http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/item/1134/ But the problem does not end there, the whole system should be vector graphics by now when it comes to rendering the windows, menus, icons and so on.

I know this is not a Ubuntu feature, but it should be pressed HARD upon so we also get the great crisp sharp user-interface OSX has. It does not make the system slower, just better. With vector graphics, CompizFusion could take a new leap forward since it is then not hold back by the limitations of bitmap images. Also new graphical applications would be easier to develop, see on the mac side where Quartz engine has helped make a sea out of new graphical applications. We need a Quarz engine for Gnome now!

[1751 votes] Solution #1: Auto-generated solution of idea #1134


]]> en-us Fri, 29 Feb 2008 08:46:52 +0000 Sun, 25 Sep 2011 01:36:21 +0000 QAPoll module http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/idea/1134/ Fri, 29 Feb 2008 08:49:46 +0000 ]]> Fri, 29 Feb 2008 08:50:41 +0000 And an quartz engine makes it easier for developers to create graphical applications. On the mac everything is PDF for example, and that make a HUGE difference if you want to do something graphical.
And if Gnome stays the way it is, it will start looking like something from the 90-s, not after the millennium. For example: all this gray everywhere. People like beautiful, so it is also important for new adoption.]]> Fri, 29 Feb 2008 09:01:44 +0000 Fri, 29 Feb 2008 09:51:49 +0000 Fri, 29 Feb 2008 12:05:32 +0000
However, a definite thumbs up here. I don't think that having an icon of a turd is appropriate on Ubuntu.]]> Fri, 29 Feb 2008 12:19:45 +0000 Fri, 29 Feb 2008 13:15:25 +0000 http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=703899
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/svg-icons-by-default]]> Fri, 29 Feb 2008 17:03:53 +0000 Fri, 29 Feb 2008 23:29:14 +0000 Fri, 29 Feb 2008 23:49:05 +0000
it should not be a discusssion about what we have today, but about where we can go. Thats the real power of brainstorm. No sorry, if we can get you, me and alllllllot of developers to crate some library that beats Quartz big time.

Take it like this: if OSX was fee, it would be on every sine second computer in the world. But it is not, so lets make freedom, Ubutnu, what we are looking forward to,

Mainly = we need a way to direct allt this energy for these projects into action. If we can do that, we win big time. GN
]]> Sat, 01 Mar 2008 01:24:23 +0000 Sat, 01 Mar 2008 01:27:22 +0000
As you wish, master.
Puffff!!!
(and Gnome becomes vista, and the world explodes)

THE END.

Seriously... Each desktop has own its look and feel. If you don't like it you're free to change it, or use another desktop.
There are options: You can donwload a theme from gnome-look, or you can switch to KDE, or keep using OSX or Windows.
This idea is so pointless...
]]> Sat, 01 Mar 2008 05:12:22 +0000 Sat, 01 Mar 2008 08:31:33 +0000
If I create a vector graphic in 48x48, and then scale it up to 128x128, then it looks bad, because now all my borders are now 2.6 pixels wide. Ouch. Fuzziness.

If I do the opposite, say create some 128x128 SVGs and try to scale them down, it still looks bad, because now there's too much detail to represent in 48 pixels.

High resolution bitmapped graphics are the way to go.]]> Mon, 03 Mar 2008 18:04:09 +0000
Now I know, looks are irrelevant to a lot of people, like to most people on Brainstorm. But to the average user looks play a important role in whether or not they will use an OS. First impressions make a big difference. ]]> Wed, 05 Mar 2008 16:40:24 +0000 But IMHO it's the right way. Include caching and manually touched up raster versions for standard sizes, and you get the best of both worlds.
Display sizes/resolutions vary vastly today, from 30+ inch HD displays to smartphones. Vector UI means all resolutions work out of the box, with manual enhancements possible. With raster UIs you'll have to wait until someone comes up with versions suitable for your setup, or live with the (often horrible) results of scaled raster graphics.

And it's not just eye-candy; the technology does not define the looks, everything can still look and feel the way it does today. But it would add some great possibilities:

- take screenshots at higher resolutions, e.g. for print publishing (A3 at 600dpi? no problem!)

- or just take vector screenshots! Completely resolution-indipendant, how nice is that! Done properly, they would be easily editable (even text!), a dream for creating mock-ups etc!

- desktop zooming: Need more screen real-estate? Just zoom out! (today you have to change resolution, sacrificing quality because of not running at your screens native resolution).

@MighMoS: All that depends on the scaling and anti-aliasing algorithms. You can scale up an SVG and have the outlines stay at 1px/dot/pica whatever width, and you can omit unnecessary detail from smaller renderings. The technology is there, it just needs to be used properly (but I know it's tricky, that's why I vote for hand made raster versions for standard sizes).
]]> Sat, 08 Mar 2008 04:12:24 +0000
Icon themes have some pre-rendered sizes to be pixel-perfect, but usually include scalable versions to fill in the missing sizes. I see that the Tangerine iconset that comes with Ubuntu has svg icons. e.g. in /usr/share/icons/Tangerine there is a Scalable folder full of .svg icons

Controls and widgets in the GTK are rendered using Cairo, a vector graphics library, and are then rasterized for display.

Having developed some custom controls in Cairo, I have to say that it's pretty slick, and that it certainly makes this kind of work both fun and productive.

The only problem I see is that cairo is software rendered, and the glitz backend for opengl acceleration is somewhat new/in-development, and lacks the maturity and proper cross-language bindings to make it readily adoptable.

That said, there is some interesting experimentation going on with things like libclutter, which apparently integrates with cairo, and the things beingn experimented with by people like MacSlow.

What might be nice is the automatic scaling of the DPI based on the screen resolution. If a high resolution is detected, DPI is lowered to make everything bigger; if a low resolution is detected, DPI is increased, making everything fit into a smaller space. Because most (if not all) things *are* svg in gtk/gnome, using the DPI setting to control this kind of thing is actually quite effective]]> Mon, 10 Mar 2008 07:50:21 +0000

SVG icons and widgets are significantly slower to render.]]> Tue, 11 Mar 2008 22:10:55 +0000
http://www.firewheeldesign.com/sparkplug/2006/April/icon_design_bitmap_vs_vector.php

SVG is much overrated. Real art isn't scalable.]]> Fri, 14 Mar 2008 21:21:34 +0000
Ubuntu using SVG of course! They are prerendered and optionally avaiable for other than standard sizes. (so i used larger icons depending on screen size for my mediacenter app)

For fast vectorgraphic Widgets see Murrine! (There are some OSXish Murine Themes too)

Tip: try Alphacube-Color, Auroralooks and Oxygen-Gnome icon themes, looks good as OSX but isn't simple imitate!]]> Tue, 18 Mar 2008 11:15:07 +0000 Sun, 06 Apr 2008 02:50:13 +0000
The desktop on a 15.4 Laptop screen should look the same way, independently of the resolution the screen has (1024x768 or 1920*1200).
This is pretty important, because today, this is really not the case, and you can't work well with a 1920*1200 resolution on such a screen-size.

So it doesn't matter to me so much, if there are many png-icons like in OSX or if it is SVG, but the important part is that all the desktop scales!!!
]]> Sat, 12 Apr 2008 18:24:30 +0000
http://gnome-look.org/index.php?xcontentmode=120x121&PHPSESSID=8903d10157887cbd7f3855cf2c91cfc7

Take your pick if you dislike the current ones.]]> Tue, 15 Apr 2008 18:59:18 +0000
http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/idea/1557/

As far as performance, OSX's approach to icon rendering is this:

For each size...
1. Load the base vector graphic.
2. Resize it to the desired size.
3. Rasterize it.
4. Save it in a specific icon folder, like /usr/share/icons/22x22]]> Tue, 29 Apr 2008 15:28:04 +0000
Anyway I have a fairly fast system so this all works plenty fast for me. Your mileage may vary. :)]]> Fri, 09 May 2008 02:43:41 +0000 i love 1 icon not 4-5 frame sizes for each resolution, and smooth scale, that's a future
+1]]> Sun, 18 May 2008 18:23:00 +0000 Thu, 19 Jun 2008 20:44:15 +0000
For me, the versatility of .svg icons have were getting back those vectorial icons from SGI-Irix, for example - their simplicity recalls me so good memories, as well i think they were the most simple vector icons i even found - i think vector icon designers should bet on this! =) - http://art.gnome.org/themes/icon/1051

(For me, for example, the NeXT-Step and Rhapsody interfaces back on MacOS-X are very missing, and Apple did a huge stupidity on killing them... i think betting on fancyness is a huge mistake)]]> Fri, 05 Sep 2008 18:26:06 +0000
Small icons need less detail to keep the icon recognisable and clear, while very large 'dock' style icons need more detail in them in order to look decent.

Even if you did go entirely vector, you'd need vectors specifically designed for various size ranges (e.g. small 16px - 24px equivalent, medium 32px - 48px equivalent and large 64px - 128px and above) otherwise it would look pretty horrible.]]> Wed, 10 Sep 2008 05:46:39 +0000
]]> Wed, 10 Sep 2008 05:54:51 +0000 Wed, 24 Sep 2008 17:34:49 +0000 Sun, 16 Nov 2008 02:29:18 +0000
Mac OS X doesn't use vector graphics for its icons. Vector graphics was used to produce the icons, yet all the icons are plain prerendered bitmaps (with alpha channel). Icons contains multiple resolutions and system has some very smart scaling to make it look as if icons were vector graphics.]]> Tue, 23 Dec 2008 14:48:03 +0000
Bitmap images only copies themself to the RAM, so they let the system be quicly but heavyweight.

anyway, i don't think we should go searching to be Vista or OSX like.

we shoulkd focus on create a new UI.]]> Fri, 09 Jan 2009 01:52:42 +0000
we shoulkd focus on create a new UI. "

So, either we do what has been done for years, or we follow what the rest of the popular OSes out there are doing...how is either creating a new UI?]]> Sun, 15 Nov 2009 01:55:41 +0000 Sun, 25 Sep 2011 01:36:21 +0000