Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!gatech!ncar!boulder!tramp!rademach
From: rademach@tramp.Colorado.EDU (Simon Rademacher)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: Icon sizes, Workbench hand (was Re: My AmigaDOS 1.4 wishlist)
Message-ID: <10706@boulder.Colorado.EDU>
Date: 11 Aug 89 22:01:00 GMT
References: <12878@well.UUCP>  <16025@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> <1989Aug8.220028.13827@nc386.uucp> <16163@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> <2584@cbnewsm.ATT.COM>
Sender: news@boulder.Colorado.EDU
Reply-To: rademach@tramp.Colorado.EDU (Simon Rademacher)
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Lines: 74

In article <2584@cbnewsm.ATT.COM> nsw@cbnewsm.ATT.COM (Neil Weinstock) writes:
>In article <16163@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> Vince Lee writes:
>[ ... ]
>
>>Editting my own icons won't change the Amiga's appearance for everyone else.
>>Interlace mode, even with a flicker-fixer looks stupid because everything is
>>wide and flat.  What I'm saying is this:  I don't wan't shrinking of icons
>>just to make my own workbench look better.  That misses the point completely.
>>I think shrinking of icons would make the Amiga look more professional to 
>>people considering purchasing an Amiga instead of a Mac or Clone, and that
>>would make it all worthwhile.
>
>Bingo.  One of the things that makes the Mac's icon-based interface usable
>whereas Workbench is not is the fact that all icons are the same size, and
>small.  I think that the Amiga developers made a mistake by not restricting
>icon size to a small standard rectangle.  Why?  Well, it's darn near impossible
>to create a neat arrangement of icons in a window without snapshotting all
>the time.  Wanna have default icons for files without .info files?  Try
>arranging them.  Good luck.  Check out Jazzbench to see the difficulties
>involved.  Furthurmore, many programmers like to abuse the system and create
>enormous icons (example: NewZap).  Sure, I can redo them or shrink them.
>I shouldn't have to.  I'm not particularly artistic, and even if I were I
>wouldn't want to be forced to be spending time playing with other peoples icons all the 
>time.
>
>Unfortunately, I'm not sure what can be done at this point to remedy the
>problem.  Sigh.
>
>Sorry, this is a sore spot with me.


A few of ugly solutions:

1) Include program to shrink all icons to standard size.  The problem is
that detail is lost and the result could be horrendous to look at.

2) Write a program that displays a bunch of icons for the user to choose as
a replacement for the included icon.  Icons can be found on some of the Fish
disks.  Problem: requires user input and would require lots of tedious work
to replace many disk's program's icons.  But after this initial replacement,
each furthur one would just be part of the installation of new software.

3) Include two icons for each program.  (Oops, forgot interlace.  4 icons?
this is getting out of hand.)
  a) put two icons in each .info file, one of standard size.  Include a
preferences option to choose plain or fancy icons.  Problems: increases size
of .info files and would have to be backwards compatiable.  Neither of these
are real biggies.  Of couse, programmers wouldn't have to give two icons, so
this may be wasted.
  b) include two .info files.  Then, either have the user choose one to use
as the .info, or have a preferences option that picks which one to display.
Problem: adds lots of files to already cluttered directories.

4) Change workbench to display standard, built-in icons for every .info file
found.  Ie, check the .info for file type and then display the appropriate
icon.  Problems: Dull, repetetive, have to resort to reading file name to
see what program is rather than look at icon.

I myself like 3a.  It wouldn't be too hard to examine the icon and just
display it if it's the old style.  Or, if new, check preferences to see
which icon in the file to display.  Of course, this is probably too late for
1.4.  Numbers 1 and 4 could work retroactivly, but I don't think the results
would be very satisfactory.

As to the icons themselves, I think home buyers would be more attracted to
a machine displaying more interesting and large icons then the less
interesting, if neater, standard sized ones.  Should we give the machine two
modes--business (plain) and home (fancy) as far as icons go?

Sorry to ramble.

=======================================
=          Simon Rademacher           =
= rademach%tramp@boulder.colorado.edu =