Yeah, I do remember different icon sizes on the Amiga. Way back when I was in junior high, they had one to do graphics in the video/technology class.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Patent: Multi-Sized Icon Interface for Mac OS X?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yeah, I do remember different icon sizes on the Amiga. Way back when I was in junior high, they had one to do graphics in the video/technology class.
1984 graphics!
I love the image - deja-vu to April 1984 when I unpacked my 128 KB Mac and fired it up for the first time!
I love the image - deja-vu to April 1984 when I unpacked my 128 KB Mac and fired it up for the first time!
Look again. The collection of icons in the sketch do not give a cue to the third dimension. It features MacOS 8 application, document and folder icons of different sizes. However, the folders are of different sizes and orientations. Although it may be possible to use this this technique to simulate cues to the third dimension, it will take a lot more refinement than is displayed in the patent application. There was no attempt to do so here.
Maybe Leopard will sport a new "Classic" GUI mode - that olde tyme OS9 look with all of today's innovation behind it. 
I can see why this feature never made it to the top of the heap, but I suppose for folks who work more visually than I, it would be a good thing.
Though I'd rather see Leopard released sooner rather then later if they're adding on "secret" features such as this.
I can see why this feature never made it to the top of the heap, but I suppose for folks who work more visually than I, it would be a good thing.
Though I'd rather see Leopard released sooner rather then later if they're adding on "secret" features such as this.
I seem to remember seeing this in some screen shots of AmigaDOS.
Scroll down in this article to the Amiga Workbench screen shot. Notice that not all the icons are the same size.
But this isn't quite the same thing. The patent under discussion seems to be desribing different scale-factors for each icon. In the case of the Amiga, icons were always displayed at a 1:1 scale. The different sizes were the result of the files/applications providing different size icons to the Workbench.
I'm pretty sure this was not in OS/2. I was an OS/2 user for almost 10 years and I never saw this. All of OS/2's icons were displayed at a single size, determined by the video driver (typically 32x32 for low resolutions or 40x40 for high resolutions. OS/2 1.3 used 64x64 for high resolutions.)
Could be useful!
This could be really useful for finding say, a current project folder within Documents or making the drive icons on the desktop larger than the rest of the stuff that ends up there. I can see how this feature would make it easier for people to easily identify certain items out of the mass of stuff we all have to manage on a daily basis.
Would be really cool if they could extend this idea to things like Mail.app. I'd love to have client emails show up in large fonts in the inbox list for example.
This could be really useful for finding say, a current project folder within Documents or making the drive icons on the desktop larger than the rest of the stuff that ends up there. I can see how this feature would make it easier for people to easily identify certain items out of the mass of stuff we all have to manage on a daily basis.
Would be really cool if they could extend this idea to things like Mail.app. I'd love to have client emails show up in large fonts in the inbox list for example.
Not wanting to give anything away Apple chose to use a "generic" square Finder window.The Patent is for the icons not the full window.I'd do the same if I wanted a new Finder to remain under wraps
Ok, much silliness is coming into the thread. You can head over to http://pat2pdf.org and use 20070079255 as the number to see the actual document instead of the ridiculous AppleInsider summary.
Sounds Good
Sounds good. I would love to be able to designate different sizes for different icon types. For example: All photos at maximum size (with previews), but file folders at, say 64x64 pixels. Sounds great to me!
I have a problem with the way Tiger deals with view options for windows. Every time you open up "view options" it defaults to "change for all windows." If you're not careful, you mess up every window. Then you have to go back and change every window that had different view options. Bogus.
Sounds good. I would love to be able to designate different sizes for different icon types. For example: All photos at maximum size (with previews), but file folders at, say 64x64 pixels. Sounds great to me!
I have a problem with the way Tiger deals with view options for windows. Every time you open up "view options" it defaults to "change for all windows." If you're not careful, you mess up every window. Then you have to go back and change every window that had different view options. Bogus.
mmh..nice little article. Not sure I like the different icons thing - it could get a little messy if they're not careful.
Funny how the guy has OSX and XP tied historically on his 'timeline' graph - I do hope Windows people don't see OSX to be 'of the XP generation' ??
I guess they also think Leopard is playing catch up!!
I think the headline's a little misleading, my immediate thought was "AmigaOS" too. Changing it to "Individual icons dynamically sized" would probably be more descriptive.
Interestingly, it is an extension of an unrelated Amiga concept. The Amiga allowed files to not have icons at all. From AmigaOS 2 onwards, files with icons were displayed by default, and files without them were only shown if you selected "Window->View->All Files" from the menu. Generally, user created folders and documents had icons, whereas less important files didn't.
How is this related? Well, in practice, despite its origins as a disk saving hack, it made it easier to identify important files. Generally, the applications you'd want to run had icons. The word processor documents you wanted to open had icons. Things you needed had icons, the others didn't clutter your desktop unless you needed to see them.
And in that respect, I think that's the intention here. Your own files, representing stuff you work on every day, will have large icons. The metric butt-load of downloaded PDFs, application installers, etc, you download from the Internet will have much smaller ones. Stuff batch downloaded from your digital camera will appear, but it will be assumed you actually just want to see them in iPhoto, not your file system.
It's a much more spacial approach than the Amiga's (which isn't surprising because it's actually had some thought put into it in terms of "How is this useful", as opposed to the Amiga's "Damn it, the developers aren't giving icons to every file" rationale, that ended up being accidentally a really good thing.) But... therein lies the problem. If it's spacial, will it stand much chance of appearing in a modern Finder?
This would be absolutely fantastic. I can see myself using this a lot especially with like papers that are due soon so I make their icons bigger for importance sake. Beautiful idea!
I want it a customizable view like "Light Table" in Aperture,
a slider to change the icon size will be ok, it also works for multiple files to change size.
It would be interesting. I don't think it will mess, you can switch to column or standard icon view anytime, after all.
a slider to change the icon size will be ok, it also works for multiple files to change size.
It would be interesting. I don't think it will mess, you can switch to column or standard icon view anytime, after all.
sorry to break it to you all.
this is not a new feature for 10.5
this is actually a feature which used to be in old versions OSX but was removed.
it was never public, but there was a hack which enabled a submenu in the Finder which allowed you to set a size for each individual icon.
it was in 10.0 - 10.1 i think. then removed.
apple played with the idea and dropped it.
here is more info:
http://blog.kung-foo.tv/archives/000466.php
also i suspect the patent filing does not conflict with other OS's having multiple icon sizes. the patent is specific to having some systematic linking of item size with file importance.
this is not a new feature for 10.5
this is actually a feature which used to be in old versions OSX but was removed.
it was never public, but there was a hack which enabled a submenu in the Finder which allowed you to set a size for each individual icon.
it was in 10.0 - 10.1 i think. then removed.
apple played with the idea and dropped it.
here is more info:
http://blog.kung-foo.tv/archives/000466.php
also i suspect the patent filing does not conflict with other OS's having multiple icon sizes. the patent is specific to having some systematic linking of item size with file importance.
You idiot...he's speculating. Give them all a break.
Again, it's just speculation. The title of this thread does not say 10.5 either. People are commenting on it being implemented in the future, yes, but because it was once in and taken out does NOT mean it can't be returned.
That's like saying features Microsoft promises and takes out, while there are traces found in the OS, will never return. There would go their whole SP1!!
Hey everyone! This website is called MacRumors, so you all should welcome speculating, whether you think it's a load of crock or not.
-=|Mgkwho
Does this really need a patent ? I have seen things like this before, its not anything really new. I don't think this justifies a patent. Then again, I am generally against software patents
Based on other patent filings as of late and the differences between patent diagrams and final execution (e.g. iPhone), including Piles which was a project that actually started in 1992, and some conversations I've had with a former Apple product engineer, I think it's possible that:
1. The diagrams aren't to be taken as a literal interpretation of the exact form in which the features may manifest. The diagrams are representative of a concept.
2. As potential integrations into Leopard in combination with Piles, Cover Flow and various other depth-oriented UI design factors, it's my opinion that Apple is migrating toward a platform that will be suitable for multitouch user interaction. The first devices to see a more full-blown functionality of this kind following iPhone are widely regarded by analysts to be in the Mobile Mac business unit that recently emerged at Apple.
3. The features described in the patent are disjointed.. Often Apple files patents on concepts without really expressing the larger product in which those concepts may take shape. This might even include omitting the various applications and OS panels in which this potentially contextual icon sizing may ultimately manifest... But that's how Apple is... they work on a concept and then design products around it.
1. The diagrams aren't to be taken as a literal interpretation of the exact form in which the features may manifest. The diagrams are representative of a concept.
2. As potential integrations into Leopard in combination with Piles, Cover Flow and various other depth-oriented UI design factors, it's my opinion that Apple is migrating toward a platform that will be suitable for multitouch user interaction. The first devices to see a more full-blown functionality of this kind following iPhone are widely regarded by analysts to be in the Mobile Mac business unit that recently emerged at Apple.
3. The features described in the patent are disjointed.. Often Apple files patents on concepts without really expressing the larger product in which those concepts may take shape. This might even include omitting the various applications and OS panels in which this potentially contextual icon sizing may ultimately manifest... But that's how Apple is... they work on a concept and then design products around it.
That's what I would guess too. Just like the finder knows 'top hits' icon functionality could use that intelligence as well, The OS could also look at your work history and resize icons based on how their content relates to what you're doing.