Hmm... Very similar looking icons for 2 completely unrelated apps...

Discussion in 'iOS Apps' started by TheSpaz, Mar 2, 2009.

  1. TheSpaz macrumors 604

    TheSpaz

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2005
    #1
    Look here:

    iThink

    and here:

    WhitePages Mobile

    Someone might get in trouble. Do you think iThink is blatantly ripping off WhitePages Mobile or do you think it was a coincidence?
     
  2. acfusion29 macrumors 68040

    acfusion29

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2007
    Location:
    Toronto
  3. wmcwmc macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2009
  4. MacToddB macrumors 6502a

    MacToddB

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2007
    Location:
    Rochester, NY
    #4
    So will it be WhitePages.com or the guy in Japan with the free app and no discernible revenue stream?
     
  5. return7 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2008
  6. wmcwmc macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2009
  7. MacToddB macrumors 6502a

    MacToddB

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2007
    Location:
    Rochester, NY
    #7
    Since they're free, I downloaded both, and put the apps side by side.

    It's pretty clear the iThink app copied the other one, not only because it's a new app with nearly zero reviews and WhitePages is old with 400+ reviews, but the iThink icon has extra white shading at the top... They didn't set the 'prerendered' flag when uploading the app, so it gets re-rendered and shrunk slightly. Very amusing, but also disconcerting. I'll go post a review now!

    At least I don't have to worry about an exact copy of my icon... the app's name (100sounds) is in it!
     
  8. TheSpaz thread starter macrumors 604

    TheSpaz

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2005
    #8
    I can't stand it when an App icon has the app name IN the icon. What's the point in having the name below the icon and inside the icon? Kinda defeats the purpose of having an icon.
     
  9. MacToddB macrumors 6502a

    MacToddB

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2007
    Location:
    Rochester, NY
    #9
    And yet this thread, which you started, proves the value :)

    Seriously, in my case, the 100 is an integral part of the icon design. The zeros act like speakers with waves resonating out. Plus the image is used in advertising, reviews, etc., where the name is NOT necessarily highlighted or even included.
     
  10. stevearm macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2007
    #10
    Horrendously ugly icon, sorry. I completely agree with theSpaz.

    No point in having the title in an icon, completely pointless and in 99% of cases looks ugly.
     
  11. MacToddB macrumors 6502a

    MacToddB

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2007
    Location:
    Rochester, NY
    #11
    To each their own. But "completely pointless" is simplistic. This thread demonstrates the danger of a generic icon. And keep in mind that an app icon appears many places without the title below it. Look at an Apple store. How many banner ads do you see that have no indication what the app is? This isn't about guessing games, it's about sales. I agree that just typing the name is one thing, but if it's used as an integrated part of the design, that's another. But, what do I know?
     
  12. TheSpaz thread starter macrumors 604

    TheSpaz

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2005
    #12
    Less is more.
     
  13. stevearm macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2007
    #13
    There's a difference between banner ads and app icons.

    And yes as TheSpaz says, less is more. People want gorgeous icons that they'll love to see on their iPhone homescreen.

    Not black icons, with the name of it written twice, one on top of the other.
     
  14. MacToddB macrumors 6502a

    MacToddB

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2007
    Location:
    Rochester, NY
    #14
    Unfortunately, the app icon is quite often the banner ad when 125x125 is the typical ad size. It's certainly the identity of an app and it's like a game of Memory Match trying to place apps with their icons.

    Well, they can get plenty of gorgeous icons to look at... for free. My focus is on identification, for ease of use and importantly, for purchase.

    If that's all the icon was, I'd agree. But as I said, the 100 is a key design element.

    Look, we can disagree... but there's no need to take such a hardline about it. It's a valid point that icons should be something people want to put on their phone. But it's also a valid point that a generic non-descript (albeit pretty) icon, is at risk of being copied (see this very thread), or worse, unidentifiable... and therefore never purchased.

    Then again, what do I know. Perhaps my customers are wrong :)
     

Share This Page