InterfaceLIFT, a source for freeware icons for both Mac OS X and Windows has launched a new section of its web site devoted to developers. The new stock icons collection makes it easier for programmers to find high-quality, royalty-free interface icons that are designed specifically for use in software and web site projects.
Great resource, but sorry, the cheapest icon set is $49.00
They submitted it, and it looked like some developers might be interested in it. But your comment is valid. But think about this: if there’s a new release of an OS or OS-related product, we’d post that, and nobody would complain. And some could say that it would be an “advertisement” for that product. It all depends on how you look at it.
If you have to pay a royalty on something, it means that the creator gets paid for each copy you ship. A royalty free image is something that you pay for once and you don’t have to pay more no matter how many times it’s used. But you still have to pay for it up-front. In other words, royalty free is not the same as plain old free.
he… technically speaking, royalty really means that you don’t have to pay a royalty _each time_ you use the product (icons, pics, whatever). It does not mean they cost nothing.
And since they give them away for personal use, they can call that freeware… for personal use.
so they are technically correct, but I still fall into being a marketing trick to attract people in the hope that someone will eventually spend some money.
But hey, no much harm done, right?
cheers.
How about http://art.gnome.org/themes/icon/ ?
This is a pretty trivial inclusion to have on OS news. Have we gone from a slow news day to a no news day?
I’ll stick with kde or gnome look.org I think.
Who even thought this was a story?
GJ
With Firefox and AdBlock I haven’t seen an ad in weeks.
But AdBlock missed this article somehow… isn’t that odd?
I really don’t think this is an appropriate article for OSNews. I would rather have less stories than to have commercial offerings.
not worth 100 bucks, but it wouldn’t be too hard to photoshop those red lines out and get some nice 32×32 icons.
Royalty free, but definitely not the type of icons you should distribute with “Open Source” licensed software due to the possible legality issues.
Are all of these icons even legal? Some of them look like direct copies of OS X’s icons, which are neither freeware nor royalty-free. I’m really disappointed that this got posted in the first place and even more so that it’s been kept up for this long. It’s in poor taste and there’s no explanation why this paid icons site is being posted about, but hundreds of others like it aren’t. The moderator of this website owes his readers an apology.
http://jimmac.musichall.cz/ikony.php3
Why do people continue to **encrypt** data in .sit files? I say encrypt because .sit is to archives what .doc is to documents.
Right but in the same time, stuffit is very used in the mac-world, as the ‘expander is included with the OS.
Right but in the same time, stuffit is very used in the mac-world, as the ‘expander is included with the OS.
But it handles zip-files just fine right? It would be nice if they’d agree on one format since they doesn’t differ much to the user.
yep, stuffit can also (de)compress .zip, .tar (and others) formats.
As a mac-developer myself I distribute my packages in .sit because of a better compression (especially .sitx), but I must agree you’re right about interoperability when that concerns this sort of stuffs.
To talk about this news, I think it has its right place on a site like OSNews because of the many developers that regularly come here. Graphic design IS important for users, they are now accustomed to get good looking interfaces that can be apprehended quickly because of easy recognizable icons/symbols. I’m pleased to see there’re more and more icon-shops that open and ‘offer’ beautiful pieces which avoid us to spent our (ton of) time on this area.
(sorry about my poor English..)
I’m pleased to see there’re more and more icon-shops that open and ‘offer’ beautiful pieces which avoid us to spent our (ton of) time on this area.
I think people where upset because of the fact that the article says that it offers freeware icons, yet they charge money for them.
To me it felt like “10,000 free smilies” hence why I wrote (and modded down) that post.
I agree with you about the looks of software, and I bet most people do (although a lot of devs aren’t very good at that part).
What is with all the bubbly 3dish icons lately? they are everywhere! Whatever happened to well done crisp 2d icons or even isometric icons??
This is more an ad than a story, but it touches on a legitimate question: where do OSS Mac developers get icon sets that look like Mac icons? KDE-Look.org is the only one I’ve seen. The Crystal and Nuvola sets are nice in their look and in that they support 128 pixel sizes, and they can easily be converted from png to the Mac icn format, but they aren’t Mac-native; they stand out as Linux sets. (I say this as one who uses them in the apps I’ve developed.) A lot of the Mac-specific icons in OSS apps that I’ve seen look like they were hacked directly from OS X system folders in some way; this seems a legal gray area to me.
Not only is this “story” a thinly veiled ad, but the icons those guys sell are almost all copies of Apple’s own icons.
Additionally, these copies don’t even conform to the HIG (where Apple’s icons mostly do).
IMO, no one should still be using .sit or even .sitx under Mac OS X. Apple has built zip packing and unpacking right into the OS and it not only works great but it has hassle-free cross platform support. StuffIt should be abandoned ASAP (and thankfully this seems to be the case with many…).
For a sec, I thought that these were free icons (as in $0).
Dull, uninspired, tedious designs. These things would be rejected as an entry to the special olympics for art design.
To call the people who designed these “artists” is an insult to art, any art, even art-and-crafts art.
actually, just zipping a file isnt that great compression. both the standard tar/gzip on *nix, and the standard sit/hqx on the mac platform give better compression then zip. rar is comparable though, which is probably why its become the standard so quickly amoung techie guys on windows.
Half the icons are close enough to other peoples desgins that they could be called IP theft and the other half are just plain ugly.
I don’t commercial products being show on OsNews. But what I DO mind is misleading headers!
The header claims “a source of freeware icons”, but when I go there, I find out that the programmer icons that the headline is about aren’t free at all!
Thanks for wasting my time. You use the phrase “source of freeware icons” in a heading that has to do with icons that arn’t free at all. This is deceptive advertising in my book, so you won’t get my business even if I am in the market to buy icons.
Look at the rest of the site, free:
* wallpaper, http://interfacelift.com/wallpaper/
* themes, http://interfacelift.com/themes-mac/
* and icons. http://interfacelift.com/icons-mac/
If you want free-as-in-beer or free-as-in-speach icons, hit up the KDE and GNOME UI sites.
– chrish