Hello! I've noticed some bad tendency in Breeze Icon theme - there are too simplified (honestly said: totally lacking style and ugly) icons for the file types which don't have any distinctive characters for the appropriate file type. Typical example - the archive types icons (and Ark's icon itself) - I just see some random squares on my screen which are a bit differend coloured. For the audio and video file types the situation is tragic too - there are so many popular formats and in Breeze many of them are using even the same (in most cases gray) icon. Please make a new ones which are in point with the file associations.
Hi, Can you help me understand your comments a little more. They are a little more subjective when it comes to appreciation. Can you post an example of an icon that is "too" simplified and what it should look like? Thank you, Andy
(In reply to Andres Betts from comment #1) > Hi, > > Can you help me understand your comments a little more. They are a little > more subjective when it comes to appreciation. Can you post an example of an > icon that is "too" simplified and what it should look like? > > Thank you, > > Andy I gave you an example, you can just check on your system what the archive file types icons are looking like. Isn't understandable? OK, a picture is worth a thousand words. Check the screenshots.
Created attachment 107282 [details] scr1
Created attachment 107283 [details] scr2
Created attachment 107284 [details] scr3
Three examples for stylish and distinctive icons: http://cdn.makeuseof.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/file-types-low-res-300x300.jpg?x92042 https://pre01.deviantart.net/d434/th/pre/i/2011/048/e/c/vlc_files_type_by_vargas21-d39qwcl.png https://comps.canstockphoto.com/can-stock-photo_csp7121105.jpg I think you can get the idea now.
Thank you for clarifying. It makes it a lot easier to understand. Maybe a route we can go is to make the features inside the icon bigger. I noticed in your examples that the file type was always very prominent, it was easy to see them from far. Do you agree?
I agree with hotmusicfan on this. Differentiating file types with color alone is a bit chintzy. On macOS, typically files that aren't showing a live preview display the actual file type extension as part of the icon, which helps.
(In reply to Andres Betts from comment #7) > Thank you for clarifying. It makes it a lot easier to understand. Maybe a > route we can go is to make the features inside the icon bigger. I noticed in > your examples that the file type was always very prominent, it was easy to > see them from far. Do you agree? Well, I generally agree but first, notice the size I've set from the slider down right (64px) :) But nowadays with the quality and resolutions of today's displays and the potential of .SVGs I don't even think that looking from far is a problem at all. Yes, route forward for me is "enriching" the inside features of the icons, I personally prefer text with the file type extension inside the icon and running away from the basic shapes (squares, triangles, circles), running away from the sharp edges in favour of rounded ones and preferring more "natural" images over "symbolic" ones.
(In reply to Nate Graham from comment #8) > I agree with hotmusicfan on this. Differentiating file types with color > alone is a bit chintzy. On macOS, typically files that aren't showing a live > preview display the actual file type extension as part of the icon, which > helps. Exactly! MacOS is one of the best examples!
What I mean with "more natural" - typical example: http://windows.intowindows.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/Add-Recycle-Bin-icon-to-Windows-10-Desktop.jpg I agree that symbolic icons are much more useful in some cases, especially where a detail will be displayed with a small size - for example, shell items , the tray items, some buttons - in such a places some complex 3D icon will give very heavy and not sophisticated feeling. But when it comes to applications icons or file type icons which in the most cases will be shown at a large sizes - for me today's icons in Breeze is a degradation. In the perfect case they should be 3D , especially applications's ones.
Please do not mix multiple issues in a single ticket. The breeze icons follow specific design decisions, and this makes them flat, not 3D. It looks like you might want to switch to a different icon theme.
(In reply to Christoph Feck from comment #12) > Please do not mix multiple issues in a single ticket. The breeze icons > follow specific design decisions, and this makes them flat, not 3D. It looks > like you might want to switch to a different icon theme. Sorry. Well I can file one more bug about changing the design decisions because "flat" is not something good not only for me. If I could switched to another theme, I wouldn't waste my time filling this bug at all. The problem is that the themes available are neither complete nor specificly made for KDE and break any consistence.
> Sorry. Well I can file one more bug about changing the design decisions > because "flat" is not something good not only for me. > If I could switched to another theme, I wouldn't waste my time filling this > bug at all. The problem is that the themes available are neither complete > nor specificly made for KDE and break any consistence. For the record, oxygen was (at least at kde4 times) rather complete, 3D, colourfull, and realistic. It is still largely applicable to plasma 5, although maybe not as complete as breeze.
(and I am not saying that I prefer one to the other. I like both very much)
(In reply to Hugo Pereira Da Costa from comment #14) > ... 3D, colourfull, and realistic. Indeed, just like the real world in which we live :) I'm trying hard to like the Breeze icons, but it's just not working...
Sorry but this is not the right way to contribute: Breeze has its own style, if you don't like it, both Plasma and KDE applications support Freedesktop icon themes. Notice that Oxygen is still supported. If you know an icon theme that want to be part of KDE let us know. New icon themes need to be complete at least for icons used by Plasma + KDE applications. Then, if the new icon theme is complete enough we could agree after a discussion that could be better than Breeze as default. Generic enhancement wishes based on personal preferences are not appreciated, at least by me.
Hi, I'm sorry that you are not happy with breeze icon theme. The power of KDE is that you have the choice. I got the feedback from time to time that users didn't like flat icons, so I work hard to give you some options. 1. you can use oxygen icons which are awesome, and I know they could need some love, so if you'd like to help, you are very welcome. 2. I make a elementary kde icon edition in the store.kde.org you can test them. they aren't flat. there are other icon themes out, but yes most maintained ones are flat. that's the reason I choice elementary to fit with kde cause there are a lot of icons still available and I only have to make same symlinks.
(In reply to andreas from comment #18) > Hi, > > I'm sorry that you are not happy with breeze icon theme. The power of KDE is > that you have the choice. I got the feedback from time to time that users > didn't like flat icons, so I work hard to give you some options. > > 1. you can use oxygen icons which are awesome, and I know they could need > some love, so if you'd like to help, you are very welcome. > 2. I make a elementary kde icon edition in the store.kde.org you can test > them. they aren't flat. > > there are other icon themes out, but yes most maintained ones are flat. > that's the reason I choice elementary to fit with kde cause there are a lot > of icons still available and I only have to make same symlinks. Hi. Yes, I admit that I mixed various issues here involving personal preferences. Sorry about that. But let me be clear on some things: 1. KDE = Choice. Agreed 100%. KDE design group had their choice for flat theme and I respect it. 2. (But) I still don't give up on my opinion that significant part of the icons are not distinctive. Yes, keep them flat, keep the Breeze design guidelines but make some new decisions here (see above posts and screenshots). 3. I love Oxygen and Elementary (especially the last and personally I want it to be part of KDE) but they still have issues which breaks the consistent feeling of the desktop. I believe that Oxygen will not be deprecated. As I mentioned other themes in KDE store aren't even developed especially for KDE (seriously why they are there?). Many of them after installing and applying show inappropriate icons for various items. Typical example is System Settings control center. Which in most cases leaves the user with almost no choice if he wants a good, complete, stylish look.
The reason other icons are there is because the Get Hot New Stuff is linked to a webpage which is not directly controlled by KDE that used to be called KDE look, and which was mirrored by sites like gnome-look and openbox-look etc. That means that many of the icon themes are in fact GTK icon themes and, as you noticed, unsuitable for KDE (this is the confusing part of KDE look and Get Hot New Stuff - its not communicated clearly enough that this is a third party area and not something native) The elementary theme Andreas mentions is the one called Elementary-KDE in Get Hot New Stuff
(In reply to Christoph Feck from comment #12) > Please do not mix multiple issues in a single ticket. The breeze icons > follow specific design decisions, and this makes them flat, not 3D. It looks > like you might want to switch to a different icon theme. It's official: Users navigate flat UI designs 22 per cent slower. Put in some chrome and shade. https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/09/05/flat_uis_designs_are_22_per_cent_slower_official/ Don't take it to heart, just couldn't resist the urge to post the link... :)
(In reply to Paul from comment #21) > (In reply to Christoph Feck from comment #12) > > Please do not mix multiple issues in a single ticket. The breeze icons > > follow specific design decisions, and this makes them flat, not 3D. It looks > > like you might want to switch to a different icon theme. > > It's official: Users navigate flat UI designs 22 per cent slower. > Put in some chrome and shade. > > https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/09/05/ > flat_uis_designs_are_22_per_cent_slower_official/ > > Don't take it to heart, just couldn't resist the urge to post the link... :) Supporting with two hands!
I'm not sure if the header is right? make breeze more distinctiv or do you mean make oxygen fit plasma 5. maybe I also wrote in a way that was not friendly. sorry. two options: 1. submit patches for oxygen to support plasma 5 in a better way 2. fork breeze and make new higs this doesn't mean that I want accept patches to breeze but it would be better to have a fork and when the fork work quite good, we can merge. I would be very happy if someone is interested into solution 1 or 2.
Paul: if you don't want people to take it to heart then why post that clickbait article in a bug list?
(In reply to Jens Reuterberg from comment #24) > Paul: if you don't want people to take it to heart then why post that > clickbait article in a bug list? If you view that article as "clickbait" then so be it. The point made is nonetheless valid IMHO. (I've no intention of engaging in some sort of "flame war" either).
(In reply to andreas from comment #23) > ... make oxygen fit plasma 5. ... Now, I'm not a Graphic Designer / Artist. Just a user who needs to get work done in a productive manner. The change from KDE4/Oxygen to Plasma5/Breeze was a seismic shift. For some it was a shift too far. Yes, oxygen icons are still available, and indeed I believe you yourself are maintaining them. For that I, and I'm sure others, are thankful. One of the problems with oxygen though, is it's lack of full integration with plasma 5. Plasmoids for example still look "wrong" when using the Oxygen Look & Feel; that I suspect is something unlikely to change. Limited resources in terms of manpower (should that be people power?), coupled with the (it seems) probable believe there is no real demand for oxygen any longer, it's not "modern", it's not "arty". Ultimately though, the choice is with the user, if one has the ability, open source allows you to make your own contributions. Most users are not in that fortunate position, myself included. We use what we are given, if we don't like it nothing forces us to use it. Users do however get frustrated, sometimes that frustration is vented on developers. But, if you create anything, no matter what, and put it into the public domain, then one must take the brickbats as well as the bouquets.
Sry you are right "click bait" is a strong term. It's just that in my circles its sort of like when people say "thats skeumorphism!" while pointing at for example beveled buttons and how that becomes a truth used to slap down good design practices. The statements within it is already well known and have been for a very long time and is something that most of us work towards. Those fixes are layout and indicators. Essentially what is being said in the text isn't close to being as dramatic as the header. This isn't a "flamewar". Simplified design, vs realistic Design (skeumorphism is the mimicing of real world objects and can be equally true in simplified as in realistic design) is not a "flamewar" - at a certain point both styles have benefits - in one certain things are more easily done, in another other things are more easily done. Both come with drawbacks and demands. Both of these "schools" (lets say) and their demands are well known. Breeze is constantly improving and changing - but it wont change its design language to follow fads or subjective preferences. That is better served either by a fork, or by another icon theme.
Also just to clarify: I am not at all saying "you are wrong" or anything like that. Just that this discussion is at an impasse. We can only improve the Breeze icon theme, we wont change the design language underneath. As you say "people power" is lacking - and I wish, honestly, that I could say that Oxygen Would get better support soon but like you it seems less likely. (which also is the reason this discussion is relevant since your options shrink effectively). One hopeful fix would be that we could have better sorting and grading of KDE icon themes. I KNOW there are some for example Mac like themes out there that could work for you but in the current state of Get Hot New Stuff its a mess to find. (If you have more questions you can try to catch us in the #kde-vdg room on freenode (Im jensreu))
The bottom line is that aesthetics are subjective, but usability isn't. It's possible for a "flat" design to have perfectly good usability if its UI elements give the proper visual cues: buttons are recognizably buttons, links follow the convention of being undermined, icons reasonably resemble the the concepts they represent, etc. As long as all that's done, the style is a matter of taste. If there are legitimate *usability* (as opposed to aesthetic) problems with Breeze, we should fix them. But "flat" doesn't automatically equal "bad"--and I say this as someone who prefers a bit more depth to his icons! Here is an example of a Breeze icon bug that's primarily about a usability issue rather than an aesthetic preference, even though aesthetics come into it: https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=384357
Yes thats my bottom line as well and it has been since Plasma 5.0 and we got involved in it AND its the reason Breeze Icons, and colours, etc constantly evolve. Take your bug about the server rack - THAT is where I think we should have made it more simple. The icon you refer to is someone trying to draw a server rack (succesful or not is irrelevant, check it in Cuttlefish, its pretty realistic). Instead we should have simplified it. Made it a symbol instead of an image. Either way, talk to you more in the #kde-vdg channel?
(In reply to andreas from comment #23) > I'm not sure if the header is right? make breeze more distinctiv or do you > mean make oxygen fit plasma 5. maybe I also wrote in a way that was not > friendly. sorry. > > two options: > 1. submit patches for oxygen to support plasma 5 in a better way > 2. fork breeze and make new higs this doesn't mean that I want accept > patches to breeze but it would be better to have a fork and when the fork > work quite good, we can merge. > > I would be very happy if someone is interested into solution 1 or 2. Hi again. Yes , the header is totally right. Sorry for my opinion, but AFAIK one of the fundaments of the OSS is the user feedback. And people like you nowadays seems to totally not fit in this situation. Because some devs just does not read, does not listen and does not accept even the minimal offerings that are directly coming from the users. Screenshots, detailed explanations, some suggestions...What did you not understanding? And this cost our time too - because we have work to do on our machimes and we want to do it in the most effective way. I (as a reporter) agreed that KDE Design Team has a 'design' decisions for the 'flat' but someone hurried up to put 'WONTFIX' (maybe the favourite decision of the devs nowadays) even when the discussion is not done and users still have some things to say? On (2) - don't you think that you are offering people a 'double work'? Instead of just accept that something in breeze isn't right and go to decision for enhancement you speak about forking? This is not a decision at all - it does not solve any problems but 1: cost even more time to everyone; 2: will bring even more 'personal preferences' to the 'ring'.
Another foundation of OSS is that if you really want something done, you come with patches and do the work yourself. People are listening to you; they're just disagreeing with some of your points. Also, a bug tracker isn't the right place for this kind of discussion. Bug trackers are for tracking specific discrete units of work that can be marked as completed. IMHO the broader discussion you want to have (and it's a legitimate discussion!) should take place on a mailing list, forum, or IRC channel. Then the results of that discussion should yield a few specific bug reports that can be fixed and closed. But if the problem is that you just don't like the Breeze icon theme in general, you can always switch to another one and do the work to make that other icon theme fit better with the rest of the system.