Slashdot Mirror


A History of Icons

John H. Doe writes "The GUIdebook has a great page illustrating the history of icons. Of course, they have the Lisa/Mac/OS X paths, but there's the Windows progressions, along with entries for NeXT, OS/2, BeOS, and yes, Linux. Would you call it progress?"

99 of 400 comments (clear)

  1. Rolling your own by ackthpt · · Score: 5, Interesting
    I haven't been big on designing my own Windows icons because, before I gave up looking, all icon editors cost $$. Inexplicably the one format Paint doesn't support is *.ico

    I used to have some beauties on my Amiga, and they could be any size I liked, up to the whole screen if that was your wish. IIRC they were easy to draw with something that came with the operating system.

    I'd like to take some of my raytracings and make them icons. Any ideas where to start?

    Darn my dyslexia. At first glance I thought it said "A History of Loons" and thought it was something biographical about slashdot.

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    1. Re:Rolling your own by wiredlogic · · Score: 5, Informative
      Inexplicably the one format Paint doesn't support is *.ico

      That's because the Windows .ico format is a complex meta-format with the capacity for multiple icon sizes and color depths. Paint Is just a rudimentary application like notepad and has never been the target of much improvement by MS.

      The best Windows tool for editing icons is Microangelo. There is a shareware trial version available.

      --
      I am becoming gerund, destroyer of verbs.
    2. Re:Rolling your own by razjml · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Ahh, the good old days of throwing a MacOS 7 icon together with ResEdit. Too bad there's no quick and dirty all-in-one utility like that in MacOS X. That was the pinnacle of mac hacking.

    3. Re:Rolling your own by Random+Chaos · · Score: 5, Informative

      Well, I have found a few freeware ICO editing programs, but really you don't need them unless you want a multi-size icon (one that looks good in both a toolbar and in a folder).

      It turns out that Windows can read BMPs as ICOs. Just make a BMP of the right size (16x16, 32x32, or 64x64) and rename the extension from .bmp to .ico.

      ----

      As for my most used icons: Giving all my hard disks a icon with the drive letter on it. Makes using a tool bar (I have a "goto" toolbar that links to every drive and a few important folders) easy to locate which drive is which (I only have 6 partitions/hard drives on my windows box).

    4. Re:Rolling your own by raider_red · · Score: 2, Informative

      You can just use a .tif file and use interface builder to add it to your program.

      --
      It's good to use your head, but not as a battering ram.
    5. Re:Rolling your own by Instantlemming · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yeah, screen-sized icons in a whopping 4 colours! (which also were the WRONG colours if you deviated from the standard Workbench theme)
      Then we had about 3 different icon-enhancement sets, and the ugly MUI won...

      But I want a decent icon editor and a pointer editor too!
      I miss the pointer editor from OS/2Warp...

    6. Re:Rolling your own by nazh · · Score: 5, Informative

      I design the icons in .png then convert them to .ico with png2ico works both on *nix and windows. You can also add several different image sizes in the icon file you make with this program.

    7. Re:Rolling your own by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Use the gimp... its free and supports this format. I made my own Shuffle icon for my pc so it would look more like it does in OSX.

    8. Re:Rolling your own by tgrigsby · · Score: 2, Informative

      Graphics Workshop Professional will convert just about anything to an ICO. It's not 100% though -- sometimes you end up with an icon that's off-center for some odd reason. But I love this application -- I've been using it for years now and it's just too handy not to have. It's not terribly expensive, either.

      Website: http://www.mindworkshop.com/
      Price: $44.95

      I also have the GIF Construction Set, which is great and all, but I'm just as likely to use some of my other graphics tools to create GIFs, or just use Flash. Xara3D is good for animated text.

      rambling...

      --
      *** *** You're just jealous 'cause the voices talk to me... ***
    9. Re:Rolling your own by iBod · · Score: 2, Informative

      Try...

      http://www.microangelo.us/

    10. Re:Rolling your own by Dogtanian · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I used to have some beauties on my Amiga, and they could be any size I liked, up to the whole screen if that was your wish.

      Was this a *good* thing? IIRC, Amiga programs came with lots of oddly-shaped icons that frequently *were* a large portion of the screen-size.

      I'm sure it's nice for the designer's ego, but massive icons aren't that great from a usability point-of-view.

      --
      "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
    11. Re:Rolling your own by yintercept · · Score: 5, Funny
      all icon editors cost $$.

      Well, when you consider all of the things that icons do, they certain are worth the money you spend on the icon editor.

      Have you ever clicked on an icon? You click on an icon and, bammo, there's a big spread sheet or email program on your screen or something. Icon editors must be complex and expensive to accomplish that. Seeing all of the amazing things icons do, it is the one software expense that the guys in purchasing will have no problem approving.

      On an unrelated note, being a manager of a large software development team, I had been wondering why you techies like Dilbert so much. I have a big informative staff meeting. Afterwards, the techies gather around to pick the Dilbert that matches the meeting. I don't get it.

    12. Re:Rolling your own by alfboggis · · Score: 4, Informative

      This page is a useful guide if you ever need to create icons for Windows XP. It gives information on style, perspective and colours needed to make icons consistent with that OS. They recommend an app called GifMovieGear to create the actual icon files.

    13. Re:Rolling your own by grahamlee · · Score: 4, Informative
      /Developer/Applications/Utilities/Icon Composer.app

      I think that says it all.

    14. Re:Rolling your own by Cutterman · · Score: 2, Informative

      Neil Rubenking's IconEdit32 first appeared in PCMag in March 2000. "With IconEdit32 you can create icons that can include all valid combinations of size and color depths - up to nine images. It features various drawing tools, such as a pencil, dropper, paint, line, rectangle and ellipse. You can also easily add text to your icon. The main window shows both an enlarged version of the icon, and a preview area that displays the icon against a background color of your choice. The icon can be shifted in any direction, rotated, mirrored and flipped." Free. Dozens of places to find it on the Web.

    15. Re:Rolling your own by the+darn · · Score: 4, Funny

      Ahh, yes! You should have seen mom's face when she noticed that I had replaced her trash can icon with a carefully crafted toilet. When you put files in it, instead of swelling like the can did, I added tasteful wavy green 'stink lines'. Those were the days...

      --
      Ceci n'est pas un post.
    16. Re:Rolling your own by hattig · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yes, it was a good idea.

      Unimportant, but maybe required at some point, files/folders could have small icons.

      Important files (e.g., the application itself) would havea big icon. They'd also have a location in the window that was easy to get to, e.g., the centre.

      Files you never need to see had no icon, and you'd have to select the option to view all files to see them.

      A good use of Fitt's Law.

    17. Re:Rolling your own by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny
      Here is a nice modified firefox icon.

      It shows the firefox shagging an IE icon instead of the world. :)

    18. Re:Rolling your own by Freshie · · Score: 3, Informative

      You can make an icon in paint. an icon is a bmp with the extension changed. The first pixel in the upper left denotes the transparency. Granted it won't give you sizability, but if all you icons are 48x48, just make it 48x48, and save it with a .ico extension. :)

      --
      'I don't want more choices. I just want better things.' - Edina Monsoon
    19. Re:Rolling your own by GerbilSoft · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Who needs multiple icon sizes or color depths when you've got SVG icons?

    20. Re:Rolling your own by T3kno · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I like these icons better, the nicest FF and TBird icons I've seen. Kudos to whomever did them!

      --
      (B) + (D) + (B) + (D) = (K) + (&)
    21. Re:Rolling your own by Dogtanian · · Score: 2, Informative

      That's good in theory, but in practice, it requires people to stick to the guidelines you gave. I have memories of opening disks full of programs with massive icons that didn't help much.

      And, to be fair to windows, it lets you hide system files (though I don't).

      --
      "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
    22. Re:Rolling your own by after+fallout · · Score: 3, Informative

      try snico at http://www.snidesoft.com it is freeware

    23. Re:Rolling your own by Picticon · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'm the author of Iconian, Picticon, and several other Amiga icon utilities. Ahh I do miss those big, gaudy icons... I get teary eyed thinking about my Amigas.

      When I moved over to Windows 95, my first project was going to be an icon editor. Then I realized that icons in Windows suck. Such tiny little things. Sigh.

      But seriously, the best icon editor I've found on Windows is the one built into Visual C++ 6. It's straight forward and no-frills. Very easy to use. And it's included for free as part of my line of work.

      I tried some of the shareware crap out there. $20 to 50$ for some of the buggiest, confusing P.O.S. programs out there. Micheangelo in particular was VERY confusing to me. But everyone recommends it.

    24. Re:Rolling your own by Ark42 · · Score: 3, Informative


      Thats not true. ICO files have 2 channels per image (an XOR mask and an AND mask) plus other data different from BMP, such as the number of sizes and colors in the .ICO file.

    25. Re:Rolling your own by value_added · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Consistent with XP? That would mean an odd mixture of sometimes 16, sometimes 32 colours, sometimes more, and sizes in ranging (depending on the icon) from 16x16 to 48x48, each size being made available in either 16 or 32 colours or more, or all three, but not always, and depending on which .dll that particular icon is being served from, as opposed to other .dlls which contain an identical (but not always) icon.

      There was a Slashdot article posted some time ago where Steve Jobs was quoted as saying (way back when, and I paraphrase) that Bill Gates never understood the concept of design.

      Despite the overhaul made for the XP interface, much of the same crap found on NT, 2K, etc. can be found on XP, and the inconsistencies aren't limited to icon choices.

      As for the icon editor recommendation, unless it's capable of replacing the icons buried in innumerable .dlls, I don't believe it could compare favourably against any number of alternatives (Microangelo, etc.) which, thankfully, make Windows at least bearable.

      But that's just an opinion. I have otheres, of course.

    26. Re:Rolling your own by Ark42 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      http://ark42.com/freeimage/alphahlp.exe is a nice little free command line utility that can:
      • Convert to/from png/tga/tif/bmp/ico
      • split/join alpha channels to/from separate files
      • split/join multi-page images into single images per page (tif/ico specific)
      • split/join image tiles (where you, for example, have 8 16x16 toolbar icons stored as a 128x16 image)

    27. Re:Rolling your own by DrWhizBang · · Score: 2, Informative

      From the page you linked:

      * - Altorught this version is known as "SVG", the icons are still in PNG format, the SVG files will be relased once the support for the format improves in KDE.

      Not SVG. And Jimmac doesn't agree with you anyways.

      --
      Schrodinger's cat is either dead or really pissed off...
    28. Re:Rolling your own by Leo+McGarry · · Score: 2

      It's an incredibly simply program. You just drag and drop images of various bit depths and resolutions to the appropriate wells, then save out an ".icns" file, which you can put into your Xcode project in place of the TIFF you might otherwise use for your application icon.

    29. Re:Rolling your own by Chief+Typist · · Score: 2, Informative

      Icon Composer is fine for developers who "just want to get the job done". If you're a designer who's developing a suite of icons with a consistent theme/style, you're going to be using Freehand/Illustrator and Photoshop (easier to review & edit.) To output from Photoshop, they use IconBuilder

      When you're dealing with applications that have hundreds of icons (think about MS Office) tools like Icon Composer just don't cut it.

      -ch

    30. Re:Rolling your own by jc42 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I think that says it all.

      Maybe, but where is it all documented? I looked all around in its menus and meagre Help stuff, and couldn't find a thing that let me do any image editing at all. I could load images from iPhoto, but I couldn't find even a way to do a bit of cropping. All it seems to allow is loading images from other apps or files, and has no actual "composing" ability at all.

      From the name "Icon Composer", I was expecting something that would let me edit individual pixels and perform at least a few of the more common transformations. Nope; none to be found anywhere.

      So what am I missing? Where's the "compose" stuff hidden?

      --
      Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
    31. Re:Rolling your own by tomhudson · · Score: 2, Funny
      the only issue i have is that the firefox icons are not a fox
      Neither does Excel excel.
      Photoshop isn't a place to get your pix developed.
      Paint Shop won't sell you a gallon of white latex
      Word would like to have a word with you.
      Neither is PowerPoint powerful in the hands of most users, or good at making points
      The GIMP, at leas[tt], *IS* "gimpy", The UI drives me nuts!!!!!!!

      Life is full of disappointments. Icons are the LEAST of my problems.

    32. Re:Rolling your own by eggsome · · Score: 2, Informative

      That's because the Windows .ico format is a complex meta-format with the capacity for multiple icon sizes and color depths. Paint Is just a rudimentary application like notepad and has never been the target of much improvement by MS.

      While it would be going too far to call this statement "wrong" you are basicly asserting that you cannot create a windows icon without all of that meta-data, orignaly windows icons had no such meta-data (Win 3.1 days) icons were just 32x32 monocrome or 16 color (4bit) BMP files renamed to .ICO.
      Indeed, if you create such a file in MS Paint and rename it, it will be recognised as a valid icon. It will even automagicly create a 16x16 version for use in the Start menu ect. This is true for all windows right up to and including WinXP.

      The original .ICO format was Very Very simple.

      --
      If they made a movie of your life, would anybody buy a ticket?
  2. Deja Vu by suso · · Score: 4, Informative
    1. Re:Deja Vu by NetNifty · · Score: 2, Informative

      That was a history of GUIs, this focuses on icons.

    2. Re:Deja Vu by Ki+Master+George · · Score: 2, Informative
      There is a difference:

      The old one announces the existance of GUIdebook (which is described as a history of all things GUI, not all things icons). The new one announces a page on GUIdebook about the history of icons.

      --
      Before you walk a mile in someone's shoes, you should insult them so you know how they are and what they're doing.
  3. Amiga Icons by Moby+Cock · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I know on my Amiga 500 I used to draw icons in Icon Editor, and it was pretty cool. I too had some real beauties. I miss Workbench, it was pretty sweet.

    1. Re:Amiga Icons by YorgleLlama · · Score: 2, Informative

      you can always use AmiWM, using my 1.x patch... http://www.cis.rit.edu/~jerry/Software/amiwm/ :)

    2. Re:Amiga Icons by SharpFang · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Some interesting features of Amiga icons:
      - Arbitrary size
      - Could change image when clicked
      - Possible arbitrary placement

      This was making for some interesting applications. Like, the game Heimdall had screen high and half-screen wide icon of the character with a warhammer, when clicked the character was slamming the hammer down. I would add a tiny, 5x5px icon placing it over corner of Filemaster 2.2 icon just to launch Filemaster 2.0 in case it was needed (just like small "arrow down" in corner of "back" of Firefox)
      There were tools converting pictures to icons. You could tile icons being parts of bigger image over some area, making a "clickable image". Clicking on directory ("drawer") icon was "opening the drawer", there were also many other cool "mini-anims" like hydraulic press "compressing" the package for a compressor program, a floppy multiplying itself for file copy etc.
      Windows was a BIG step backwards from Amiga icon functionality. That step was never undone. Now all leading OSes have single-image, fixed-size icons.

      --
      45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
    3. Re:Amiga Icons by Dogtanian · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Some interesting features of Amiga icons: - Arbitrary size. Windows was a BIG step backwards from Amiga icon functionality. That step was never undone. Now all leading OSes have single-image, fixed-size icons.

      Yeah, the multiple images were nice. HOWEVER... we have enough problems under Windows with stupid non-standard GUI flashy crap, without allowing those same aesthetically-challenged cretins to design icons that take up three-quarters of the screen.

      I'm sure those assholes would make hideous fully-animated icons that ran whenever they were visible and consumed 75% of your processor time... if it were possible, that is.

      --
      "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
    4. Re:Amiga Icons by CableModemSniper · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Now all leading OSes have single-image, fixed-size icons.

      Well as far as fixed sized goes, yo've obviousy never used Gnome or KDE with SVG icons. And icons in the Dock of OS X can be animated, likewise the systray in windows.

      --
      Why not fork?
    5. Re:Amiga Icons by Soruk · · Score: 2, Informative

      RiscOS supported multiple sized icons up to 256 colours - in 1988.

      --
      -- Soruk
    6. Re:Amiga Icons by master_p · · Score: 2, Informative

      Windows was a BIG step backwards from Amiga

      Brother, you couldn't have said it better:

      • Workbench apps could run at their own private screen or in the main Workbench screen, whereas in Windows all apps run in the same screen.
      • Each Workbench app could have its own resolution. Clicking the arrows in the menu bar would switch to the next app, changing the resolution automatically. You could edit your game's sprites in 320x240 while editing the game's code in 720x584 overscan.
      • Workbench screens could be dragged down from the menu bar and reveal the screen underneath, with all resolutions visible in the same screen!. Drag-n-drop from one screen to the other was fully supported.
      • The Amiga O/S was fully pre-emptive multitasking, without memory protection and virtual memory.
      • Each Amiga app lived completely in its own directory. There were no installers, just decompress the app in a directory and click its icon. You could copy an app anywhere you liked, and it worked.
      • The settings of each app were saved in an .info file, which was the app's registry. The application 'infoeditor' was used to edit the .info file. When you copied an executable from a Workbench window to another, the icon of the executable and the info file was copied along. No need to mess with a registry.
      • Amiga drivers were installed with ...drag-n-drop. No need to reboot.
      • Zorro slots were automatically configured. Plug-n-play without problems right from the start.
      • When the Amiga read from the floppy, cd rom or hard disk, the applications did not grind to a halt. Even in my PC today (a mighty Athlon XP 2400+), when the CD/floppy stalls, the Windows Explorer goes bonkers.
      • Amiga icons were animated. 'Nough said.
      • The mouse cursor of the Amiga was a hardware sprite. It was so smoothly moving across the desktop in 50 fps. Even in the mightiest PC today, the mouse cursor is quite jerky.
      • There was no silly limitation of 640 KB, and programming in C was as it was supposed to be: there was no silly large and small memory models.
      • For those into programming, the Amiga's chipset was the easiest one programmable. If you wanted to change the resolution, you simply wrote the size of the screen in pixels at some memory location and the video mode was changed. In the PC, before Windows and DirectX, I had to struggle with mode-X, video timing registers that used characters as the display unit, weird memory addressing systems etc.
      • The Amiga's command line was a joy! instead of using drive letters, the Amiga OS named its devices with user-defined names. When a device's name was changed, the links were not broken, because the O/S remembered the namings! Devices could also be accessed as 'device0:', 'device1:' etc.
      • Amiga filenames could accept 32 characters, instead of 8 characters of DOS.
      • Amiga had file types: a file type could be connected to an app, so when double-clicked, the registered app would open it, even from the command line.
      • Amiga had AREXX, one of the finest scripting languages around. One could write whole apps in it...you could control everything with it, and most apps where scriptable through it!
      • The menu bar was used as an information bar when the mouse was away from it, saving useful space. Now all apps waste space in status lines.
      • My Amiga booted from HD in 10 seconds in WB 3.0. There weren't many things to do though: just load the WB(!!!).
      • My Amiga could boot in GUI mode from a floppy, with WB fully ususable from floppy, both from GUI and command line.
      • A friend of mine had an Amiga with two expansion cards: one with an 68030 at 40 MHz, and another with a PowerPC processor at 120 MHz. All CPUs of the machine could be run in parallel! he used to run Lightwave3d on the PowerPC, while the 68030 was busy with code editing and the main 68000 was copying stuff.
      • The above mentioned conf
  4. Google Cache by WhatsAProGingrass · · Score: 2, Informative
    --
    Mark
    1. Re:Google Cache by matth · · Score: 5, Informative

      Why not just use mirrordot.org ?

  5. History of Icons? by Deliveranc3 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Worship the icon you techno pagans!

  6. Hmmm.... by Psychotext · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Where's my flaming server icon?

    I think it's about time that slashdot AUTOMATICALLY posted mirrors for the static pages they link to. Either that or stop posting links to crappy little servers that can't handle the traffic!

    --
    People that believe in their opinions don't post AC.
    1. Re:Hmmm.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful
    2. Re:Hmmm.... by baadger · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Why doesn't the slashcode include something like this...

      $post =~ si/http:\/\/([^\/]+)\/?/http:\/\/$1.nyud.net:8090/ g;

      My perl isn't so good..but wouldn't that be ever so trivial?

  7. Slooooooow Server... by Shadow+Wrought · · Score: 4, Funny

    Looks like an iconoclast got to it.

    --
    If brevity is the soul of wit, then how does one explain Twitter?
  8. my favorite icon by JeanBaptiste · · Score: 5, Interesting
    1. Re:my favorite icon by fussili · · Score: 5, Informative

      The Dogcow's name is Clarus, it simply makes the sound "Moof" :) It's a common misconception.

  9. Icons? by chrispl · · Score: 4, Funny

    Hm, all of the icons look like the same "broken image" icon to me...

    Slashdotted to hell.

    --
    What post? The one you're carrying inside your rusty innards!
  10. Full article text! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    This is a chart of icons from various interfaces. Clicking on GUI names, section names or icons themselves will lead to the appropriate page: Options Show GUI families: Lisa Office System Mac OS NeXTSTEP/OPENSTEP/Rhapsody Windows OS/2 GEOS/GeoWorks Apple II Amiga OS RISC OS BeOS Red Hat Linux QNX Solaris

  11. progress? by justforaday · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Hard to say whether it's progress, since I can't access TFA. However, I will say that the MS/Windows habit of trying to iconify every possible command is not progress. Some things simply cannot be conveyed via a 12x12 or 16x16 (or whatever the res is) pictogram.

    --
    I'll turn into a supernova and burn up everything. Well I'll turn into a black little hole and you'll turn into string.
    1. Re:progress? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I will say that the MS/Windows habit of trying to iconify every possible command is not progress.

      And I will say that the Slashdot habit of blaming everything you don't like on Microsoft is also not progress.

      Funny how in one article everyone's like "Apple is teh cool, they invented EVERYTHING and Microsoft just copied them", and then as soon as someone percieves something Apple popularised - like using icons for everything and deprecating the command line - as "bad", they blame Microsoft for it!

      Apple are the ones to blame for dumbed-down icon-based interfaces. And KDE and Gnome have far more inscrutable icons than Windows does. So really, Microsoft are about as good as anyone gets in this one tiny regard... not that I expect anyone to give them credit for it.

    2. Re:progress? by cowscows · · Score: 3, Informative

      I'll give a specific example that isn't really windows, but still bugs me. phpMyAdmin is an excellent piece of software that really makes my life easier. But a few versions ago they made a change that really bugs me. Before, if you were looking at a database, it could list all of the different tables in a chart, and it'd have links for all the different options (browse, insert, search, drop, empty, etc). Then one day I logged in and it was updated. All those quick little text links were replaced with tiny 16x16 icons. And they aren't even good icons. The icon for empty is a trashcan on top of some weird looking window. It's arguable whether or not a trashcan is a good symbol for empty, but regardless of that, the stupid window in the background makes it illegible. A finger pointing at a piece of paper stands for "structure"?

      There are six commands in that table that they icon-ified. They saved maybe a few pixels of horizontal space, but I don't think they were hurting for room anyways. And it's a big step backwards in terms of usability and intuitiveness.

      They say a picture is worth a thousand words. So isn't it overkill to use an image to replace one single word? How is that supposed to make things any easier?

      It'd be like /. replacing the Submit and Preview button text with little images. What would be the point?

      --

      One time I threw a brick at a duck.

    3. Re:progress? by saltydogdesign · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Some things simply cannot be conveyed via a 12x12 or 16x16 (or whatever the res is) pictogram.

      Tell that to the Chinese.

      --
      // This is not a sig.
    4. Re:progress? by Bradee-oh! · · Score: 2, Interesting

      So, it's a choice between:

      A -- lots of functions, but you have to actually learn something before you can use them fluently

      B -- a small number of functions, but with biiig pretty pictures


      I think you missed a key point of the grandparent post - That on may OSX applications the "small number of functions with biiig pretty pictures" are the icons visible on the default toolbars and the ADDITIONAL functionality is available through the menu system and keyboard shortcuts.

      I think it would be very difficult to argue that OSX versions of the big applications actually have LESS functionality than the MSW versions - they don't. The whole point of this thread is that Microsoft would rather give you a smaaaaaal pretty picture for every single function you can perform which basically clutters up your screen and masks the simple, most common functions. The common OSX approach is to have those biiiig pretty pictures for the functions you'll use 80% of the time and provide organized, readable menus for the other functionality

      As a power user I still have to learn applications. I would much rather hunt for the function I need in a menu system which follows an organizational pattern anyone who's used a computer before should be familiar with then search through the tooltips of scores of archaic pictures for what I need.

      --
      "This is Zombo Com, and welcome to you who have come to Zombo Com" - www.zombo.com
    5. Re:progress? by spitzak · · Score: 2, Insightful

      He is talking about "toolbars" as popularized by Microsoft software, not desktop icons. That idea is certainly Microsofts, whether it is good or bad. I do believe it is *way* overused, and am rather annoyed that they still have not figured out that there is no difference between the "menubar" and the "toolbar" and have failed to make them graphically match or merge them together. To be fair, Microsoft also came up with the popup tooltip that works (Apple's earlier version was too graphically intense and I believe had some other problems that made it hard to use as a quick reference), these tooltips make the "toolbar" as usable as a text bar and the screen realestate savings may be worth it. A vertical menubar with text would be far better, but you can probably blame Apple for convincing all the morons that a menu must be horizontal.

      Both platforms are quite guilty of having inscrutable *appliation* icons, which I think you were talking about. This is mostly commercial software that insists on using their company logo rather than any representation of what it does. Microsoft has apparently given up, their nice looking modern icons use "W" to indicate Word, which is not really an icon, if you think about it!

  12. They're too "static" by diegocgteleline.es · · Score: 4, Funny

    Why not .avi files instead of .png icons? Sure, it will eat more resources, but it'd be great to see a animation (a real animation, not just a .gif or a jumping/flash effect) each time I press or put the mouse over it.

  13. The more things change... by HAKdragon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    While I can't read the article as the server is being slashdotted, I can't help feel that icons, for the most part, have stayed the same since their invention. Sure, we have icons that can be huge, have millions of colors, and have cool transparencey effects, but for the most part, Icons have remained a picture that represents an object or action. The only real innovation that I can think of when it comes to icons are ones which convey information as well as symbolize actions/items. While I'm not familiar if this exists on other icons, it's pretty easy to see on a number of iApps on OSX. For example, Mail's icon shows you how many new messages you have, iCal shows the current date, and when you're downloading files with Safari,the download icons have little progress bars on them, I love the idea of icons providing information to me realting to their particular application and hope to see that implimented more on other systems,

    --
    "Our opponent is an alien starship packed with atomic bombs. We have a protractor."
  14. It's as if icons peaked 2-4 years ago by Alternate+Interior · · Score: 5, Interesting

    In the last handful of years, icons have started making a transformation from functional to stylish. Specifically, look at the differences between Windows 2000->XP icons, and Jaguar->Panther icons. In both cases, the Calculator icon illustrates specifically what I mean. In Jaguar and W2k, it was completly clear what the icon was. In Panther, however, the buttons became grayer, and as a result, the overall icon is less clear. The XP icon is much worse - it is not even distinctly a calculator.

    There are many more examples in the 2k->xp comparison. The address book, for instance. What was once clearly an Address book is now just an open book. The control panel, while not exactly clear in 2k, is now a Todo list! The desktop icon went from a desk with a letter in draft to a _vertical_ oriented surface.

    1. Re:It's as if icons peaked 2-4 years ago by Threni · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Stupid icons are a bit of a bugbear of mine. So often it would be more clear to simply have some text telling you what the button is/does, rather than an abstract, highly coloured blob. I like this little quote from an interview with Richard Stallman:

      ---
      I used a word processor once. Basically I was at a hotel, and I had to type something and get it out, so I used a computer there. And it was running some word processor, which might have been Microsoft Word, I don't know. On the screen there were lots and lots of cryptic icons, whose meanings I couldn't begin to understand. If they had been English words, I might have had a chance.
      ---

    2. Re:It's as if icons peaked 2-4 years ago by spitzak · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Are you kidding? There are a lot of KDE/Gnome applications where picking help gets you irrelevant or useless information. I am afraid too many of the developers think it is ok if some HTML document appears.

      Most recent example is in Gnome control panel, I picked "Sessions", and I got a little window with a "Help" button. I hit that "Help" button and I got a page "Part I Setting Appearance and Personal Preference...". This document did a great job of describing *some* of the items on the Control panel, and would perhaps be acceptable for a "Help" button *ON THE CONTROL PANEL* (which unfortunatly did not have a help button...). However it did not have a chapter on the "Sessions" popup, and I wasted time seeing if it was buried in one of the other chapters.

      Suggested improvement to the GUI: if no help is written, pop up a message that says "no help is available". To be really clever, have it google for answers (that would actually work pretty good for Linux, too!). Don't pop up a page of other text.

      I have to say it is incredibly annoying that "man" from 1970 still works better for getting information than any of these modern systems. With "man" I can quickly and unambigously determine if the information exists (so I don't waste time looking for nonexistent stuff), and if it does it always has the information I need (ie it lists *how to run that command*).

    3. Re:It's as if icons peaked 2-4 years ago by MustardMan · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Frankly, RMS is not one who should be talking about intiutive interfaces.

      NO SHIT! Clicking a picture of a disk to save is a lot more intuitive than typing control-x, control-s. And if you can't figure out that the disk is for saving, you might think... hey, "file" might do things with my file, I'll click that, and hey look here it says "save", I wonder if that saves things

      Hell, I even like emacs, but Stallman criticizing user interfaces is like Carrot Top criticizing fine theater.

  15. Susan Kare - Icon Artist by YorgleLlama · · Score: 5, Informative

    If you like icons, you should check out Susan Kare's page She made most of the original MacOS icons, as well as most of the original Windows icons. Lots of great pixel art.

  16. Orthodoxy Sunday by stoolpigeon · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Was this last sunday - maybe it is an annual holiday type thing. (Yes I know-- they aren't related but shouldn't they be?)

    The dominant theme of this Sunday since 843 has been that of the victory of the icons. In that year the iconoclastic controversy, which had raged on and off since 726, was finally laid to rest, and icons and their veneration were restored on the first Sunday in Lent. Ever since, that Sunday been commemorated as the "triumph of Orthodoxy."

    Orthodox teaching about icons was defined at the Seventh Ecumenical Council of 787, which brought to an end the first phase of the attempt to suppress icons. That teaching was finally re-established in 843, and it is embodied in the texts sung on this Sunday.

    --
    It's hard to believe that's how Micronians are made. Why don't we see it right now by having you both kiss one another?
  17. Coral links by spin2cool · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How hard is it to use coral links? Editors - why aren't you automatically append ".nyud.net:8090" to any url? How hard is that, really?.

    Sigh...

    1. Re:Coral links by squiggleslash · · Score: 3, Interesting
      Because it's difficult to access those links when you're stuck behind corporate firewalls. Coral uses port 8090, a non-standard port that most firewalls are unaware of and block.

      It's like a restaurant. You're stuck with the menu the restaurant has. Now, it's not that you can't necessarily get the kitchen to do a ham and cheese, but you have to do it in terms it understands (for example, you can order a burger that has ham and cheese, and order it without the beefburger, salad, etc), kind of like h[tt]p:, which runs on port 80. You can do it via the firewall, but it has to look like an HTTP request, which means running it on port 80. You can then say "Ohh, it's not really a burger, it's a ham and cheese sandwich" but as far as the kitchen's concerned, it's just one of their regular burgers. You might look at port 8090 as the ham - they're likely to have cheese burgers, but a ham, cheese, and beef burger? Not likely. So you can't have your ham and cheese because you haven't come up with a sandwich that really works within the framework you're given.

      The only option is to leave the restaurant, and cook your own sandwich, but that's not always an option, especially if you actually work at the restaurant so can't leave until 5pm, but you're a waiter or you work at the bar or you greet people or wash up or something so you can't actually make the sandwich yourself (well, not in a unionized restaurant anyway. A union-free restaurant might allow it, but you don't want to upset the staff, and it's probably going against company policy.)

      Port 8090 isn't supported by most corporate firewalls, so making all URLs point at it would just prevent Slashdot's working readers (the vast majority) from "eating their ham and cheese sandwich" - or, in other words, accessing the website. This would damage Slashdot long term as people would just stop reading it except for a few people at Universities and in Cybercafes, neither of which are appealing to Slashdot's advertisers.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    2. Re:Coral links by CylanR77 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      To everyone on a corporate firewall, just suck it up.

      Either just figure out the url to the original content, stop reading slashdot at work and get some *work* done, convince your administrators/managers that you should be allowed to view content on a nonstandard port so you can spend more company time browsing the web, or leave and find a different job.

      For a website which is devoted to shoveling up information for the most elitist of all computer-literate people [including some bright individuals], you'd think that somehow, a better system could be put into place than "bomb websites with loads of traffic, indiscriminantly".

      --
      http://cylan.deviantart.com/gallery/
  18. Biblical Icons by mfh · · Score: 5, Funny

    Don't forget the Biblical Icons. That Golden Calf must have some pretty great raytracing and high polys to be worshipped so blatantly at the risk of utter destruction.

    --
    The dangers of knowledge trigger emotional distress in human beings.
  19. If you like icons by titaniam · · Score: 2, Informative

    Then see my site iconsurf.com where hundreds of thousands of icons are displayed to help you surf the internet.

  20. Where are the default gnome icons? by arose · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I find them better than most of the icons included in the article.

    --
    Analogies don't equal equalities, they are merely somewhat analogous.
  21. Re:Mirror by TruthSeeker · · Score: 2, Funny

    In case of Slashdotting, break mirror.

    Oh, and we broke it ...

    --
    I sense much beer in you. Beer leads to intoxication, intoxication leads to hangover. Hangover leads to sobering.
  22. Bad joke about icons (believe it or not) by sczimme · · Score: 5, Funny


    Q. Once upon a time a mouse became trapped in a Russian cathedral; how did he escape?

    A. He clicked on an icon and opened a window.

    (I can't claim credit for that one...)

    --
    I want to drag this out as long as possible. Bring me my protractor.
    1. Re:Bad joke about icons (believe it or not) by Gulthek · · Score: 2, Funny

      (I can't claim credit for that one...)

      Would you want to?

  23. Joke? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Q: Why is Judy Garland like a cute little picture on an Apple Mac?
    A: Because they're both gay icons.

    Man, that was lame... sorry.

  24. The GIMP by Heliode · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The Gimp lets you create .ico files just fine. I use the Windows version of The GIMP whenever I really need to build icons for Windows.

    --
    Fox can take the sky from you.
  25. another false story filed by GarbanzoBean · · Score: 2, Funny
    The GUIdebook has a great page illustrating the history of icons.

    Yet again, the Slashdot editors have allowed a mispelled story to be posted. It should be had.

  26. Icon progess... by linebackn · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm not sure I would call everything that has happened to icons progress.

    Now that icons are commonly 24 bit color or more and use complex shading and styles they are often more difficult to identify at a glance than 2-color monochrome icons. (Icons should always be capable of being represented as a 2-color monochrome icons to ensure they have enough visual contrast)

    And with all of the varying styles these days, if you don't make your icons specific to each operating environment then they stick out like sore a thumb.

    The days of 16-color icons were probably the best because you could make a decent icon without having to be an artist or having an expensive paint program.

    It still boggles my mind how many people choose bad icons for their products. I currently have the joy of working with a particular software product where many of the different configuration tools all have slightly different pictures of little computer... looking things with some kind of network dealy around them, and I keep getting them all mixed up. Of course part of the problem is that the programs aren't very well organized to begin with and the fact that they keep changing the program names in each version proves that.

    Anyway, it is important that any application have a clear distinct purpose, a good icon to reflect that purpose and then to stick with it as people learn what it symbolized.

    Remember, Icons literally become a language to people!

  27. People Could I have your attention? by danalien · · Score: 3, Informative
    for a tiny-winy bit.

    DISCLAIMER: This is off-topic, yet related.

    Now that I have it, all I wanted to say is that we (the 'slashdotters') need to agree to some common courtesy.
    Yes, I'm talking about the 'slashdot effect'.

    That each time we, who post something, take the 'common courtesy' of at least Coral CDN [mirror it].

    And, no it's not that hard at all, either!

    all that 'we' have to do is: http://redirect.nyud.net:8090/?url=${SUBSTITUTE_WI TH_URL} (see footnotes for more info...)

    See, not that hard, really. If it wheren't I would have taken *this time to ask for you attention.


    ----

    *) ...and if you got 'Konqueror' create a (new) shortcut (like so):
    'Searh provider name' == 'Coral CDN' (or enter your own name :P)
    'Search URI' == 'http://redirect.nyud.net:8090/?url=\{@}'
    'URI shortcuts' == 'cdn,mirror,mirr' (or, again, pick your own 'web shortcuts' :P)

    so, now all you konqi's have to do is 'mirr: ${URL} '

    *) .. and for all you Firefox'rs, here's a searchplugin for you'vs too: coral.src & coral.gif [add them to your 'Mozilla Searchplugins'-dir]

    *) .. and you with other browser, I don't know much about others to comment about. But if you use an enhanced browser (eg. not-IE :-) *blow below the belt, I know, I know =)*), you might be able to add it yourself, someway, like with 'Konqueror'. But I wouldn't know about it, so I leave this up to you'vs.

    --
    I don't claim I know more than I know, and if you know you know more than I know, then by all means, let me know.
    1. Re:People Could I have your attention? by dacarr · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Howsabout instructions on getting around firewalls? Like was indicated earlier, most firewalls block port 8090.

      --
      This sig no verb.
    2. Re:People Could I have your attention? by randyest · · Score: 2, Informative
      Right; it's not hard. But it rarely works. Like now. Coral gives:
      Due to techical problems this page is currently unavailable.

      Please try after a while - we will do our best to resolve this issue as soon as possible


      And mirrordot is slashdotted.

      Any more ideas you can present to us in that super pedantic manner?
      --
      everything in moderation
    3. Re:People Could I have your attention? by danalien · · Score: 2, Insightful
      hehe :)

      1st) it's hard to mirror, if the target URL has been slashdotted prior to CoralCDN-mirroring it...*but you knew that*

      2nd) ... and it's also hard to mirror a target URL if CoralCDN has been slashdotted, too. [CoralCDN in my eye's is still a quite a 'green' project (needs more exposure to grow), but it sure has got potential of becoming something great!]

      3rd) .. or it could be something with your (closest) node ... or something

      --
      I don't claim I know more than I know, and if you know you know more than I know, then by all means, let me know.
  28. Re:Deja Vu (Slashdotted) by supergiovane · · Score: 3, Funny

    Awesome! The post you mention is one year old and the link is STILL SLASHDOTTED!

    --
    Signatures are for stupids.
  29. Icons for software development by KIngo · · Score: 2, Informative
    Until recently, I've found it quite difficult to find decent icons for software development. As a software developer I have a natural inability to draw anything that remotely resembles the intended object and the free icon collections on the internet made my applications look like frankenstein clones.

    Fortunately, nowadays the situation has improved considerably. You can find a lot of useful BSD-licensed icons in the eclipse project, most of them are quite IDE-related, but with a little bit of imagination you can use them in lots of different situations.

    If you have some money to spend, you can buy the icon collections from Incors. They're really great Windows XP-style icons for a very reasonable price.

  30. Truth is Beauty by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Aesthetic progress, sure. Functional progress? Well, every icon represents a file. Why aren't the complete file operations available for that file available by clicking the icon? Why isn't it obvious by looking at a file icon which apps can process it? Why aren't different modes for reading and writing apparent from the app icons? Why aren't there very obvious differences between data, logic and presentation file icons? Why can't I draw pipes and redirects among the icons, making a graph like the one simulated in a commandline with "|" and "" characters? Not to mention no way to start an app in the background by its icon. And don't get me started on representing permissions, ownership, in-use status, or any other state metadata.

    As icons have progressed, we've evolved some very stable patterns in using the files which they represent. But all that these icons communicate is that a file exists, in a given storage subdivision (folder), with some clues to its datatype. If half the time spent beautifying icons were spent making them work better, more interactive, more representational of the full state of the file and its context, we'd all be more productive.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

    1. Re:Truth is Beauty by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 2, Informative

      But all that these icons communicate is that a file exists, in a given storage subdivision (folder), with some clues to its datatype.

      I have three OS's in front of me right now. Two of them have icons more or less the same as in the 90's. One is different. If you want useful icons, you want OS X. My mail icon tells me how many unread messages I have. My minimized windows indicate what application they are associated with and a thumbnail of the window. My calendar app shows the date. Downloading files show a progress bar. Minimized movies show, well the movie, still playing, or still if paused. Applications with a dialogue box, or that need attention bounce. One of my icons shows me system stats (cpu, memory, disk, network activity, and cpu use over the last minute) in a cryptic, but readable fashion.

      There is certainly a lot more that can be done to make icons more informative and useful, but to say that they have not advanced is to ignore all of the above. OS X has provided the means to make icons useful. Some developers have run with it and some have ignored the capabilities. There is more to be done, mostly with with more advanced file managers. Some will have to wait until there is more cpu power available and some can be done now. Just don't ignore the state of the art because you are not using it for whatever reason.

  31. you will laugh, but by dunkelfalke · · Score: 2, Informative

    many of those windows animations, like for example this small animation when deleting files to the recycle bin, are avi files.

    --
    Conservatism: The fear that somewhere, somehow, someone you think is your inferior is being treated as your equal.
  32. Icons by RagingChipmunk · · Score: 2, Insightful

    A neat step forward in Iconography for windows would be the ability to use alternate image formats. Time for the 'ICO' to go, yes, I know its a special format, multiple resolutions, color schemes yadda yadda.

    Even though it begs for abuse, support for an animated GIF as your desktop icons could be fun.

    --
    The only PT Boat Journal on the web: http://www.PT171.org
  33. That's no fun by bstadil · · Score: 2, Funny
    Taking down the site is part of the Esprit de Corp of being a slashdotter.

    It instills a sense of empowerment and camaraderie among us, don't take this away from us ;-)

    --
    Help fight continental drift.
  34. Rude! by EEPS · · Score: 2, Funny

    ICONS??? I use the terminal you insensitive CLOD!

  35. Re:Slashdotted by maxwell+demon · · Score: 2, Funny

    I can even imagine what it could look like. A big hammer hammering onto a server, where the shaft of the hammer forms the slash of the slashdot sign (i.e. there's the dot part right of it).

    --
    The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
  36. Artist (aka not me) by LPetrazickis · · Score: 4, Informative

    Weboso (aka Jairo Boudewyn) is the creative force behind those. DeviantArt has a sprawling interface, so here's a direct link to his Gallery.:)

    --
    Is this a sigs-optional kind of place? 'Cause I am totally down with that if you know what I mean.
  37. What? No Amiga?! by AstroSurf · · Score: 2, Informative

    Talk about icons! You could make full-screen icons on Ami! And the selected version could be a completely different picture from the unselected.

    That said, it was mostly a low-overhead UI. Now sadly missed.

    --
    Astro
  38. A little credit to the inventor by blamanj · · Score: 4, Informative

    When the Xerox Star came out, it had icons because they had been proposed in a PhD thesis by David Smith.

  39. Mirror by tajmorton · · Score: 2, Informative

    Thanks to Mirrordot.

    --
    Tell the truth and you won't have so much to remember.
  40. Jimmac's GNOME icons by Jim+Hall · · Score: 2, Informative

    If you like icons, you may also want to check out Jimmac's ikony. You've probably seen a lot of his icons already, if you use GNOME. Really great stuff!