From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Drew Adams" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: RE: Yet another emacs icons Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2005 18:12:30 -0700 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1129425223 6672 80.91.229.2 (16 Oct 2005 01:13:43 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 01:13:43 +0000 (UTC) Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Oct 16 03:13:35 2005 Return-path: Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EQx5A-0006ki-83 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 16 Oct 2005 03:13:00 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EQx59-0004iE-I0 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 15 Oct 2005 21:12:59 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1EQx50-0004i9-Jm for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 15 Oct 2005 21:12:50 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1EQx4z-0004hx-1r for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 15 Oct 2005 21:12:50 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EQx4y-0004hu-Ub for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 15 Oct 2005 21:12:48 -0400 Original-Received: from [148.87.122.31] (helo=rgminet02.oracle.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_3DES_EDE_CBC_SHA:24) (Exim 4.34) id 1EQx4y-0000te-QD for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 15 Oct 2005 21:12:49 -0400 Original-Received: from rgmsgw301.us.oracle.com (rgmsgw301.us.oracle.com [138.1.186.50]) by rgminet02.oracle.com (Switch-3.1.6/Switch-3.1.7) with ESMTP id j9G1Ck7u014172 for ; Sat, 15 Oct 2005 19:12:47 -0600 Original-Received: from rgmsgw301.us.oracle.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rgmsgw301.us.oracle.com (Switch-3.1.7/Switch-3.1.7) with ESMTP id j9G1CkFe021758 for ; Sat, 15 Oct 2005 19:12:46 -0600 Original-Received: from dradamslap (dhcp-amer-rmdc-csvpn-gw6-141-144-112-128.vpn.oracle.com [141.144.112.128]) by rgmsgw301.us.oracle.com (Switch-3.1.7/Switch-3.1.7) with SMTP id j9G1CjuJ021751 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Sat, 15 Oct 2005 19:12:46 -0600 Original-To: X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1506 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAQAAAAI= X-Whitelist: TRUE X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:44103 Archived-At: _any_ of these new icons is better than the old Gnu/mushroom icon ... it looks basically like a piece of lint! The original image is far too detailed to ever be very useful as an icon Most of us agree (I think), that neither complex images nor text work well at icon size. I've already stated my preference for no gnus, and just a single "E". (One of the "E"s I posted was split - top and bottom video-inverses, which abstractly suggests windows in a frame, but essentially it's just an "E".) However, another possibility now occurs to me - a very simple, recognizable object. This wouldn't be an object that says "Emacs" or "Gnu" by its nature. It would be recognizable as what it is at even tiny sizes, but it wouldn't by itself communicate "Emacs" initially. However, if an attractive but not-too-cute object were chosen, it would quickly become associated with Emacs. An example of such a simple object is the apple with a bite out it of used by Apple Computer. I personally use, for Emacs, a simple tree icon I grabbed somewhere, just because it looks good and stands out. The exact object chosen is really less important, I think, than having something that is attractive. Another possibility is not to try for a recognizable object, but just an attractive pattern or geometric shape that stands out. An example is the Google-Desktop swirl. Besides repeating Google's colors, there is nothing about it that says "Google", and it is not a recognizable object. But it does look good and stand out. The infamous kitchen sink and mushroom-gnu were unsuccessful not because they didn't communicate the idea of "Emacs" well, but because 1) they were too complex, 2) they simply were not recognizable as anything at all (even a pattern), and 3) they were not attractive. They did, in fact, quickly become associated with Emacs through use, but they were just bad icons. I guess I'm saying that we could broaden our scope and try to come up with something outstanding at tiny size, even if it doesn't communicate "Emacs" out of the box (it will soon enough). If we chose a simple object, we might want to choose a different object (perhaps of a similar kind) for each release. Or we might offer several different (perhaps related) objects with the same release, letting users choose. Think, for instance, of what O'Reilly books do with animals. The animal itself isn't important, and doesn't usually communicate much, but the general idea is clever, and it identifies the books as O'Reilly - and the animals are attractive (very important). To adopt this approach, we would try to look for (create) object images that are 1) SIMPLE, 2) clever, original, interesting, and 3) attractive 4) at even tiny sizes. Of course, this is not the most important thing for people to work on, but it could be fun, and who knows what we might come up with? I think now that limiting ourselves to trying to convey the idea of "Emacs" or "Gnu" has perhaps stopped us from being more creative. Emacsians are weird, funny, creative people - much weirder than the kitchen sink. A sense of humor in this endeavor is essential - what icon would Zippy adopt? (No, a washing machine is too complex for an icon. A piece of lint, perhaps? LOOP) Thinking caps on (or is it off?), chill out, dream on... No more complex icons. 256 bits max...