Re: Icon design

faq
flatforty
contribute
subscribe
configure
search
rdf

main
parent
thread

Re: Icon design
by Lala on Wednesday 16/Nov/2005, @18:20

'From a usability point of view it doesn't make too much sense, nor does it from an aesthetic point of view.'

You are talking about about aestetics and usability? First, you have to learn something about colors (your desktop, which you are so proud of, is a proof that you are colorblind). Combination of shity green and shity blue color on your desktop is a great example how one should not use the colors.

And rule number one (which you don't understand):

Aestetics = usability

'There are a number of aspects that make an icon theme more consistent, all of which are more important than the direction they face (for instance, the color palette). In fact, if we allow the "direction" mantra to override other aspects, it may even hurt usability.'

No shit. Dude, you don't understand anything. Direction is as important as any other aspect. Icons must not be a disturbing element on a desktop, and they are disturbing element if they are not facing the same direction.

Related Links

·   Articles on Graphics and Art
·   Also by Lala
·   Contact author

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whomever posted them.
( Reply )

Re: Icon design
by oliv on Wednesday 16/Nov/2005, @23:11

>Aestetics = usability

Please check in a dictionary. And then read some documentation about usability. And then think. The conclusion will spring. A sparkle of understanding in your mind. A delicious feeling.

[ Reply To This | View ]

Re: Icon design
by molnarcs on Thursday 17/Nov/2005, @03:57

"your desktop, which you are so proud of,"

Oh, please - I'm not proud of it, in fact, I linked to it as an example for color mismatch. I prefer green as a background, and I have yet to find an icon theme that is both complete and integrates well to my taste in backgrounds.

"Aesthetics=usability"

Yeah, sure. I just checked the highest rated icon sets on kde-look: nuvoeXT, crystalclear, nuvola, in this order. These are the icon sets users found most pleasing, and yet - behold the direction of the icons: ftp://hatvani.unideb.hu/pub/personal/screenshots/icons/

I think this pretty much settles the matter: good usability doesn't have to be explained to the users (with brain-pattern-recognition babble). I'm all for cooperation and whatnot, and my intention is not to incite a flamewar, but this entire matter reminds me of usability folks in the "other" project having to explain why one or other feature (spatial browsing by default comes to mind is supposed to be better), disregarding every complaint from the userbase... yeah, sure, you usability pundits don't have to listen to your users (this is a hypothetical "you" here, adressed to usabilityDude type of pundits). If they don't agree with your views on usability, it simply because they have poor aesthetic taste, and idiots in general, right?

[ Reply To This | View ]

The Fine Print: The previous comments are owned by whomever posted them.
( Reply )


		"World domination doesn't come by itself." -- Ralf Nolden
KDE®, "K Desktop Environment", "KDE Dot News", "got the dot?" and the KDE Logo® are trademarks or registered trademarks of KDE e.V. in the European Union, the United States and other countries. All other trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the poster. The rest: Copyright © 2000-2008 KDE e.V. for The KDE Project. For further information or comments on this site, please contact the Webmaster.