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.
Some flat replacement icons, thoughts?
- Thread starter andreaslarsen
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Don't like them. My theory is the flat icons were added to iOS7 so the OS can run smoother. 3 dimensional icons take up more resources. Any of today's Macs don't need low-res icons to run better. That being said I do like the square look and wish Apple would replace the Dock icons with ones designed like the Dashboard icons. I never understood why they didn't.
Uh, that is not true at all. And even if it were, the iOS 7 UI takes up more resources in almost every respect---parallax background, transparency, new multitasking view...
Anyway, there is no chance OS X icons will look like this. Having every icon the same shape is bad UI design for a mouse interface, and goes against Apple's own guidelines. If you want to see how they will probably change, take a look at the new Maps icon. More stylized, no more gloss--yes. but they will retain their shapes and the 3D perspective.
No!
Bad!
Not good!
Terrible!
Much worse than not good, even!
To be avoided at all costs!
Just one man's subtly expressed humble opinion, of course...
Bad!
Not good!
Terrible!
Much worse than not good, even!
To be avoided at all costs!
Just one man's subtly expressed humble opinion, of course...
They break a number of Apple's UI guidelines for icons:
- icons for user apps are colorful and inviting, whereas the icons for utilities have a more serious appearance.
- Give your app icon a realistic, unique shape. (remove the rounded rectangular outline of the iOS app icon)
- Choose the right perspective for your icon
- icons for user apps are colorful and inviting, whereas the icons for utilities have a more serious appearance.
- Give your app icon a realistic, unique shape. (remove the rounded rectangular outline of the iOS app icon)
- Choose the right perspective for your icon
@ everyone
Well taste is different and I'm glad some of you liked them
I know they don't follow the hig but I only use a very few apps on a daily basis so just wanted some that were as plain/simple as possible.
Submitted them to icon finder earlier today for free use (don't know how fast they are) but will probably upload them somewhere else too.
----------
If I expected OS X to look like this I obviously wouldn't have created them (And I think you are correct about where OS X style is heading)
But I'm curious as to why same shape icons are bad for mouse interface?
----------
Created some folder icons in the same style:
(They look a bit big/fat in the image but I like 'em when smaller sized in finder - easier to differentiate than stock ones)
![VMjZ+]()
Well taste is different and I'm glad some of you liked them
I know they don't follow the hig but I only use a very few apps on a daily basis so just wanted some that were as plain/simple as possible.
Submitted them to icon finder earlier today for free use (don't know how fast they are) but will probably upload them somewhere else too.
----------
If I expected OS X to look like this I obviously wouldn't have created them
(And I think you are correct about where OS X style is heading)But I'm curious as to why same shape icons are bad for mouse interface?
----------
Created some folder icons in the same style:
(They look a bit big/fat in the image but I like 'em when smaller sized in finder - easier to differentiate than stock ones)
It is easier for the eye to distinguish and click on icons that have unique shapes. iOS icons should probably be uniquely shaped for the same reasons, I'm not sure why they aren't. I think it's less of an issue because you are directly interacting with it, it's harder to "misclick".
Here's what Apple says:
Of course, Apple themselves have gone against their own guidelines for some time with their toolbar icons. And they are going overboard with their circular icons...the old iTunes icon was vastly better than the new one because it was uniquely shaped. Now, it's just another blue circle, just like the bad App Store icon.
What's not true at all, plain flat icons take up less resources than 3D designed ones? And before you return your answer as a plain "yes", enlighten me how so?
----------
Well in all fairness the OP did ask of our thoughts.
Yes, because a faux-3D image is just a group of static pixels the same as a 2D image. They are both plain .pngs.
We are maybe taking this a bit off topic but whatever...:
As always Apples guidelines are for everyone else to follow and not so much Apple...that just Apple.
Not that it bothers me but doesn't really make sense to me to differentiate between OS X and iOS icons in HIG - you "click" with finger or mouse, same difference
Thing about custom shape icons that annoys me a bit though me is how you in finder can click the "icon area" without anything happening. E.g., click between the arm and belly of the automator icon (it's almost in the middle of the icon) and nothing happens - you have to hit the custom shape. The whole icon square and not just the shape should be clickable.
That being said - If I had created an mac app then I would obviously create a custom shaped 3D icon (did that in fact a year or two ago)
And I agree that shapes are easier to distinguish but I rarely have more that 5 apps running in the dock simultaneously and use spotlight to open so don't mis that but like the, what I think it is, cleaner look instead.
----------
Yes, just as many dots are rendered. File size is smaller though (but that's due to how png's work - simple shapes + fewer colors = smaller png)
----------
True and obviously I can't really use plain "dislike" comments but constructive criticism and internet doesn't always match so when you ask for peoples opinion you just have to filter what you can and can't use.
These responses are actually quite friendly and compared to what you often see
----------
Will do soon...work in progress so I don't want to re-upload to many times
I've submitted some of the app icons to icon finder already but not up yet
Not that it bothers me but doesn't really make sense to me to differentiate between OS X and iOS icons in HIG - you "click" with finger or mouse, same difference
There's a level of abstraction removed when using your finger. I think that makes quite a bit of difference. I'm sure Apple has done plenty of research on this.
I just tried this in ML and Automator launched...
I'm sure it's great for you, but think about us poor blokes who have lots of small icons in our docks due to a lot of apps open and a crappy 1280x800 res.
Right, the file size is slightly higher but that's not going to cause a performance issue.
There's a level of abstraction removed when using your finger. I think that makes quite a bit of difference. I'm sure Apple has done plenty of research on this.
I just tried this in ML and Automator launched...
I'm sure it's great for you, but think about us poor blokes who have lots of small icons in our docks due to a lot of apps open and a crappy 1280x800 res.
Right, the file size is slightly higher but that's not going to cause a performance issue.
Apple research, true - but android has custom shapes on their phone and seems to work well there too so still don't see an argument for one having different icon HIG for different devices but yeah...let's just leave it at that
Automator, also in icon view? I'm on Mavericks now but pretty sure it was the same before. Listview, dock and probably other places: no problem. Iconview only as far as I can tell.
I'm also on 1280x800 (one of the last white ones) - so think it's more a matter of how many icons. My solution was a SSD => fast to open close apps so don't run that many simultaneously
Filesize differs quite a lot but I agree in terms of performance (mail.app original icon 2,1mb and my icon 98 kb (and I do have sizes 16-1024 in my icns)
So that's one of the reasons why sometimes my icon is unresponsive.. Besides it not registering a double click every now and again.
Apple research, true - but android has custom shapes on their phone and seems to work well there too so still don't see an argument for one having different icon HIG for different devices but yeah...let's just leave it at that
Well, without having access to their research, I would guess that shape doesn't matter so much since you're pressing it directly. Which is why it works well on both iOS and Android. They chose the boxes purely out of style (and it let them put an icon on the home button that made sense.) Just my baseless speculation.
Oh, I was testing it in columns view. I never use icon view. Yeah, that's a bizarre inconsistency.
I'm also on 1280x800 (one of the last white ones) - so think it's more a matter of how many icons. My solution was a SSD => fast to open close apps so don't run that many simultaneously
I'm on an SSD as well, just too lazy to close out apps!
thanx, just dl'd, and will check them out this weekend...
EDIT: they're nice, but...of course, have apps that DON'T have icons for them, so...
it's kind-of an all-or-nothing set.
anyway, good work.
EDIT: they're nice, but...of course, have apps that DON'T have icons for them, so...
it's kind-of an all-or-nothing set.
anyway, good work.
Last edited:
The icons in iOS 6 aren't true 3D. They're 2D icons with a pseudo-3D appearance. iOS 7 is far more graphically demanding than iOS 6, which is why it stutters a lot on the 3rd-generation iPad and has many effects disabled on the iPhone in the current beta (for example).
The icons have gone flat because Apple believes that gloss and ornament in GUIs are no longer in fashion and are now even considered distasteful clutter.