Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

A History of Icons

Posted by CmdrTaco on Tue Mar 22, 2005 12:02 PM
from the you-mean-like-marilyn-monroe dept.
John H. Doe writes "The GUIdebook has a great page illustrating the history of icons. Of course, they have the Lisa/Mac/OS X paths, but there's the Windows progressions, along with entries for NeXT, OS/2, BeOS, and yes, Linux. Would you call it progress?"
+ -
story
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • Rolling your own (Score:5, Interesting)

    by ackthpt (218170) * on Tuesday March 22 2005, @12:03PM (#12013035) Homepage Journal
    I haven't been big on designing my own Windows icons because, before I gave up looking, all icon editors cost $$. Inexplicably the one format Paint doesn't support is *.ico

    I used to have some beauties on my Amiga, and they could be any size I liked, up to the whole screen if that was your wish. IIRC they were easy to draw with something that came with the operating system.

    I'd like to take some of my raytracings and make them icons. Any ideas where to start?

    Darn my dyslexia. At first glance I thought it said "A History of Loons" and thought it was something biographical about slashdot.

    • Re:Rolling your own (Score:5, Informative)

      by wiredlogic (135348) on Tuesday March 22 2005, @12:09PM (#12013108)
      Inexplicably the one format Paint doesn't support is *.ico

      That's because the Windows .ico format is a complex meta-format with the capacity for multiple icon sizes and color depths. Paint Is just a rudimentary application like notepad and has never been the target of much improvement by MS.

      The best Windows tool for editing icons is Microangelo. There is a shareware trial version available.

    • Ahh, the good old days of throwing a MacOS 7 icon together with ResEdit. Too bad there's no quick and dirty all-in-one utility like that in MacOS X. That was the pinnacle of mac hacking.
    • Re:Rolling your own (Score:5, Informative)

      by Random Chaos (831686) on Tuesday March 22 2005, @12:12PM (#12013141)
      Well, I have found a few freeware ICO editing programs, but really you don't need them unless you want a multi-size icon (one that looks good in both a toolbar and in a folder).

      It turns out that Windows can read BMPs as ICOs. Just make a BMP of the right size (16x16, 32x32, or 64x64) and rename the extension from .bmp to .ico.

      ----

      As for my most used icons: Giving all my hard disks a icon with the drive letter on it. Makes using a tool bar (I have a "goto" toolbar that links to every drive and a few important folders) easy to locate which drive is which (I only have 6 partitions/hard drives on my windows box).
      • Re:Rolling your own (Score:4, Informative)

        by alfboggis (528706) on Tuesday March 22 2005, @12:37PM (#12013413)
        This page [microsoft.com] is a useful guide if you ever need to create icons for Windows XP. It gives information on style, perspective and colours needed to make icons consistent with that OS. They recommend an app called GifMovieGear to create the actual icon files.
        • Re:Rolling your own (Score:5, Interesting)

          by value_added (719364) on Tuesday March 22 2005, @01:49PM (#12014211)
          Consistent with XP? That would mean an odd mixture of sometimes 16, sometimes 32 colours, sometimes more, and sizes in ranging (depending on the icon) from 16x16 to 48x48, each size being made available in either 16 or 32 colours or more, or all three, but not always, and depending on which .dll that particular icon is being served from, as opposed to other .dlls which contain an identical (but not always) icon.

          There was a Slashdot article posted some time ago where Steve Jobs was quoted as saying (way back when, and I paraphrase) that Bill Gates never understood the concept of design.

          Despite the overhaul made for the XP interface, much of the same crap found on NT, 2K, etc. can be found on XP, and the inconsistencies aren't limited to icon choices.

          As for the icon editor recommendation, unless it's capable of replacing the icons buried in innumerable .dlls, I don't believe it could compare favourably against any number of alternatives (Microangelo, etc.) which, thankfully, make Windows at least bearable.

          But that's just an opinion. I have otheres, of course.
    • Re:Rolling your own (Score:5, Informative)

      by nazh (604234) on Tuesday March 22 2005, @12:16PM (#12013203) Homepage Journal

      I design the icons in .png then convert them to .ico with png2ico [winterdrache.de] works both on *nix and windows. You can also add several different image sizes in the icon file you make with this program.

    • Graphics Workshop Professional will convert just about anything to an ICO. It's not 100% though -- sometimes you end up with an icon that's off-center for some odd reason. But I love this application -- I've been using it for years now and it's just too handy not to have. It's not terribly expensive, either.

      Website: http://www.mindworkshop.com/ [mindworkshop.com]
      Price: $44.95

      I also have the GIF Construction Set, which is great and all, but I'm just as likely to use some of my other graphics tools to create GIFs, or just
    • Try...

      http://www.microangelo.us/
    • I used to have some beauties on my Amiga, and they could be any size I liked, up to the whole screen if that was your wish.

      Was this a *good* thing? IIRC, Amiga programs came with lots of oddly-shaped icons that frequently *were* a large portion of the screen-size.

      I'm sure it's nice for the designer's ego, but massive icons aren't that great from a usability point-of-view.
    • by yintercept (517362) on Tuesday March 22 2005, @12:35PM (#12013397) Homepage Journal
      all icon editors cost $$.

      Well, when you consider all of the things that icons do, they certain are worth the money you spend on the icon editor.

      Have you ever clicked on an icon? You click on an icon and, bammo, there's a big spread sheet or email program on your screen or something. Icon editors must be complex and expensive to accomplish that. Seeing all of the amazing things icons do, it is the one software expense that the guys in purchasing will have no problem approving.

      On an unrelated note, being a manager of a large software development team, I had been wondering why you techies like Dilbert so much. I have a big informative staff meeting. Afterwards, the techies gather around to pick the Dilbert that matches the meeting. I don't get it.

  • Deja Vu (Score:4, Informative)

    by suso (153703) * on Tuesday March 22 2005, @12:04PM (#12013048) Homepage Journal
    • That was a history of GUIs, this focuses on icons.
    • Orthodoxy Sunday (Score:5, Interesting)

      by stoolpigeon (454276) <bittercode@gmail> on Tuesday March 22 2005, @12:16PM (#12013198) Homepage Journal
      Was this last sunday - maybe it is an annual holiday type thing. (Yes I know-- they aren't related but shouldn't they be?)

      The dominant theme of this Sunday since 843 has been that of the victory of the icons. In that year the iconoclastic controversy, which had raged on and off since 726, was finally laid to rest, and icons and their veneration were restored on the first Sunday in Lent. Ever since, that Sunday been commemorated as the "triumph of Orthodoxy."

      Orthodox teaching about icons was defined at the Seventh Ecumenical Council of 787, which brought to an end the first phase of the attempt to suppress icons. That teaching was finally re-established in 843, and it is embodied in the texts sung on this Sunday.
  • Amiga Icons (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Moby Cock (771358) on Tuesday March 22 2005, @12:06PM (#12013070) Homepage
    I know on my Amiga 500 I used to draw icons in Icon Editor, and it was pretty cool. I too had some real beauties. I miss Workbench, it was pretty sweet.
    • Re:Amiga Icons (Score:5, Interesting)

      by SharpFang (651121) on Tuesday March 22 2005, @12:30PM (#12013344) Homepage Journal
      Some interesting features of Amiga icons:
      - Arbitrary size
      - Could change image when clicked
      - Possible arbitrary placement

      This was making for some interesting applications. Like, the game Heimdall had screen high and half-screen wide icon of the character with a warhammer, when clicked the character was slamming the hammer down. I would add a tiny, 5x5px icon placing it over corner of Filemaster 2.2 icon just to launch Filemaster 2.0 in case it was needed (just like small "arrow down" in corner of "back" of Firefox)
      There were tools converting pictures to icons. You could tile icons being parts of bigger image over some area, making a "clickable image". Clicking on directory ("drawer") icon was "opening the drawer", there were also many other cool "mini-anims" like hydraulic press "compressing" the package for a compressor program, a floppy multiplying itself for file copy etc.
      Windows was a BIG step backwards from Amiga icon functionality. That step was never undone. Now all leading OSes have single-image, fixed-size icons.
  • by Deliveranc3 (629997) on Tuesday March 22 2005, @12:07PM (#12013078) Journal
    Worship the icon you techno pagans!
  • Looks like an iconoclast got to it.
  • my favorite icon (Score:5, Interesting)

    by JeanBaptiste (537955) on Tuesday March 22 2005, @12:09PM (#12013103)
    moof the dogcow! [storybytes.com]
  • Icons? (Score:5, Funny)

    by chrispl (189217) on Tuesday March 22 2005, @12:11PM (#12013127) Homepage
    Hm, all of the icons look like the same "broken image" icon to me...

    Slashdotted to hell.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 22 2005, @12:11PM (#12013131)
    This is a chart of icons from various interfaces. Clicking on GUI names, section names or icons themselves will lead to the appropriate page: Options Show GUI families: Lisa Office System Mac OS NeXTSTEP/OPENSTEP/Rhapsody Windows OS/2 GEOS/GeoWorks Apple II Amiga OS RISC OS BeOS Red Hat Linux QNX Solaris
  • progress? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by justforaday (560408) on Tuesday March 22 2005, @12:12PM (#12013146)
    Hard to say whether it's progress, since I can't access TFA. However, I will say that the MS/Windows habit of trying to iconify every possible command is not progress. Some things simply cannot be conveyed via a 12x12 or 16x16 (or whatever the res is) pictogram.
    • Re:progress? (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      I will say that the MS/Windows habit of trying to iconify every possible command is not progress.

      And I will say that the Slashdot habit of blaming everything you don't like on Microsoft is also not progress.

      Funny how in one article everyone's like "Apple is teh cool, they invented EVERYTHING and Microsoft just copied them", and then as soon as someone percieves something Apple popularised - like using icons for everything and deprecating the command line - as "bad", they blame Microsoft for it!

      Apple ar
    • Re:progress? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by saltydogdesign (811417) on Tuesday March 22 2005, @01:02PM (#12013679)

      Some things simply cannot be conveyed via a 12x12 or 16x16 (or whatever the res is) pictogram.

      Tell that to the Chinese.

      • Re:progress? (Score:4, Informative)

        by cowscows (103644) on Tuesday March 22 2005, @12:46PM (#12013511) Journal
        I'll give a specific example that isn't really windows, but still bugs me. phpMyAdmin is an excellent piece of software that really makes my life easier. But a few versions ago they made a change that really bugs me. Before, if you were looking at a database, it could list all of the different tables in a chart, and it'd have links for all the different options (browse, insert, search, drop, empty, etc). Then one day I logged in and it was updated. All those quick little text links were replaced with tiny 16x16 icons. And they aren't even good icons. The icon for empty is a trashcan on top of some weird looking window. It's arguable whether or not a trashcan is a good symbol for empty, but regardless of that, the stupid window in the background makes it illegible. A finger pointing at a piece of paper stands for "structure"?

        There are six commands in that table that they icon-ified. They saved maybe a few pixels of horizontal space, but I don't think they were hurting for room anyways. And it's a big step backwards in terms of usability and intuitiveness.

        They say a picture is worth a thousand words. So isn't it overkill to use an image to replace one single word? How is that supposed to make things any easier?

        It'd be like /. replacing the Submit and Preview button text with little images. What would be the point?
  • by diegocgteleline.es (653730) on Tuesday March 22 2005, @12:13PM (#12013158)
    Why not .avi files instead of .png icons? Sure, it will eat more resources, but it'd be great to see a animation (a real animation, not just a .gif or a jumping/flash effect) each time I press or put the mouse over it.
  • by HAKdragon (193605) <hakdragon@nosPAm.gmail.com> on Tuesday March 22 2005, @12:15PM (#12013181)
    While I can't read the article as the server is being slashdotted, I can't help feel that icons, for the most part, have stayed the same since their invention. Sure, we have icons that can be huge, have millions of colors, and have cool transparencey effects, but for the most part, Icons have remained a picture that represents an object or action. The only real innovation that I can think of when it comes to icons are ones which convey information as well as symbolize actions/items. While I'm not familiar if this exists on other icons, it's pretty easy to see on a number of iApps on OSX. For example, Mail's icon shows you how many new messages you have, iCal shows the current date, and when you're downloading files with Safari,the download icons have little progress bars on them, I love the idea of icons providing information to me realting to their particular application and hope to see that implimented more on other systems,
  • In the last handful of years, icons have started making a transformation from functional to stylish. Specifically, look at the differences between Windows 2000->XP icons, and Jaguar->Panther icons. In both cases, the Calculator icon illustrates specifically what I mean. In Jaguar and W2k, it was completly clear what the icon was. In Panther, however, the buttons became grayer, and as a result, the overall icon is less clear. The XP icon is much worse - it is not even distinctly a calculator.

    There are many more examples in the 2k->xp comparison. The address book, for instance. What was once clearly an Address book is now just an open book. The control panel, while not exactly clear in 2k, is now a Todo list! The desktop icon went from a desk with a letter in draft to a _vertical_ oriented surface.
    • by Threni (635302) on Tuesday March 22 2005, @12:31PM (#12013355)
      Stupid icons are a bit of a bugbear of mine. So often it would be more clear to simply have some text telling you what the button is/does, rather than an abstract, highly coloured blob. I like this little quote from an interview with Richard Stallman:

      ---
      I used a word processor once. Basically I was at a hotel, and I had to type something and get it out, so I used a computer there. And it was running some word processor, which might have been Microsoft Word, I don't know. On the screen there were lots and lots of cryptic icons, whose meanings I couldn't begin to understand. If they had been English words, I might have had a chance.
      ---
        • by MustardMan (52102) on Tuesday March 22 2005, @02:52PM (#12014974)
          Frankly, RMS is not one who should be talking about intiutive interfaces.

          NO SHIT! Clicking a picture of a disk to save is a lot more intuitive than typing control-x, control-s. And if you can't figure out that the disk is for saving, you might think... hey, "file" might do things with my file, I'll click that, and hey look here it says "save", I wonder if that saves things

          Hell, I even like emacs, but Stallman criticizing user interfaces is like Carrot Top criticizing fine theater.
  • by YorgleLlama (814842) on Tuesday March 22 2005, @12:16PM (#12013195)
    If you like icons, you should check out Susan Kare's page [kare.com] She made most of the original MacOS icons, as well as most of the original Windows icons. Lots of great pixel art.
  • Coral links (Score:5, Insightful)

    by spin2cool (651536) on Tuesday March 22 2005, @12:17PM (#12013207) Homepage

    How hard is it to use coral links? Editors - why aren't you automatically append ".nyud.net:8090" to any url? How hard is that, really?.

    Sigh...

    • Re:Coral links (Score:4, Interesting)

      by squiggleslash (241428) * on Tuesday March 22 2005, @12:57PM (#12013630) Homepage Journal
      Because it's difficult to access those links when you're stuck behind corporate firewalls. Coral uses port 8090, a non-standard port that most firewalls are unaware of and block.

      It's like a restaurant. You're stuck with the menu the restaurant has. Now, it's not that you can't necessarily get the kitchen to do a ham and cheese, but you have to do it in terms it understands (for example, you can order a burger that has ham and cheese, and order it without the beefburger, salad, etc), kind of like h[tt]p:, which runs on port 80. You can do it via the firewall, but it has to look like an HTTP request, which means running it on port 80. You can then say "Ohh, it's not really a burger, it's a ham and cheese sandwich" but as far as the kitchen's concerned, it's just one of their regular burgers. You might look at port 8090 as the ham - they're likely to have cheese burgers, but a ham, cheese, and beef burger? Not likely. So you can't have your ham and cheese because you haven't come up with a sandwich that really works within the framework you're given.

      The only option is to leave the restaurant, and cook your own sandwich, but that's not always an option, especially if you actually work at the restaurant so can't leave until 5pm, but you're a waiter or you work at the bar or you greet people or wash up or something so you can't actually make the sandwich yourself (well, not in a unionized restaurant anyway. A union-free restaurant might allow it, but you don't want to upset the staff, and it's probably going against company policy.)

      Port 8090 isn't supported by most corporate firewalls, so making all URLs point at it would just prevent Slashdot's working readers (the vast majority) from "eating their ham and cheese sandwich" - or, in other words, accessing the website. This would damage Slashdot long term as people would just stop reading it except for a few people at Universities and in Cybercafes, neither of which are appealing to Slashdot's advertisers.

      • Re:Coral links (Score:5, Insightful)

        by CylanR77 (532552) <christopher.wallace+slashdot@gmail.com> on Tuesday March 22 2005, @01:44PM (#12014142)
        To everyone on a corporate firewall, just suck it up.

        Either just figure out the url to the original content, stop reading slashdot at work and get some *work* done, convince your administrators/managers that you should be allowed to view content on a nonstandard port so you can spend more company time browsing the web, or leave and find a different job.

        For a website which is devoted to shoveling up information for the most elitist of all computer-literate people [including some bright individuals], you'd think that somehow, a better system could be put into place than "bomb websites with loads of traffic, indiscriminantly".
  • by mfh (56) on Tuesday March 22 2005, @12:18PM (#12013220) Journal
    Don't forget the Biblical Icons. That Golden Calf must have some pretty great raytracing and high polys to be worshipped so blatantly at the risk of utter destruction.
  • If you like icons (Score:3, Informative)

    by titaniam (635291) * <slashdot@drpa.us> on Tuesday March 22 2005, @12:24PM (#12013280) Homepage Journal
    Then see my site iconsurf.com [iconsurf.com] where hundreds of thousands of icons are displayed to help you surf the internet.
  • by sczimme (603413) on Tuesday March 22 2005, @12:38PM (#12013433)

    Q. Once upon a time a mouse became trapped in a Russian cathedral; how did he escape?

    A. He clicked on an icon and opened a window.

    (I can't claim credit for that one...)
  • Icon progess... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by linebackn (131821) on Tuesday March 22 2005, @12:49PM (#12013542)
    I'm not sure I would call everything that has happened to icons progress.

    Now that icons are commonly 24 bit color or more and use complex shading and styles they are often more difficult to identify at a glance than 2-color monochrome icons. (Icons should always be capable of being represented as a 2-color monochrome icons to ensure they have enough visual contrast)

    And with all of the varying styles these days, if you don't make your icons specific to each operating environment then they stick out like sore a thumb.

    The days of 16-color icons were probably the best because you could make a decent icon without having to be an artist or having an expensive paint program.

    It still boggles my mind how many people choose bad icons for their products. I currently have the joy of working with a particular software product where many of the different configuration tools all have slightly different pictures of little computer... looking things with some kind of network dealy around them, and I keep getting them all mixed up. Of course part of the problem is that the programs aren't very well organized to begin with and the fact that they keep changing the program names in each version proves that.

    Anyway, it is important that any application have a clear distinct purpose, a good icon to reflect that purpose and then to stick with it as people learn what it symbolized.

    Remember, Icons literally become a language to people!
  • by blamanj (253811) on Tuesday March 22 2005, @01:58PM (#12014314)
    When the Xerox Star came out, it had icons because they had been proposed in a PhD thesis by David Smith [digibarn.com].