Icon "flat" design

[xnview]

What about simplified style of icons (flat) like on iOS and Win8?

[quapurna]

What about simplified style of icons (flat) like on iOS and Win8?

I think if an option to select the current icon style or the new one is available, it would be OK to most users.

What about a smaller (a half) size of icon set for both the current and new styles ?

NB: Has the missing icon issue been handled ?

Thanks

[XnTriq]

Do you mean a monochromatic version of app-xnviewmp-512.png, Pierre?

I've always been in favor of a logo based on simple geometric shapes

Windows Store apps leave behind the “icons represent everything everywhere” approach to UI design.

• Icons in Windows Store apps are an important part of navigating a touch-first system. Think of icons as touch targets.
• Icons aren't bullet points, embellishments, or detailed illustrations.
• Icons are graphic in nature, flat in perspective, and monochromatic. This approach reinforces the principle of “content over chrome.”

• Windows Dev Center: Design » Visual identity » Icons
• deviantART: 158 Missing App-icons Metrostyle By Cryptowork
• BetaNews: XnView 2.0 debuts new Metro toolbar style
• XnView Forum: Re: Toolbar skins

[piXuniverse]

I like flat icon styles a lot, they're less distracting and look more professional.

[xnview]

Do you mean a monochromatic version of app-xnviewmp-512.png, Pierre?

First i think about toolbar icon.

[JohnFredC]

Only as a user-selectable alternative to the current Mezich icons, please.

[mezich]

I asked Pierre to post this question because flat style will be less time-consuming for me with hight resolution version of icons. But may be I don't see other troubles in future with such decision?

[JohnFredC]

Flat style is obviously the "style de jour". The demise of skeuomorphism is official now that Apple has adopted the flat interface.

IMO, if the UI resembles Windows 8/WP 8, then flat icons (defined solely by outline and color) are in keeping with THAT aesthetic and, to a certain degree, should be adopted. Many modern flat icons are also superior to the majority of "run of the mill" skeuomorphic icons used in software over the decades...

But I also (and conversely) think that the icons chosen for a software are important to visually distinguish it from other, similar, programs. IMO the flat style, though aesthetically (and conceptually) pleasing, pushes all software toward a common appearance (that is: Apple's, or Microsoft's). At some point, users won't even know whose software they are using. I think this convergence of the UI to a single metaphor is bad from a developer's point of view.

Consider how similar graphics packages appear to each other these days.

Flat icons reduce the developer's degrees of freedom to distinguish their products from others in the market place. Those missing "degrees of freedom" also go missing from the user/UI interface, reducing the richness of the interaction metaphor and making the UI less efficient. In other words, as the icons become simpler, the UI has to become more complicated (=modal) to take up the slack. A simple, filled outline is more limited in the concepts it can communicate "at a glance" than a properly designed skeuomorphic image.

So please consider carefully before moving toward using flat icons in XnView products that are intended specifically for the classic Windows Desktop. There is a continuum between overly skeuomorphic and overly simplified (aka "flat"). Please seek an happy medium between the two. Perhaps an harmoniously-styled combination of "outline" icons, simple geometric shapes, and simple 3D imagery (similar to the current Mezich look) would be appropriate for XnView products going forward.

FWIW, the majority of Apple users I have asked thinks the new iOS interface looks "cheap".