15:28 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/29/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/24/13 22:24 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/18/13 11:21 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/16/13 9:29 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/15/13 22:44 UTC
More Features »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2006-02-15
I don't really grasp his logic, either. Icons are actually a very good method for conveying non-physical meanings fast and precisely. Human brains are developed in a way that they can recognize familiar shapes very quickly and efficiently, whereas recognizing text in arbitrary boxes is a much more inefficient process for us.
What I am getting at is that there is a time and place for everything and that both approaches can be used simultaneously where applicable. Unfortunately Microsoft has decided icons are a second-class citizen now, if even that, and that everything should provide a live tile even when it makes no sense.
OT: The article was a good read, though I do also agree that it has a very 'we are doing this only for the PR' - feeling to it and that I do not agree with everything there. Still, worth reading.