|Summary:||Ugly, non-fitting openoffice.org icons that are difficult to understand|
|Product:||[Fedora] Fedora||Reporter:||Kyrre Ness Sjøbæk <kyrsjo>|
|Component:||redhat-artwork||Assignee:||John (J5) Palmieri <johnp>|
|Status:||CLOSED DUPLICATE||QA Contact:|
|Version:||rawhide||CC:||jkeck, lsof, nicubunu, simonlanzmich|
|Fixed In Version:||Doc Type:||Bug Fix|
|Doc Text:||Story Points:||---|
|Last Closed:||2005-05-03 07:01:31 UTC||Type:||---|
|oVirt Team:||---||RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:|
|Cloudforms Team:||---||Target Upstream Version:|
Description Kyrre Ness Sjøbæk 2005-04-29 22:58:38 UTC
Description of problem: Icons for launcing OOo are really ugly. They doesn't fit, as they are way larger than any of the others on the panel (globe-with-mice firefox icon and letter evoulution icon), and completely sqare. It simply looks bad with three bricks sitting on top of my panel. On top of that, (at least) the impress and the calc icon are very difficult to understand - how should i know that red icon (with, if i look *really* close, has a rounded sqare in the middle) means "impress"? Same with calc - similarity in colour with MS office isn't enough. (as a matter of fact, i liked the artwork of ooo 1.1.x better than the to much "oh please, i want to look like MS Office 2003!" feeling i get by looking at ooo 1.9.x.) Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): redhat-artwork-0.122-4 How reproducible: Steps to Reproduce: 1. 2. 3. Actual results: Expected results: Additional info: Rest of the new theme look really nice :)
Comment 1 Simon Lanzmich 2005-04-30 11:48:23 UTC
Concerning the size of the icons, I totally agree with you. They are too large. I don't really have an oppinion about the style of the icons and I think the colours are ok. I have, in fact, never used MsOffice and I don't know how these icons look like, but yes, without any text it is hard to understand which icon launches which part of the suite.
Comment 2 Nicu Buculei 2005-04-30 12:03:16 UTC
Simon, the icons should not have text on them but should illustrate the purpose of the application - look at the ones used in FC3 (to which I think we should revert). And the colors are *not* OK, they break consistency with the rest of the icons from the panel/menu.
Comment 3 Simon Lanzmich 2005-04-30 12:13:26 UTC
Sorry for no being clear enough concerning the text. I just wanted to say that I need the mouse-over text to find out which icon is which, because they are not clear. I DID not mean that there should be text added to the icons!!
Comment 4 Kyrre Ness Sjøbæk 2005-04-30 12:46:41 UTC
Adding text is probably not the correct answer - that is done allready. Why not use the icons used in FC<3? They are not as fancy, but they are clear and consistent with the rest of the desktop. And i'll pick "clear and consistent" over "fancy" any day. Where did those icons come from anyway? And then there is those with poor eyesigth - what do they see? probably just a colored "blob". Because they are just that. A colored blob - no good, clear, and recognizable shape.
Comment 5 Need Real Name 2005-04-30 15:52:15 UTC
The point of an icon is to provide a visual shortcut that describes what will happen. An orange wavey piece of paper with a seagull, and a feinter orange square doesn't say "presentation program", at least to me. The previous icons were better.
Comment 6 Nicu Buculei 2005-05-01 09:49:41 UTC
Kyrre Ness SjÃ¸bÃ¦k wrote: > Where did those icons come from anyway? From Sun, those are the default ones from OOo 2.0