AgreedHopefully not. They look like crap and aren't even that helpful. Safari looks much cleaner without them.
But what about everywhere else? Are they making a full come-back?
Hopefully not. They look like crap and aren't even that helpful. Safari looks much cleaner without them.
Not all pinned tabs use the favicon. I can't tell exactly what causes Safari to use it vs the letter on a colored background. It might hardcoded for some specific sites. Reddit, for example, uses an entirely different image that is not the favicon.
MacRumors has an Apple touch icon, and it is displayed as a letter on pinned tabs.Safari uses the "Apple Touch Icon", and if it is not available it uses letters.
Cleaner it may be, but also harder to sort through my many open tabs. I don't think I would mind the favicons.Hopefully not. They look like crap and aren't even that helpful. Safari looks much cleaner without them.
My mistake, I was thinking about the other icons. The pinned icons are finally coming from the html5 link tag. And as mentioned above should be svg.MacRumors has an Apple touch icon, and it is displayed as a letter on pinned tabs.
Firefox 41 and Chrome will be supporting svg-favicons, IE supports it if you make a svg named favicon.ico . And it seem like the format for pinned-type in Safari will be changed to something likeAn SVG favicon? Why would they not follow the same format as everyone else? Can't they at least provide some backwards compatibility for those sites that don't bother?
For pinned tabs, existing SVG favicons do not work. They will need to be redone.Firefox 41 and Chrome will be supporting svg-favicons, IE supports it if you make a svg named favicon.ico . And it seem like the format for pinned-type in Safari will be changed to something like
<link rel="mask-icon" href="pinned.svg" color="#00FFFF">
I am sure favicon.ico will still be supported as before, as well as the appletouchicons...
It doesn't seem to be the case now, going by the picture above and the missing icon of MacRumors. It's already annoying enough that many websites don't seem to support the large icons in the favourites view of Safari 8 either. I don't get why Apple always need to do their own thing. It's not like Safari is currently a popular browser.Firefox 41 and Chrome will be supporting svg-favicons, IE supports it if you make a svg named favicon.ico . And it seem like the format for pinned-type in Safari will be changed to something like
<link rel="mask-icon" href="pinned.svg" color="#00FFFF">
I am sure favicon.ico will still be supported as before, as well as the appletouchicons...
I get the logic behind this. Apple touch icons have been around for a while (originally introduced as icons for sites on the iOS home screen), and regular favicons just aren't large enough to do the job without looking very ugly/pixelated.It's already annoying enough that many websites don't seem to support the large icons in the favourites view of Safari 8 either. I don't get why Apple always need to do their own thing.
Tell that to Apple, which now wants to charge $99/year just to develop extensions for it.It's not like Safari is currently a popular browser.
I get the logic behind this. Apple touch icons have been around for a while (originally introduced as icons for sites on the iOS home screen), and regular favicons just aren't large enough to do the job without looking very ugly/pixelated.
It doesn't seem to be the case now, going by the picture above and the missing icon of MacRumors. It's already annoying enough that many websites don't seem to support the large icons in the favourites view of Safari 8 either. I don't get why Apple always need to do their own thing. It's not like Safari is currently a popular browser.
I was under the impression that the current release of Firefox/Chrome supported it, but it appears you are correct.For the moment only Firefox in their Nightly Developer Release support SVG favicon (in the <LINK rel=icon> tag). Safari only support SVG in the Pinned tab, so Apple is not the "dominator". And the support for PNG will still be there.
However, Safari makes things worse by not showing the "alternate icon" png, so sites with an SVG as a normal favicon won't have one at all.
Exactly this. I understand that Apple wants to move things forward and push new techologies, but why not even add a fallback for normal favicons in this case?
Based on my experience with a few software companies, fallbacks usually remove the incentive to improve things. In other words, if Apple provides a fallback, there is zero incentive to even do the proper icon. Why do a SVG icon when the favicon is good enough.
Never underestimate the power of lazinessThat is a fair question, no? ;-) Shouldn't the advantages speak for themselves?