Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 7th Sep 2009 17:43 UTC
Graphics, User Interfaces Last week, Culf of Mac published an article showing off some of Snow Leopard's beautiful 512x512 icons, revealing some interesting tidbits about them you could only see when the icons are fully maximised. In this article, I compare some of Snow Leopard's icons to those of Windows 7, and you'll see while both operating systems have beautiful icons, there are some key differences between the styles of these icons. Note that this article contains some large images, so if you're on dial-up, you've been warned.
Thread beginning with comment 382699
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Give me functional
by sbergman27 on Mon 7th Sep 2009 23:57 UTC in reply to "RE: Give me functional"
sbergman27
Member since:
2005-07-24

Ascetics is more than just beauty, it is also about functionality and purveying a certain message which affect peoples productivity...

There is no way in hell icons need to be a megabyte a piece in order to purvey whatever subtle message you think people can't get their work done without.

And your gate for boarding is 12C.

Reply Parent Score: 6

RE[3]: Give me functional
by kaiwai on Tue 8th Sep 2009 00:03 in reply to "RE[2]: Give me functional"
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

Ascetics is more than just beauty, it is also about functionality and purveying a certain message which affect peoples productivity...

There is no way in hell icons need to be a megabyte a piece in order to purvey whatever subtle message you think people can't get their work done without.

And your gate for boarding is 12C.


If an icon is a megabyte in size then that would sit in the realm of the user experience which is part of the GUI experience; if the GUI effects the performance then it effects ones productivity and the usefulness of the tool.

It confuses me though that we're sitting at 2009 and neither Apple nor Microsoft have moved to SVG icons - something that was in use on SGI IRIX Indigo desktop almost a decade ago. There is no reason why the icons for the bundled command controls on both Windows and Mac OS X can't be replaced with SVG versions with no impact on compatibility since all the handling is sorted out behind the scenes and not the third party applications themselves.

Edited 2009-09-08 00:04 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[4]: Give me functional
by Glynser on Tue 8th Sep 2009 06:52 in reply to "RE[3]: Give me functional"
Glynser Member since:
2007-11-29

The problem with SVG or vector graphics in general is that you can't really predict how they will look like in 16x16 or 32x32. But when you design a pixel icon in 16x16 or 32x32, you have control over every single pixel, which is why they often look clearer.

Sadly, many icons today are already designed in a higher resolution and simply scaled down, resulting in exactly the same problem, but that's another story...

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[4]: Give me functional
by StephenBeDoper on Fri 11th Sep 2009 03:08 in reply to "RE[3]: Give me functional"
StephenBeDoper Member since:
2005-07-06

It confuses me though that we're sitting at 2009 and neither Apple nor Microsoft have moved to SVG icons - something that was in use on SGI IRIX Indigo desktop almost a decade ago. There is no reason why the icons for the bundled command controls on both Windows and Mac OS X can't be replaced with SVG versions with no impact on compatibility since all the handling is sorted out behind the scenes and not the third party applications themselves.


There's an interesting article on the Haiku Icon Vector Format, describing some of the reasons they didn't go with SVG - it's an interesting read:

http://www.haiku-os.org/news/2006-11-06/icon_facts

Reply Parent Score: 2