|
|
256x256 in Tiger? Ruh-eally?
|
|
|
|
Forum Regular
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: United Kingdom
Status:
Offline
|
|
I was just flicking through a couple of threads and someone mentioned that 256x256 is going to be the largest size for icons in Tiger.
Can anyone/devs verify this?
What a challenging prospect.
Even if 256x256 aren't an option in Tiger, icons are inevitably going to get bigger. What do other designers out there think about it? Good? Bad? Cluttering?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Junior Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: France
Status:
Offline
|
|
that's wrong, i've a friend who have ADC Seed, and in TIGER 8A323 there no 256x256
and for me 128x128, it's enought.. no?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Iowa
Status:
Offline
|
|
while on most laptops and smaller screens 256x256 would simply be too big, on the larger displays and resolutions it wouldn't be all that bad. Still, I don't think we'll see this in Tiger. In fact, I think it will be a few years before we do see anything bigger than 128x128.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Regular
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: United Kingdom
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by BlueIce:
while on most laptops and smaller screens 256x256 would simply be too big, on the larger displays and resolutions it wouldn't be all that bad.
Exactly what I was thinking.
I remember the bitch-fest regarding how 128x128 was going to swallow up screen realestate back in 2000. I hate to think of the broohah 256x256 would cause amongst those using low-res screens.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Floreeda
Status:
Offline
|
|
to those complaining about 256 taking up space, its an option! that means it doesn't have to be at 256.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Cupertino
Status:
Offline
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Iowa
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by fireside:
to those complaining about 256 taking up space, its an option! that means it doesn't have to be at 256.
You are absolutely right about that. For all I care, Apple could implement support for 512x512 icons (or would those be desktop pics at that point?) but that doesn't mean I would use them. In fact, my icons rarely get larger than 80px.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Iowa
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by digitaljames:
Yes, Tiger will support 256 pixel icons through resolution scaling but it appears that this will only be enabled in developer GUI's and not as a user option in OS X.....
http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=610
The article suggests that it will be a feature available in 10.5 which, based on comments from Apple, will probably be around 2007. By then, more users will probably have larger monitors or at least higher resolution monitors that will justify a need to change the display resolution (DPI) of the GUI. Plus, as the article implies, that will give developers plenty of time (theoretically) to implement that change into their programs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Rules
|
|
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|